The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 6CCITY OF S0UTHLA1<,,E Department of Planning & Development Services STAFF REPORT February 26, 2014 CASE NO: ZA13-134 PROJECT: Zoning Change and Development Plan for Remington Estates EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Four Peaks-RM, Inc. and JTS Holdings are requesting approval of a Zoning Change and Development Plan from "AG" Agricultural and "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District to "R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development for Remington Estates for the development of 22 residential lots (originally 23 residential lots) on 13.43 acres. SPIN Neighborhood #4 DETAILS: Four Peaks-RM, Inc. and JTS Holdings are requesting approval of a Zoning Change and Development Plan from "AG" Agricultural and "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District to "R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development for Remington Estates. The original proposed development consisted of 23 residential lots and 4 open space lots. With feedback from citizens and the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant revised the development plans by removing one (1) lot along the north boundary, increasing these lots to approximately 18,000 square feet. The Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation for approval included the option of removing the one (1) lot from the south tier of lots rather that from the north. The site currently consists of three (3) tracts, two (2) have residences and other accessory structures which will be removed upon development. At the February 4, 2014, City Council meeting, the applicant presented the proposed 22 residential lot and 4 open space lot development showing both options recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. For the 2nd Reading, City Council requested that the applicant provide additional information regarding a garage orientation plan; design guidelines for homes, to include and not limited to, the home sizes and building materials, articulation, and styles; work with the homeowners to identify an alternative fencing plan along the northern border of Lot 27X and along the western border of Lot 1X; a specific vegetation plan along the northern border of Lot 27X and along the western border of Lot 1 X; and the traffic study be made available to residents. Additionally, Police and Fire will need to address access to the site. The applicant has submitted a revised set of develop regulations, a narrative, and three (3) development options addressing the conditions of the 1s' Reading approval. The development details are noted in Attachment `C' of this staff report. A comparison of the three (3) options is shown below. Case No. ZA13-134 Site Data Summary for• • Alternate `A' Alternate `B' Alternate `C' Existing Zoning AG & SF-1A AG & SF-1A AG & SF-1A Proposed Zoning R-RUD R-RUD R-RUD Gross Area 13.43 acres 13.43 acres 13.43 acres Number of 22 22 22 Residential Lots Residential Density 1.64 d/u per acre 1.64 d/u per acre 1.64 d/u per acre Open Space 3.07 acres 3.07 acres 3.30 acres (22.86%) (22.86%) (24.75%) Tree Cover to be 79.3% 79.3% 79.3% Preserved *North Side: No. of 8 lots/ 18,025 sf 9 lots/ 16,045 sf 9 lots/16,149 sf Lots/Ave. Lot Size *South Side: No. 13 lots/12,695 sf 12 lots/ 13,753 sf 12 lots/ 12,791 Lots/Ave. Lot Sizea * Remington Lane residential lots only This development is related to and being processed concurrently with a Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment and a Preliminary Plat under Planning Cases CP13-009 and ZA13-140. ACTION NEEDED: 1) Conduct a Public Hearing 2) Consider 2nd Reading Zoning Change & Development Plan Approval Request ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Plans and Support Information — Link to PowerPoint Presentation (D) Development Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated January 10, 2014 (E) Surrounding Property Owners Responses (F) Ordinance No. 480-656- 2nd Reading (G) Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council members only) STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker Patty Moos Case No. ZA13-134 (817) 748-8067 (817) 748-8269 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNERS: Tim and Linda Bradford, James N. Mertz, and Carol Ann Lance APPLICANT: Four Peaks- RM, Inc. and JTS Holdings, LLC PROPERTY SITUATION: 395, 405, and 413 Shady Lane LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Greg's Country Addition and Tracts 2A02 and 2A01 of the S. Freeman Survey Abstract No. 525, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas EXISTING LAND USE: Low Density Residential PROPOSED LAND USE: Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural District and "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District REQUESTED ZONING: "R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District HISTORY: In 1978, a plat showing was approved for Greg's Country Acres (405 Shady Lane) under Planning Case ZA78-13. CITIZEN INPUT: A SPIN (SPIN #4) meeting was held on October 14, 2013 for this proposed development. See Attachment `D' for the SPIN Report for the meeting. SOUTHLAKE 2030 TREE PRESERVATION Case No. ZA13-134 Consolidated Land Use Plan The Southlake 2030 Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Low Density Residential. The developer is requesting a Land Use Plan Amendment to change a portion of the site from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on the eastern portion of the development. The west portion of the property will L D ;t R ;d t; I remain ow ensi l y lulen is . The development as proposed appears to be consistent with the intent of the requested land use designation at this location. Pathways Master Plan Four (4) foot wide sidewalks along the residential streets will be constructed with this development. The applicant is proposing to preserve seventy-nine percent (79 %) of the existing trees. Attachment A Page 1 UTILITIES: TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: STAFF COMMENTS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Water The site has access to an existing 8-inch water line from the south at the Morrison Office Park and water line along Shady Lane. Sewer The site has access to an existing 8-inch sewer line along an easement on the south adjacent property. Area Road Network and Conditions The proposed development, with approximately 22 residential lots will access onto Shady Lane, a local residential street with approximately fifty (50) feet of right-of-way. The project did not warrant a Traffic Impact Analysis. Traffic Impact * Vehicle Trips Per Day • AM -In, AM -Out, PM -In and PM -Out are peak hour generators on a weekday • Based on the ITE: Trip Generation Manual, 7t" Edition Attached is the Development Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated January 10, 2014 January 9, 2014: Tabled (6-0) per the applicant to the Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting on January 23, 2014. January 23, 2014: Tabled (5-0) per the applicant to the Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting on February 6, 2014. February 6, 2014: Approved (4-1) (Commissioner Smith dissented) subject to Staff Report dated January 31, 2014 and Development Review Summary No. 2 dated January 10, 2014 stipulating the limiting of construction traffic and the applicant's willingness to consider eliminating the one lot from the south side (rather than on the north side as another option for City Council). CITY COUNCIL: February 18, 2014: Approved (4-3) the motion for Ordinance No. 480- 656 (ZA13-134) Zoning Change and Development Plan for Remington Estates pursuant to the Development Plan Review Summary #2, January 10, 2014, with the following additions: Prior to the next reading, the applicant will bring forward a garage orientation plan; design guidelines for homes, to include and not limited to, the home sizes and building materials, articulation, and styles; work with the homeowners to identify an alternative fencing plan along the northern border of Lot 27X and along the western border of Lot 1 X; it is Case No. Attachment A ZA13-134 Page 2 City Council's intention that the living screen is not an alternative; applicant will bring forward a specific vegetation plan along the northern border of Lot 27X and along the western border of Lot 1 X; Police and Fire to come forth to address Councilman Williamson's concerns regarding the existing access; and the traffic study be made available to residents. WCommunity DevelopmentVEMO12013 Casesl134 - ZDP - Remington EstateslStaff Report Case No. Attachment A ZA13-134 Page 3 Vicinity Map Remington Estates d �_ f� N Z" f 2fi24 2fi2fi 1 2832 2503 25.C,5 2509 2613 2621 1 w cv 0 23DD 2354 z54� SH 114 2601 0 to 26001 2MOI =0 330 281a s Ch E ZA 1 3-'134 Zoning and Development Plan 0 105210 420 Feet Case No. Attachment B ZA13-134 Page 1 Plans and Support Information Residential Planned Unit Development District - Land Use and Development Regulations for the 13.43 acre development known as Remington Estates Southlake, Texas Zoning Case # ZA13-134 11 FEBRUARY 2014 This Residential Planned Unit Development shall abide by the all conditions of the City of Southlake Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as it pertains to the "SF-20A" Single -Family Residential zoning district and the City of Southlake Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, with the following exceptions: Lot Area: The minimum area of a lot shall not be less than twelve thousand (12,000) square feet. Front Yard: The minimum front yard of a lot shall not be less than twenty-five (25) feet. Side Yard: The minimum side yard shall not be less than seven and one-half (7.5) feet, twenty (20) feet for side yards facing a street. Rear Yard: Each lot shall have a minimum rear yard of twenty-five (25) feet. Lot Width: The minimum lot width shall be eighty (80) feet. Lot widths shall be measured at the Front Yard setback line for each lot as indicated on the Zoning Development Plan. Lot 2 lot width shall be as shown on the on the approved Zoning Development Plan. Lot Depth: The minimum lot depth shall be one hundred thirty (130) feet. Lot Coverage: All buildings or structures shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding fifty-five percent (55%) of the lot area, except the sum total of accessory buildings shall not exceed 600 square feet. Minimum House Size: All houses shall be a minimum of 3,000 s.f. in floor area. A minimum 4' wide concrete sidewalk shall be required along the internal street frontage of all Residential Lots. Sidewalks and trails within the Open Space Lots shall be as shown on the Zoning Development Plan and Pedestrian Access Plan. Case No. Attachment C ZA13-134 Page 1 Streets: A 31' B-B pavement section with standard 6" curb & 40' R.O.W. with 5' S/W & U.E. on both sides shall be provided along the frontage of Lots 4 through 26. All other street pavement shall be 27' B-B concrete paving with ribbon curb, within a 40' R.O.W. & 5' S/W & U.E. on both sides. Buffer lots: No buffer lots shall be required. Maximum number of Dwelling Units and Cul-de-sac length: Section 5.03 I of the Subdivision Ordinance shall be modified to allow a maximum number of dwelling units on a cul-de-sac to be 23, and maximum cul-de-sac length to be 1,750 feet (as shown on the approved Zoning Development Plan), with no requirement for fire sprinklers for residences under 6,000 s.f. Open Space Management Plan: All Common Open Space shall be owned and maintained by the Remington Estates Homeowners Association (HOA). All other areas shall be the responsibility of the individual property owners, including the front yards and required streetscape trees of the residential lots. All property owners shall be required to be a member of the HOA. Dues assessments, required for the maintenance of the common areas and other HOA activities, shall be mandatory. The HOA shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation of the protected open space within the development. The expenses required to maintain the common areas at a quality level shall be estimated annually by the HOA Board, and dues shall be determined and assessed on each property owner in an equitable fashion at such a rate as necessary to maintain such a level of quality. Authority to enforce these requirements, and to place a lien on the property if such dues are not paid, shall be in the form of written Deed Restrictions and Covenants, agreed to by all property owners at purchase, and shall run with the land. Provisions shall be made, in the HOA bylaws and Deed Restrictions, that in the unlikely event the HOA fails to maintain all or a portion of the protected open space in reasonable order and condition, the City of Southlake may, but is not required to, assume responsibility for it's maintenance and take corrective action, including the provision of extended maintenance. The costs of such maintenance may be charged to the HOA or individual property owners that make up the HOA, and may include administrative costs and penalties which shall become a lien on all property in the development. Case No. Attachment C ZA13-134 Page 2 Remington Estates Development Standards 1.0 Permitted Land Uses Use Categories Single-family residential detached d« elling unit. model homes for sales and promotions. Park playgrounds and open space. 2.0 Street Design Standards R.O.W. Width A 31' B-B pavement section with standard 6" curt and 40' R.O.W. with 5' S,,W & U.E. on both sides shall be provided along the frontage of Lots 4 through 25. All other streets pavement shall be 27 B-B with ribbon curb -,within a 40' RO.W. 7 5' SIB, & U.E. on both sides Design Speed < 25 mph Street Typology Allowed Residential Street: 2 lane Undivided 3.0 Streetscape Standards Sidewalk Trails Walkivays 4' miniinuinl. 4.0 Open Space Standards Open Space Minimum of 20% 5.0 Lot Standards Lot Area Minimum of 12.000 sq. ft. Lot width Munimlun of 80' wide Lot depth Minimum of 130' deep Cul de Sac lots Minimum of 80' wide Maxilmlum Lot Coveraze 55% 6.0 Building Standards Buildiniz Height 2 Stories Setbacks: Front 25' Front Facmiz Garage 25' Side 7 5' Rear 25' Accessory Buildings As per requirements of Zoning Ordinance. Sec. 34. Max of 600 sq. ft. Principal Building Orientation Toward fi-ont (street) of lot 7.0 Site Design Standards Off street parking requirements 2 spaces in garage (minimum) plus 2 in the home's driveway Case No. Attachment C ZA13-134 Page 3 Screening • Trashrecycling receptacles • Other utility equipment • Loading spaces • Surface parking area Landscaping nr'a Landscape or fence n a wa Fully landscaped 8.0 Sign Standards All Signs in accordance with No permanent signs allowed on Residential Requirements of Sign Ord.: lots: Wayfnding and identification signs Entry Feature signs allowed allowed in Common areas Project Entry Remington Building Design Standards Home design: Texas Traditional and European Country Minimum House Size: 3.000 s.f. Minimum Roof Pitch: 10x12 except for accent roofs or where architectural style dictates otherwise Roof Material: 30 year. high performance composite roof or metal standing seam or tile Masonry Requirement: Minimum 100% on ground floor (except penetrations) and 100% on all font elevations except for accents and architectural features: 80% brick. stone or true stucco overall. except for penetrations. Windows: Low E vinyl windows. All front elevation windows shall be divided unless an alternative is dictated by architectural style Front Door: Muninnrm 8' heielnt. decorative architectural style Driveways and walk-ups: Salt finished or exposed aggregate Garage Doors: Wood clad. painted or stained depending on style of house Garage orientation: Maximuum of 5 homes within the subdivision may have direct street facing two car garages, the balance of homes shall be swung garages. Direct facing third car garages at a mirnirmuum of 45' behind the street right of way are permitted. Fencing: Stockade fencing between lots is permitted. All font facing returns on all lots shall be decorative metal. open style fencing. Case No. Attachment C ZA13-134 Page 4 The west side fencing on lots 4 and 25 shall be metal. open style fencing. Mail boxes: Duplex. metal and of a singular. uniforms design Landscaping: Front aid back yards shall be fully landscaped with automatic irrigation system. Front Yard Trees Within the front yard of each house a minimum of two. 3 ' caliper trees shall be plaited at the time of installation of the other landscaping Lot 4 R 25: The west elevations of lots 4 and 25 shall be required to have articulation of a nninimu ni of one foot which may include but not limited to a bay window. exterior livimg area or other appropriate design element. Enhancements to Home Each elevation must include a minimum of 3 enhancement Elevation: elements according to the architectural style of the home: ■ Sliced brick quoins ■ Cast stone address block ■ Double brick ro« locks ■ Cedar corbels or bracing ■ Projected stone or brick watercourse ■ Decorative brick (herring bone. lacing. etc.) ■ Cast stone window or door surrounds ■ Copper or painted metal roof rents or louvers ■ Size appropriate shutters with hardware Case No. ZA13-134 Attachment C Page 5 Remington Estates: Summary of Revisions for Second Reading Zoning Case #ZA13-134 Lot Configuration: With approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission came the request that a single lot be eliminated from the project. It was left to the developer to decide whether that lot should be eliminated from the north or south side of the road. It was decided to eliminate a lot from the north side, thus creating allowing the lots on the north side to be a minimum of 18,000 sq. ft. and a minimum of 12,000 sq. ft. on the south side. This plan is represented as plan "A - 22 Total Lots". At the first City Council reading of the zoning application for Remington on February 18, 2014 an alternative idea was shown, and discussed, which dropped the lot from the south side instead of the north side. This restored the minimum size lot on the north side to 16,000 sq. ft. as was called for in the original application. The minimum size lot on the south side became 13,191 sq. ft. This plan is represented as plan "B-22 Total Lots". At that first reading of the zoning application on February 181h, Mayor Terrell expressed a desire to see the east/west divide between the Low Density and Medium Density designated land areas be a straight, north/south line. There was also an idea, which has been subsequently reiterated, that such an adjustment to the land plan would eliminate the future potential issue of headlights from the north lots (and potential future lots) from shining directly into that most western lot on the south side of the street. Taking this input into consideration, we have presented "Plan C— 22 Total Lots". The lots on the north side are the same as was originally submitted with our application and as shown in "Plan B — 22 Total Lots". With the adjustment of the land use designation boundary, the open space to this plan has increase to be 24.57% of the project's land area. It is this "Plan C — 22 Total Lots" that we are requesting your approval. Neighbor, Screening Wall/Fence/Buffer At the first reading of the zoning application for Remington on February 18, 2014, we were instructed to eliminate the proposed living screen between Remington and the first two neighbors north of the project whose homes front the east side of Shady Lane. We received further input from Council to replace said screening with a combination of masonry and decorative metal so as to reduce the visibility of additional cars within the development for the immediate neighbor and to create additional privacy and shield headlight illumination on the next neighbor to the north. We have met the neighbors at their properties and have further analyzed the location of the immediate neighbor's improvements and existing vegetation along the subject screening wall location to create the plan submitted for this second reading at City Council for our zoning and platting application. We have subsequently met with the immediate neighbor to present our plan and, to our understanding, have received approval of the plan from that neighbor. Case No. ZA13-134 Attachment C Page 6 Revised Development Plans Alternate 'A' z, pnap 4 TA r Case #ZA13-134 A 22 Total Lots �t rAQ 23rd Lot Removed North of Road Remington 18,000 s.f. lots Estates LM SoAhlake, Tarrant County, Tw Alternate 'B' PO 7=r Plan— n a 16.033 sX I �6 U6 �f 16, ,1 13,9191 sti 3.223,11 13 S. 0.704s.f 1 W12.f.1 I. .. i =— - _ _ - — __ am lnr — — — — - rasa rota �' car .0 Ca- #ZA13-134 B - 22 Total Lots�'=° 23rd Lot Removed South of Road =Larger lots eRemington Estates Southiake, Tarrant County, Texas Case No. ZA1 3-134 Attachment C Page 7 Alternate V Planner:) L ZVWIV 16 A 1.6 s, r. U" 11 a.f.l 12,7'I'fi sX. Case #ZA13-134 C 22 Total Lots 23rd Lot Removed at West End of South Lots Remington Estates SOu hMe, Tarrant f—W, Texas Proposed Screening Exhibit for North and West Property Edge Case No. Attachment C ZA1 3-134 Page 8 Developer's Response for Development Plan Revisions These were the primary points of direction we felt we heard from the majority of the Commission members, and how we addressed them: There was a concern about the straight sections of the road, and that the view toward the homes on those straight sections- once the visitor gets through the entry- would appear to have the homes all lined up in a row. RESPONSE: We have re-routed Remington Lane to give it a gentle undulation or curve. This will make every building pad off -set from the one next to it and keep this from happening. Also, as we mentioned during the meeting, Remington Lane, once it enters the area where lots are on either side of it, does not traverse flat ground; it goes uphill to the top of a ridge, after the first 5 or 6 lots, and then goes down the other side. So, the number of homes visible on either side would be just 5 or 6, no more than half of the total number of homes on that street. 2. The Commission was generally okay with the size of the lots along the southern side of Remington Lane (as they are immediately adjacent to the Commercial and closest to the noise of SH-114), but wanted a greater transition in lot size on the northern side of the street. The final requested size for those lots was at least "1/3rd acre lots." RESPONSE: 1/3 of an acre is 14,720 s.f., but commonly referred to as a 15,000 s.f. lot. The change we made to the location of Remington Lane, as well as moving one lot from the north side to the south side, allowed us to increase the size of the lots on the north side of the street to at least 16,000 s.f. (a little bit more than the requested 1/3 acre size), while keeping the lots on the south side in the range of 12,000 to 13,650 s.f., thus making a graded transition. 3. Although the portion of the project we are requesting a change to a Medium -Density Residential Land Use is not adjacent to any of the neighboring properties along Shady Lane and Rolling Lane, there was some concern by the neighbors that the Fusella property (which is not a part of this request, and is remaining Low Density Residential), looks like a possible "second phase," and will someday have a request for similar lot sizes made for it. The Commission recognized we have no control over that property, but asked us to address this concern. RESPONSE: As we mentioned, so far as we've been told, the owners plan to remain on this property for the foreseeable future and have no plans to sell it for development. However, should this property be considered for development at some time in the future, we would expect it would be treated differently and the lot size expectation would have to be different, than it is for the property currently under consideration- because the location and conditions would be different. For example, whereas the property we are proposing for development is immediately next to commercially developed parcels- and close to SH-114, the Fusella property would not be and would be adjacent to the Low Density lots along Rolling Lane. So, it would be only logical to expect the city decision makers to only approve a layout that included lots sized more compatibly with those Rolling Lane lots, such as, say, 30,000 s.f. lots. At the next meeting, we intend to have a graphic showing how eight 30,000 s.f. lots would fit within the 8+ acre Fusella property (the density of which, less than 1 lot/acre, would be consistent with Low Density). 4. We were also asked to take a look the front lot lines of Lot 2, the acre + lot adjacent to the Rolling Lane homes, to see if we could open it up a little, so the eventual home there could be placed further away from the neighboring lot along Rolling Lane. RESPONSE: We widened the lot lines to allow for the front setback to move up a little. It also added a little area to that lot. Everyone seemed to like the entry area and open spaces, so those have remained the same. Case No. Attachment C ZA13-134 Page 9 Binkley Barfield I C&P consulting engineers January 29, 2014 JTS Holdings, LLC Attn: Jana Murphy PO Box 92582 Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: Remington Estates City of Southlake Jana: At your request BBCPI has submitted this letter to outline the expected difference in traffic impact for the proposed 23 residential lot Remington Estates versus the 13 residential units that would be provided with the current land use plan. The site is to be located on the east side of Shady Lane just north of the SH 114 northwest bound frontage road in Southlake. Trip Generation for Site Traffic Table 1 summarizes the total un-adjusted trip generation for the proposed site plan with 23 units. TABLE 1 Calculated Trip Ends (site traffic) ADT A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR LAND USE (vpd) IN (vph) OUT (VPH) IN (vph) OUT (VPH) Single -Family Detached Housing 219 4 13 14 9 (ADT = average daily trips; vpd = vehicles per day; vph = vehicles per hour; in = vehicles entering the site; and out = vehicles exiting the site) Binkley & Barfield-C&P, Inc. • TBPE F-3815 • 1801 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 101- Richardson, Texas 75080 • Tel: 972.644.28001 Fax: 972.644.2817 www.bbcpi,com Case No. Attachment C ZA13-134 Page 10 The trips indicated in Table 2 are the total unadjusted traffic volumes for currently zoned 13 residential lots. TABLE 2 Calculated Trip Ends (surrounding area) LAND USE ADT (vpd) A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR IN (vph) OUT (VPH) IN (vph) OUT (VPH) Single-�Housing 124 2 7 8 5 Detach (ADT = average daily trips; vpd = vehicles per day; vph = vehicles per hour; in = vehicles entering the site; and out = vehicles exiting the site) As indicated in our previous letter dated December 2, 2013, the worst case assumption would be for all of these vehicles to travel south to the SH 114 frontage road or north to the intersection of Shady Lane at North Kimble Avenue. A reasonable assumption would be that all outbound trips would utilize the SH 114 frontage road because of its close proximity and as a clearly easier route to almost all destinations, and that the vast maiority of inbound trips would also utilize the SH 114 frontage road because those origins are primarily from the east, and even those from the west or south would have the reasonable option of using SH 114 frontage road. Therefore, we would estimate less than 20 % of incoming traffic would use Shady Lane. The difference in traffic with 23 residential lots versus 13 residential lots is: • Daily (24 hours) = 95 vehicles per day • AM Peak Hour = 8 vehicles per hour (2 entering and 6 exiting) • PM Peak Hour = 10 vehicles per hour (6 entering and 4 exiting) Applying our reasonable assumption to the difference in traffic identified above, we would conclude that, at most, only one (1) vehicles would be entering the site from the north on Shady Lane in the AM peak hour, and that less than two (2) vehicles would be entering the site from the north on Shady Lane in the PM peak hour; and that all outbound traffic would go directly to the SH 114 frontage road and not utilize Shady Lane to the north at all. These small one and two trip additions are so negligible, they could be classified as insignificant. The threshold volumes used by NCTCOG for planning purposes is 420 vehicles per hour per lane (840 for a two-lane road) and 4,000 vehicles per day per lane (8,000 vehicles per day for a two- lane road) so the amount of added trips is negligible. If we can be of further assistance to your, please let me know. Sincerely, r, tOF Binkley & Barfield I C&P, Inc. �� .�� S Z0 ��.o �n La ��+ ��LARRY W. CEFiVENKA ......................... Larry W.(Cervenka, P.E Project Engineer '±•.1r6� Case No. Attachment C ZA13-134 Page 11 DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA13-134 Review No.: Two Date of Review: 01/10/14 Project Name: Remington Estates APPLICANT: Four Peaks-RM, Inc. and JTS ENGINEER: Goodwin and Marshall, Inc. Holdings, LLC Tom Matthews Jason Weaver 2600 E Southlake Blvd. #120-323 2405 Mustang Drive Southlake, TX 76092 Grapevine, TX 76051 Phone: 214-676-3434 Phone: 817-329-4373 Email: Email: CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 12/02/13 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE APPROPRIATE STAFF MEMBER. Planning Review Patty Moos Planner I Phone: (817) 748-8269 Email: pmoos ci.southlake.tx.us Tree Conservation/Landscape Review E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS: The tree preservation and removal calculations on the submitted Tree Conservation Plan are based on the number of individual existing trees proposed to be saved, altered, and/or borderline. The calculations are actually required to be based on the total percentage of tree canopy cover on the entire site. Please be aware that all existing trees shown to be preserved on the City Council approved Tree Conservation Plan must be preserved and protected during all phases and construction of the development. Alteration or removal of any of the existing trees shown to be preserved on the approved Tree Conservation Plan is a violation of the Tree Preservation Ordinance and the zoning as approved by the Southlake City Council. Please ensure that the layout of all structures, easements, utilities, structures grading, and any other structure proposed to be constructed do not conflict with existing trees intended to be preserved. Indicates informational comment. # Indicates required items comment. Case No. ZA13-134 Attachment D Page 1 Fire Department Review Kelly Clements Assistant Fire Marshal Phone: (817) 748-8671 E-mail: kclements@ci.southlake.tx.us FIRE LANE COMMENTS: Fire apparatus access needs to be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (minimum of 80,000 Ibs GVW). Fire access roads must be at least 31 ft. back of curb to back of curb. (Standard street width) FIRE HYDRANT COMMENTS: Hydrants required at maximum spacing for R-3 Occupancies is 400 feet for subdivisions with un-sprinkled homes. (Hydrant needs to be located at maximum distance to be as close as possible to dead end area of cul-de-sac on east end of subdivision) Public Works/Engineering Review Alejandra Ayala, P.E. Civil Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8274 E-mail: aayala ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: The driveway entrance will require reconfiguration to eliminate the round -a -bout. Street intersections must comply with TDLR/ADA accessibility standards. Sidewalk widths along Shady Lane must conform to the Southlake Pathways Plan. Sight distances will be required to conform to AASHTO guidelines on adjacent collectors and arterials. Use the City of Southlake GPS monuments whenever possible. Information can be found in the City of Southlake website: http://www.cityofsouthlake.com/index.aspx?NID=266 EASEMENTS: Detention ponds shall be dedicated by plat as drainage easements. The following note shall be added to the plat: Compliance with the provisions of the city's Storm Drainage Policy does not relieve a person of the responsibility of complying with all other applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 11.086, Texas Water Code. Provide necessary easements for water, sanitary sewer and drainage. Easements shall be 15' minimum and located on one lot — not centered on the property line. A 20' easement is required if both storm sewer and sanitary sewer will be located within the easement. Case No. Attachment D ZA13-134 Page 2 Water and sewer lines cannot cross property lines without being in a public easement or in the ROW. All waterlines in easements or ROW must be constructed to City standards. WATER AND SEWER COMMENTS: 1. Further review will be required with the civil construction plans for the water and sewer extensions to the northern property line of Open Space Lot 14X to provide future connection to the property. The minimum sizes for public water and sanitary sewer lines are 8-inch diameter. The water meters must be located in an easement or right-of-way. All sewer lines in easements or ROW must be constructed to City standards. DRAINAGE COMMENTS: 1. Civil construction plans shall include calculations for the detention ponds. Pre and post development runoff shall be captured in the detention ponds. The proposed detention ponds shall control the discharge of the 2, 10 and 100 year storm events. 2. Civil construction plans shall include hydraulic calculations for the driveway culvert at the entrance of the subdivision. Verify that the size, shape and/or location of the detention ponds, as depicted on the development plan, are adequate to meet the detention requirements. Any changes to the size, shape, and/or location of the proposed ponds may require a revision to the development plan and may need to be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. Lot -to -lot drainage will not be allowed and grading plan should clearly depict how runoff will discharge onto street and away from neighboring properties. Calculations will be required to verify that the street and the proposed curb inlets will be able to handle the volume of storm water at proposed conditions. All storm sewers collecting runoff from the public street shall be RCP. The discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties and meet the provisions of Ordinance # 605. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS: Submit 4 copies of the civil construction plans (22" x 34" full size sheets) and a completed Construction Plan Checklist as part of the first submittal for review directly to the Public Works Administration Department. The plans shall conform to the most recent construction plan checklist, standard details and general notes which are located on the City's website. http://www.citvofsouthlake.com/PubIicWorks/engineeringdesign.asp A ROW permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Operations Department for connections with the City's sewer, water or storm drain inlets. Contact Public Works Operations at (817) 748-8082. A Residential Developer Agreement shall be required for this development and may need to be approved by the City Council prior to any construction of public infrastructure. Construction plans for these improvements must be acceptable to Public Works prior to placing the Developer's Agreement on the City Council agenda for consideration. Case No. ZA13-134 Attachment D Page 3 Payment, Performance and a separate 2-year Maintenance Bond for public infrastructure shall be required for this development. The 2-year Maintenance Bond shall be bound only unto the City of Southlake. The Maintenance Bond cannot be tied to the Performance and Payment Bond in any way as required per the Commercial Developer Agreement. Any hazardous waste being discharged must be pretreated, Ordinance No. 836. Community Service/Parks Department Review Peter Kao Construction Manager 817-748-8607 pkao@ci.southlake.tx.us Park Board comments or recommendations: 1. All applicants are required to appear before the Park Board to discuss park dedication issues if requesting fee credits. Please contact the Community Services Department at (817) 748-8607 for further details. Land/park dedication requirements: 2. Residential park dedication fees may be required in the amount of $3000 per lot or dwelling unit. General Informational Comments All lighting must comply with the Lighting Ordinance No. 693, as amended. All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended. Development must comply with all requirements in Zoning Ordinance No. 480, Section 43,; Overlay Zones. The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees Developer's Agreement: 33.20 OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLANS — For all development proposing any private or public open space, an open space management plan is required that: 1. Generally describes or illustrates intended uses of the open space, such as natural vegetation preservation areas, gardens, trails, playgrounds, and/or other facilities; 2. Allocates responsibility and guidelines for the maintenance and operation of the open space and any facilities located thereon, including provisions for ongoing maintenance and for long- term capital improvements; 3. Provides an estimate of the costs and staffing requirements needed for maintenance and operation of, and insurance for, the open space and an outline showing the means by which such funding will be obtained or provided; Case No. Attachment D ZA13-134 Page 4 4. Provides that any changes to the plan be approved by the City Council; 5. Provides for enforcement of the plan; and 6. Provides that, in the event the party responsible for maintenance of the open space fails to maintain all or any portion in reasonable order and condition, the City of Southlake may, but is not required to, assume responsibility for its maintenance and may enter the premises and take corrective action, including the provision of extended maintenance. The costs of such maintenance may be charged to the owner, Homeowner's Association, or to the individual property owners that make up the Homeowner's Association, and may include administrative costs and penalties. Such costs shall become a lien on all subdivision properties. (As amended by Ordinance No. 480-FFFF) Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment D ZA13-134 Page 5 15SOUTHLAK,E CASE NO. PROJECT NAME SPIN DISTRICT: MEETING DATE: MEETING LOCATION: SPIN MEETING REPORT N/A — Formal application pending Darby Lane Estates SPIN # 4 October 14, 2013; 8:00 PM 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX Training Rooms 3A — 3B TOTAL ATTENDANCE: Seven (7) • SPIN REPRESENTATIVE(S) PRESENT: Lou Hillman # 4 • APPLICANT(S) PRESENTING: David McMahan, et al one (1) • STAFF PRESENT: Lorrie Fletcher, Planner I STAFF CONTACT: Lorrie Fletcher, Planner I: (817)748-8069 or Ifletcher ci.southlake.tx.us EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Property Situation • The property is located at 405, 413 and 395 Shady Lane. Development Details • Zoning change, site plan, preliminary plat and comprehensive plan amendment for a 13.4 acre residential development on three separate tracts. • Proposed R-PUD — Residential Planned Unit Development for twenty-three (23) single family residential lots. • Average lot size is 14,400 square feet; average home size is 4,500 square feet; average price is $725,000. Approximately 22% open space. Case No. Attachment D ZA13-134 Page 6 Presented at SPIN: fX1511NG GO�MfRGI.LL L� � u Dar6,q Lane Estates PR IMINARY SRE PLAN QUESTIONS/CONCERNS • Who is the builder going to be? o We have not signed a builder yet, however, Shaddock in Dallas is likely. • Why the smaller lots? o The market calls for smaller lots and the economics make the project viable. • What is the timing? o We anticipate getting through City Council by the end of January 2014. We would start construction in April or May 2014. We should have homes finished by March 2015. SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council. Case No. Attachment D ZA13-134 Page 7 2300 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS MAP & RESPONSES Remington Estates 1 I 2426 1 2504 516 R4a6�� 25 504 2503 25 5 4 23 N 11 <Z 3 2621 I 2711 25 10 22 ;S7 9 20 t61N 2 2540 19 21 1 3 12 14 600 2880 2720 1 3 2810 1 J 18 e City or Grapevine SPO Owner Zoning Address Acreage Response 1. Bonola Family Ltd Prtnshp C3 2600 E SH 114 1.15 NR 2. Bonola Family Ltd Prtnshp C3 2540 E SH 114 5.64 NR 3. Bonola Family Ltd Prtnshp C3 2680 E SH 114 1.26 NR 4. Drescher, Jay M Etux Susan M SF1-A 2505 ROLLING LN 1.06 NR 5. Garland, Bill C Etux Mija SF1-A 2503 ROLLING LN 1.07 NR 6. 114 Kimball Square Llc SP1 2360 E SH 114 1.45 NR 7. Bradford, Tim D Etux Linda R SF1-A 405 SHADY LN 2.13 F 8. Clary, Richard E Etux Helen SF1-A 415 SHADY LN 1.92 O 9. Rogers, Janet E SF1-A 425 SHADY LN 1.98 O 10. Barbaria, Dhirajlal Etux Jaya SF1-A 435 SHADY LN 1.90 NR 11. Frieling, John Etux Dana SF1-A 445 SHADY LN 1.96 NR 12. Sam 114-Kimball Commercial Llc SP2 2720 E SH 114 1.47 U 13. Sam 114-Kimball Commercial Llc SP2 300 MORRISON PARK DR 0.62 U 14. Sam 114-Kimball Commercial Llc SP2 320 MORRISON PARK DR 0.52 U 15. Sam 114-Kimball Commercial Llc SP2 330 MORRISON PARK DR 0.46 U 16. Sam 114-Kimball Commercial Llc SP2 325 MORRISON PARK DR 0.51 U 17. Sam 114-Kimball Commercial Llc SP2 315 MORRISON PARK DR 0.40 U Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 1 18. Sam 114-Kimball Commercial Llc SP2 305 MORR15ON PARK DR 1.65 U 19. Fusella, Robert A & Michel V SF1-A 399 SHADY LN 4.07 F 20. Lance, Carol Ann AG 413 SHADY LN 2.85 F 21. Mertz, James N Etux Karen E AG 395 SHADY LN 8.66 F 22. Fusella, Robert A Etux Michel AG 409 SHADY LN 3.70 F 23. Miller, Timothy C Etux Donna SF1-A 2509 ROLLING LN 1.12 U 24. McCrummen, Ronald & Denise L SF1-A 2613 ROLLING LN 1.04 NR 25. Standifer, Edward G Etux Edith SF1-A 2621 ROLLING LN 1.10 NR 26. Chamathil, Varghese Etux Sara SF1-A 328 SHADY LN 1.52 NR 27. Absher, Kay Blankenship SF1-A 410 SHADY LN 1.76 O 28. Dao, Michael SF1-A 420 SHADY LN 1.49 F 29. Markwood, Glenda Kay SF1-A 414 SHADY LN 0.53 NR F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response Notices Sent: Twenty-nine (29) Responses Received: In Favor: 6 Opposed: 3 Undecided: 8 No Response: 12 Responses not included in Property Owners Map Responses Received: In Favor: 0 No Response: 0 Opposed: 15 Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 2 Dao, Michael 12/27/13 City of Southlake Zoning and Platting 1400 Main St., Ste. 310 Southlake, TX 76092 To Whom It May Concern: In regard to Remington Estates (Case No. ZA 13-134) for residential development, I am in favor of this proposal. I have seen the proposed plat and I think it will enhance property values in the area and will be beneficial to all the neighbors. Sincerely yours, Michael Dao 420 Shady Lane Southlake, TX 76092 I Case No. Attachment E ZA1 3-134 Page 3 Notification Response Form ZA13-134 Meeting Date: January 9, 2014 at 6:30 PM Miller, Timothy C Etux Donna 2509 Rolling Ln Southlake Tx, 76092 A 525 2E PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided abo �/, (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: Date: Additional Signature: �� ;L�'�� (;� Date: Printed Name(s): �� yZ--1 Must be property owner(s) whose name(s) are printed at top. Oth Phone Number (optional): Case No. ZA13-134 contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Attachment E Page 4 4 rT�Y-�{OUTT i A KE Fwd: Property Development at 413 Shady Lane Southlake Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> To: Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Carol LaTumo Date: January 9, 2014 at 4:28:29 PM CST To: "kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us" <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> Subject: FW: Property Development at 413 Shady Lane Southlake Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 5:04 PM Mr. Baker, my name is Carol LaTumo and I reside at 413 Shady Lane in Southlake. Mr. Matthews with FourPeaks is presenting tonight at the P&Z meeting. I won't be able to attend due to work commitments but I wanted to let you know his project has my full support. He seems very dedicated to ensuring the neighborhood melds well with the location and surrounding commercial and residential uses. Please feel free to contact me if you hake any questions or require additional information. Case No. ZA13-134 Attachment E Page 5 Date: Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 4:06 PM Subject: Re: darby In estates To: lfletchergci. southlake.tx.us Lorrie Fletcher, I am writing to you regarding the proposed Darby Lane Estates. The residents of Shady Lane were just at a similar spin meeting less than 3 years ago and were opposed to the same development. Why is the city of Southlake revisiting this issue? Nothing has changed. Shady lane is still a 2 lane street, no sidewalks, and too narrow for our kids to walk or safely ride their bicycles. I will be at the meeting on the 9th. The city council should not allow a developer to bring the same plan back in such a short period of time! Janet Rogers 425 Shady Lane ZA13-134 Meegng Oafs Rogers, Jane 425 Shady Ln Sou011ake Tx, 16405 3 dLetLotq eo w Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 6 Notification 11141Sonse Form ZA13-134 Meeting Data: January 9, 2014 at 6:30 PM Clary, Richard E Etux Helen 415 Shady Ln Southlake Tx, 76092 16406 2 .MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SC}# 1bb,ULED PUBLIC. HEARING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS V A Be r .# rt er(�}' bf tier rca iv inoted above, are hereby iin, r of", undecided about pfu Ina the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: A ►`Y�ACG Signature: Additional- Signature_ Date: Printed Name(s): T 1llir""-v-\ (�,.AAilfj Must be property oHmer(s) whose pame(a) are printed at top. Merw1ae contact the Planning Depa nt. one fame par property Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 7 Notification Response Form ZA'13-134 Meeting Date: January 9, 2014 at 6,30 PM Bradford, Tim D Etux Linda R 405 Shady Ln Southlake Tx, 76092 16405 1 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Development: Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: ,l ll rt s A Signature Additional Signature: i Date: !� -� Date: Printed Name(s): wL Z G kO A '/ . C0 Must be property uwner(s) whose names) are printed at top_ Otherwise contact the Planning Departmerd. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): UD 7 — 4 Z / : Ease NO. Httacnment E ZA13-134 Page 8 van UI r\ay nUDl Im 0 1 /-40 1-40,14 P. I Notification Response Form ZA13-134 Meeting Date: January 9, 2014 at 6:30 PM Absher, Kay Blankenship 410 Shady Ln Southlake Tx, 76092 A 52-5 6B02C PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed t � undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: ............. Z' 0C{ ��' S A f� Li A,2�t- Signature: Additional Signature: Printed Name(s): 11 f Must be property owner(s) whose nam Date: / 1�!. _�' Date: are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department One lam per Phone Number (optional): '�l -)- �� Case No. ZA13-134 Attachment E Page 9 January 9, 2014 City of Southlake Planning & Zoning Committee D. Todd Parish - Vice Chairman Michael Springer Shawn McCaskill Daniel Kubiak Kate Smith Robert Hudson - Chairman Michael Forman I wish to voice opposition to existing plans for Darby Lane/Richmond Estates accessed off Shady Lane in Southlake SPIN 4 The City of Southlake has considerable effort in the Master Plan. I stand against any effort to change the well thought out standards and limits. The planned density in the first phase and obvious planned second phase come close to doubling the community population in about 15% of the space. Currently the mostly older neighborhood (all streets off Shady Ln) has one acre lots. The newer places off Kimball meet the current Master Plan standards. 1. I live on the creek that runs through the neighborhood. I saw considerable increase in run-off water flow when Highway 114 was completed several years ago. Adding buildings, driveways, streets, etc. will add even more water to the creek. I am very concerned. My home is about 500 feet downstream (North) from the proposed development one lot East of Shady Lane. 2. Adding 23 or later a near total 50 additional residences will have a large increase in traffic on Shady Lane. Access to the development from 114 Eastward will be short on the South end of Shady Lane, however, any entry from West of Shady Lane (all of Southlake) will use the entire length of Shady from Kimball to 114. I strongly oppose widening Shady Lane. Please stay with the plan which has worked for Southlake citizens. Respectfully Submitted Lloyd Satterfield - resident since 1977 2417 Greenbough Lane Southlake 76092 Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 10 153r3 Keeder,,1— lexan(-Icr OFFICL Ll► i Y. 3• kiil�: Ii � �i i� Saturday, January 04, 2014 Southlake City Council 1400 Main Street, Suite 270 Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Mayor Terrell and Ladies & Gentlemen of the Council, I hope you will deny any application from JTS Holdings to develop Darby Lane Estates near Shady Lane & Hwy 114. Zoning rules in that location clearly prohibit lots of less than one acre. If a permit is granted, can I assume that I'm free to subdivide my lot for three additional home sites? Shady Lane today includes lots with numerous mature native oaks. If this proposed development includes improvements on Shady Lane that require removing these valuable trees, I must object strongly!! These trees improve my property values significantly more than would the addition of 22 small home sites. Sincerely, Sara Alexander Homeowner Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 11 Paul Locklin, 2620 Rolling Lane, Southlake — Opposed Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 12 1123014 CI.saEhlale.b— Mail - Online Farm Sibn#UW: Cantact to City Online Form Submittal: Contact the City noreply@civioplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM To: hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us If you are having problems Hewing this HTML email, click to New a Text version. Contact the City Contact Us The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First dame Last Marrls Susan Johnson Email Select A oppartm_nt -- --- ---- --- —.� Planning and Development SerlAces -- — — ---- — -- ------ ------------- ----- Please select the City of Southlake Department to receive your message and fill out the required information. Message to the City" ---------------------------- I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13.134, ZA13-140). The Increased density will cause an increase in treific on Shady Lane The following form was submitted Na your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Name: Susan Last Name: Johnson Email Select A Department: Planning and Development Services Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 13 1/23/2014 Ci.southlals.bcus Mail - Online Form Submittal: Contact the City Message to the City : I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13-134, ZA13- 140). The increased density will cause an increase in traffic on Shady Lane above and beyond what the street is designed for, especially during the construction period. When entering from the west, the construction traffic will tra\,el down Shady Lane - causing a decrease in the property values for the homeowners living on Shady Lane and encroaching on their right to enjoy their property. The increased traffic from the higher density zoning will cause this to be more than a temporary situation. If a neighborhood of this density is allowed to be built, they should be required to have the ONLY entrance to the neighborhood off of the SH114 frontage road. Additional Information: Form Submitted on: 1/23/2014 11:01:16 AM Submitted from IP Address: 71.252.188.72 Referrer Page: http://tx-southlake.civicplus.com/FormCenter/Contact-the-City-2/Contact-the-City-33 Form Address: http://tx-southlake.ci%Acplus.com/Form Center/Contact-the-City-2/Contact-the-City-33 Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 14 The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Name: Antonia Last Name: Buban Email : Select A Department: Planning and Development Services Message to the City : I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13-134, ZA13- 140). The increased density will cause an increase in traffic on Shady Lane above and beyond what the street is designed for, especially during the construction period. When entering from the west, the construction traffic will travel down Shady Lane - causing a decrease in the property values for the homeowners living on Shady Lane and encroaching on their right to enjoy their property. The increased traffic from the higher density zoning will cause this to be more than a temporary situation. If a neighborhood of this density is allowed to be built, they should be required to have the ONLY entrance to the neighborhood off of the SN114 frontage road. The negative impacts will be felt by the homeowners on Shady Lane as well as elsewhere in the Shady Lane neighborhood. As a resident of the Shady Lane neighborhood and residing on Shady lane, I moved to this neighborhood specifically because it is not a heavily trafficked, high density neighborhood. Allowing the Remington Estates neighborhood to go through with an entrance on Shady Lane will subject us to the very things I moved to the neighborhood to avoid. I consider this an assault on my right to enjoy my property and a devaluation of my property. The city should make every effort to preserve the Shady Lane neighborhood and require the developer to purchase property for access from 114 service road, similar to the entrance to Austin Oaks, just east of this development. Additional Information: b Form Submitted on: 1/23/2014 11:51:47 AM Submitted from IP Address: 71,252,188.72 Referrer Page: http://tx-southIake.ci\Acplus.com/Form Center/Contact-the-City-•2/Contact-the-City-33 Form Address: http://tx-southlake.ci\Acplus.com/FormCenter/Contact-the-City-2/Contact-the-City-33 Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 15 1123/2014 Ci.southlale.bcus Mail -Online Form Submittal: Contact the City Message to the City : I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13-134, ZA13- 140). Medium density is completely inappropriate for this area and the current infrastructure. If residential homes are built at this site, they should be constructed on a minimum of 1-acre homesites, consistent with the surrounding area, without any necessity to increase Shady Lane, which is a very narrow, 2-lane back road, and certainly inappropriate for ANY increased traffic, The most appropriate use for this acreage, based on the current infrastructure and property values, are "estate" homes of several acres, perhaps limited to 3-5 homes per 10 acres. Please consider the totality of the circumstances and what it will do this area. Thank you. —Robyn North Additional Information: Form Submitted on: 1/23/2014 12:23:36 PM Submitted from IP Address: 63.87.170.126 Referrer Page: http://www.cityofsouthlake.com/FormCenter/Contact-the-City-2/Contact-the-City-33 Form Address: http://www.cityotouthiake.com/FormCenter/Contact-the-City-2/Contact-the-City-33 Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 16 1/23/2014 Ci.southlale.txus Mail -Online Form Submittal: Contact the City The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Name: Margaret Last Name: Weddel Email Select A Department: Planning and Development Seances Message to the City : My husband (James) and I are against the rezoning change from Low Density residitual to Medium Density in our neighborhood off Shady Lane. Additional Information: Form Submitted on: 1/23/2014 2:04:51 PM Submitted from IP Address: 72.64.124.218 Referrer Page: http://tx-southlake.civicplus.com/FormCenter/Contact-the-City-2/Contact-the-City-33 Form Address: http://tx-southlake.civicplus.com/FormCenter/Contact-the-City-2/Contact-the-City-33 Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 17 1/23/2014 Ci.southlalq.txus Mail -Online Form submittal: Contact the City I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13-134, ZA13-140). The increased density will cause an increase in traffic on Shady Lane t.....,................ __.__...___..._ The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Name: bob Last Name: buttrill Email . Select A Department: Planning and Development Services Message to the City : I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13-134, ZA13- 140). The increased density will cause an increase in traffic on Shady Lane above and beyond what the street is designed for, especially during the construction period. When entering from the west, the construction traffic will travel down Shady Lane - causing a decrease in the property values for the homeowners living on Shady Lane and encroaching on their right to enjoy their property. The increased traffic from the higher density zoning will cause this to be more than a temporary situation. If a neighborhood of this density is allowed to be built, they should be required to have the ONLY entrance to the neighborhood off of the SH114 frontage road. The negative impacts will be felt by the homeowners on Shady Lane as well as elsewhere in the Shady Lane neighborhood. As a resident of the Shady Lane neighborhood, I can tell you that we moved to this neighborhood specifically because it is not a heavily trafficked, high density neighborhood. Allowing the Remington Estates neighborhood to go through with an entrance on Shady Lane will subject us to the very things we moved to the neighborhood to avoid. I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13-134, ZA13-140). The increased density will cause an increase in traffic on Shady Lane above and beyond what the street is designed for, especially during the construction period. When entering from the west, the construction traffic will travel down Shady Lane - causing a decrease in the property values for the homeowners living on Shady Lane and encroaching on their right to enjoy their property. The increased traffic from the higher density zoning will cause this to be more than a temporary situation. If a neighborhood of this density is allowed to be built, they should be required to have the ONLY entrance to the neighborhood off of the SH114 frontage road. The negative impacts will be felt by the homeowners on Shady Lane as well as elsewhere in the Shady Lane neighborhood. As a resident of the Shady Lane neighborhood, I can tell you that we moved to this neighborhood specifically because it is not a heavily trafficked, high density neighborhood. Allowing the Remington Estates neighborhood to go through with an entrance on Shady Lane will subject us to the very things we moved to the neighborhood to avoid. I am OPPOSED to the proposed Remington Estates plan (CP13-009, ZA13-134, ZA13-140). The increased density will cause an increase in traffic on Shady Lane above and beyond what the street is designed for, especially during the construction period. When entering from the west, the construction traffic will travel down Shady Lane - causing a decrease in the property values for the homeowners living on Shady Lane and encroaching on their right to enjoy their property. The increased traffic from the higher density zoning will cause this to be more than a temporary situation. If a neighborhood of this density is allowed to be built, they should be required to have the ONLY entrance to the neighborhood off of the SH114 frontage road. The negative impacts will be felt by the homeowners on Shady Lane as well as elsewhere in the Shady Lane neighborhood. As a resident of the Shady Lane neighborhood, I can tell you that we moved to this neighborhood specifically because it is not a heavily trafficked, high density neighborhood. Allowing the Remington Estates neighborhood to go through with an entrance on Shady Lane will subject us to the very things we moved to the neighborhood to avoid. Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 18 February 4, 2014 To: Southlake Planning and Zoning, and City Council Our names are James and Karen Mertz. We are the owners of 8 X acres at 409 Shady Lane in Southlake. When our family originally purchased the property in 1998, we were able to access the property directly from SH-114, via a drive/easement through what is now the Bonola property. The same is true for the two neighboring properties, owned by the Fusella and Laturno families. That all changed when the city approved the initial development plan and plat of the property where that access drive was located. In effect, the result was that our access from the south was cut off, and at the same time no provision was made to require a ROW stub be extended to the edge of our properties for proper future access (as we understand is normally standard procedure). When we realized what was about to happen, we made our objections known, but were told we were too late in the process to stop it. Since then, we and our neighbors (the "isolated three") can only get to our land by a gravel drive down the side of the southern lot of the subdivision to,the west of us, from Shady Lane, as there are no public street right-of-ways connecting to any of our properties, from any direction. While the gravel drive does allow us to get to our property, we have come to find out that it is a big impediment to any potential development of our land, which would require public street access. In fact, we have been told we cannot even build a home on our property, which was our original intent, because of the lack of street accessl We are not developers, but once we found ourselves In this situation, we have been trying to sell this property to someone who is, for almost 10 years now, without success. Several interested buyers have looked at it, but they have not been able to solve the access problem we were left with. It has had a severe impact on the value of our property. Finally, however, there is a solution! The development group before you tonight has come forward at the same time the owners of the lot, where we get our gravel road access, have decided to sell their home, thereby providing a means to extend a proper public right-of-way to our isolated properties. At great expense, the developers have agreed to purchase the Bradford home and property, and build a public roadway through it, providing access to all three of our properties. They are not proposing to replace the Bradford home with smaller lots, or even a single home on the property; just a beautiful, winding, estate -like entryway leading to the future homes on what is currently the Laturno's and our property. The third property owners, the Fusella's, are not selling their property, but they will also benefit by receiving street access to the edge of their property. It is truly a win/win for our neighbors and us. Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 19 Now, we fully understand that the Planning and Zoning Commission, as well as the City Council, is charged with making sure any new development is compatible with the surrounding property and existing homeowners, and we believe the proposal before you tonight is extremely well thought - through, and accomplishes that goal. It provides generous landscaped buffers to all adjacent property owners. Only one lot adjoins the neighbors, and it will replace a home which is already there. It is larger than an acre and would therefore be completely compatible with their low -density lots. Only where completely removed from the neighboring homeowners would any of the "smaller" lots be placed, and remember- those smaller lots need to be compatible with what they are next to as well, and they would be adjacent to the commercial development and freeway noise to the south, and the smaller -yet lots to the east in Grapevine, and will serve to help transition to the larger lots to the north. We have heard much from the neighbors about a possible increase in traffic, however, when the experts (traffic engineers, confirmed by city staff) are asked to analyze the resulting traffic flow and number of trips generated, the effect is "insignificant." In summary, this is a creative and entirely appropriate solution to the problem, and should be approved as is. We fear that not doing so will lead to a missed opportunity to solve a problem that we have been dealing with for years and years and this may be our only chance for some time. Please, approve this tonight. Thank you- J es Mertz Karen Mertz Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 20 To: Southlake Piannfng and Zoning My name is Carol Laturno, I am the owner and resident at 413 Shady Lane. I have lived at this address for over 21 years. For various reasons I recently decided to sell my property and move. One of the reasons was to downsize from a 2+ acre lot that is difficult and expensive to maintain. My neighbors, the Fuseila's and Mertz, and I have an access problem. Over time and forwhatever reasons the City has approved Commercial Development along Hwy 114 and residential development on Shady Lane that has left us only with a small gravel road off of Shady Lane as access. This has left us with property that is less valuable than similar properties in the City that have access to a public road. The developers who have our property under contract have come up with a very good solution to the problem, The developer's plan with the winding road coming in from Shady Lane and the large amount of open area seems to fit very well with the area. It looks to me like it is very similar to what is there now except for a wider entrance that looks like you are entering through a park. The lots and homes they are proposing are isolated in an area that I don't see how could have any effect on the rest of the neighborhood. In fact I think their entrance and the development will add value to the neighboring properties. I would simply ask that you consider us, the owners of the property in question, and the problems we have in selling our property. These problems are no access, the proximity of Hwy 114 and Commercial Development adjacent to us. We have an opportunity to sell and the developers have produced, what I believe to be, a very attractive plan and solution that will benefit the neighbors as well as us. Please vote in favor of the proposed Remington Estates development. Thank you Carol LaTurno 0�9 (a 0��/ J wl-�w Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 21 noreply@civicpluscom <noreply@civicplus. com> Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:22 AM To: hblake@ci,southlake.tx.us It you are having problems viewing this HTML email, click to view a Text version. Contact the City Contact Us The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. Margaret and James Weddel Email " Select A Departmen6 _ I Planning and Development Services Please select the City of Southlake Department to receive your message and fill out the required information. m9rssage to iha City [I and my husband (James) have lived in Southlake far 46 112 years on Raintree Lane. Our residence is in the SPIN #4 neighborhood. Our concerns are the issues w The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concems. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Name: Margaret and James Last Name: Weddel Mips Jlmal.gmgle.ccmrrd/htl=l&il�cc737a6Z5C&uCUFpt8searcFFinW th=143i85dd1aati4fH2 2/3 Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 22 Online Form Submittal: Contact the City noreply@civlcpius.com <noreply@cMcplus.com> Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:03 AM To hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us If you are hating problems Mewing this HTML email, click to Hew a Text version. Contact the City Contract US The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. 71 F!;p ill:� ' list Warne Marianne McAllister Email Se IsGt A Department r.� i Planning and Development SeMces Please select the City of Southlake Department to receive your message and fill out the required information. tlMemage to the City My name Is Madame McAllister and I the In the City of Southlake at 1008 Shady Lane . My residence is in the SPIN 94 neighborhood. I am writing this message to The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission, First Name: Marianne Last Name: McAllister Email Select A Department: Planning and Development Services Z5M14 CI.SnuY:'ala.tXLJS Mail - Or'ine Form Submittal: Contactthe City Message to the City : My name is Marianne McAllister and 1 live in the City of Southlake at 1008 Shady Lane. My residence is in the SPIN #4 neighborhood. I am writing this message to vice my concerns on the following issues to be at the planning and zoning public hearing Feb 6, 2014: I am opposed to Ordinance 1082 (CP13-009), Ordinance No. 480-656 (ZA13-134), and ZA13-140 - Preliminary Plat for Remington Estates. I believe it is not In the best interest of the residents who litre in this neighborhood, nor is it in the best interest of Southlall to deviate from the pre -established zoning as described in the future land use plan of the Southlake 2030 Plan. A deviation of zoning and future land use plans would violate the trust of residents who have purchased property in this neighborhood. It would also set precedence for future land development and zoning changes. I thank the commissioners who have protected the quality of life in our city, and who I know will make the decisions that will be in the best interest of the city and residents. Thank you, Marianne McAllister Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 23 SOUTHLAKE Online Form Submittal: Contact the City noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> To: hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us tfyou are having problems viewing this HTML email, click to view a Text ve,sion. Contact the City Contact l_is 'rhe City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Nama Elizabeth I:mxBl ` Last Name Johnson Select A Depariimeri Planning and Development Services Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:28 A+ Please select the City of Southlake Department to receive your message and fill out the required information. Mrw�,acyo3 ka 4ire ON Hello I will be out of town for the P andZ meeting on Feb 6 however I would like to voice my concem and displeasure about changing our zoning from SF11R. This will The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Name: Elizabeth Last Name: Johnson Email : Select A Department: Planning and Development Services Message to the City : Hello I will be out of town for the P andZ meeting on Feb 6 howe,,er I would like to vice my concern and displeasure about changing our zoning from SF1R. This will effect our property \value. A precedent has been made when they tried to change it years ago for Simmons Estates off Raintree Drive. I hope you consider this and stay with the Southlake 2030 Plan. Thank you. Elizabeth Johnson Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 24 m SOUTHLAK.F Online Form Submittal: Contact the City norepty@dvicplus.com <noreply@civscplus.com> To: hblake@ci.southiake.tx.us If you are hating problems viewing this HTML email, click to view a Text version. Contact the City r. or:tq& FI_ The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. biro Manna Paul F.mall' Select fA Department Planning and Delelopment SeMces Lass {Nam. Locklin Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 4:41 PM Please select the City of Southlake Department to receive your message and fill out the required information. Message to the City" Planning and Zoning Commissioners, ---- The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the City Contact Us : The City of Southlake welcomes comments, suggestions and concerns. We will respond to your email within 48 hours. Thank you for your submission. First Name: Paul Last Name: Locklin Email Select A Department: Planning and Development Services 213M14 Ci.southial®.bcus Mail - Online Form SubrNsal: Conraclthe City Message to the City : Planning and Zoning Commissioners, My name is Paul Locklin and I live in the City of Southlake at 2620 Rolling Lane. My residence is in the SPIN 44 neighborhood. I am writing this message to voice my concerns on the following issues to be at the planning and zoning public hearing Feb 6, 2014: 1 am opposed to Ordinance 1082 (CP13-009), Ordinance No. 480-666 (ZA13-134), and ZA13-140 - Preliminary Plat for Remington Estates. I believe it is not in the best interest of the residences who live in this neighborhood nor is it in the best interest of Southlake to deviate from the pre -established zoning as described in the future land use plan of the Southlake 2030 Plan. A deviation of zoning and future land use plans would violate the trust of residents who have purchased property in this neighborhood. it would also set precedence for future land development and zoning changes. I thank the commissioners who have protected the quality of life in our city, and who I know will make decisions that will favor the best Interest of the city and residents. Paul Locklin Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 25 Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission: Our names are Paul and Jean Lehmann. Due to overseas travel and recent surgery neither of us are able to attend this meeting. We have asked Linda Stewart to read this letter on our behalf. We reside at 1100 Shady Lane and are concerned about the multiple rezoning requests for the properties at 405, 413 and 395 Shady Lane. Southlake's uniqueness of high quality residential communities coexisting with rural attributes is what drew us to this area when we relocated in 2006. We believe these qualities still hold true today and Southlake continues to attract residents with the same values. Changing the zoning in this area does not support Southlakes's vision statement to enhance Southlake's status as a desirable, attractive, safe, healthy and fiscally -sound community with quality neighborhoods. We would request that the zoning commission continue with the 2030 plan for future development and deny the zoning change from essentially low density single family homes to Residential Planned Unit Development. Sincerely, Paul and Jean Lehmann 1W11111jIe___� � C' jj"_� Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 26 PLEASE REGISTER WITH THIS CARD TO SPEAK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGARDING ANY ITEM ON THE AGENDA Please print and return to tpe P& Seer ry. Agenda Item #: Date: 61 Address: I will speak IN SUPPOFtF of this item. I will speak IN OPPOSITION to this item. I do not wish to speak, but pleas ecord my: SUPPORT OPPOSITIC Citizen Comments (for item on the agenda) PLEASE REGISTER WITH THIS CARD TO SPEAK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGARDING ANY ITEM ON THE AGENDA Please print and return to the P&Z Secretary. Agenda Item #: 'el-1 2- - ( 3 Name: 0 6 ram/ c (--L- 4 Date: 6, 1 i( Address: O % S 14(1Ok)e ✓ I will speak IN SUPPORT of this item. I will speak IN OPPOSITION to this item. I do not wish to speak, but please record my: SUPPORT OPPOSITION Citizen Comments (for item on the agenda) Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 27 Patty Moos From: Scott Sandlin Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:52 AM To: pmoos@ci.southlake.tx.us Cc: Matt Speight; scott@sandlin.com Subject: Remington Estates To Southlake City Council Members, I am the owner of Morrison Office Park in Southlake which borders the proposed Remington Estates to the South. I am not opposed to the planned development as long as it does not or will not require any additional expense to me as my property is developed or require me to install screening walls, fencing or landscaping between the properties now or in the future, unless such expense is part of and paid for by the developer of Remington Estates. Thanks, 5Cott .$Q.K&GL Sandlin Homes 5137 Davis Blvd. Ft. Worth, TX 76180 Office (817) 281-3509 x109 Mobile (817) 239-7700 Checkout our new Website! www.Sandl!nHomes.com SANDLIN H O M E S You A p_-_- Case No. Attachment E ZA13-134 Page 28 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-656 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 DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, GREG'S COUNTRY ADDITION AND TRACTS 2A02 AND 2A01 OF THE S. FREEMAN SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 525— AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, BEING APPROXIMATELY 13.43 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL AND "SF-1A" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO "R-PUD" RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B", 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 Southlake, Texas is a home rule 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 "AG" Agricultural and "SF-M" Single Family Residential District 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 the tract or tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning classification 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: 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 that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: Being described as Lot 1, Greg's Country Addition and Tracts 2A02 and 2A01 of the S. Freeman Survey Abstract No. 525as depicted on the approved Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B", and subject to the following conditions: 1. A motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480-656 (ZA13-134), zoning change and development plan for Remington Estates pursuant to development plan review summary No. 2, dated January 10, 2014 with the following additions: prior to next reading, applicant will bring forth a garage orientation plan and design guidelines for the homes to be built in the project which will include, but not be limited to the size of the homes and building materials, articulation styles; applicant will work with the homeowners to identify an alternative fencing plan along the northern border of Lot 27X and along the western border of Lot1X; it is Council's intention that the living screen is not an alternative; applicant will bring forth to Council a specific vegetation plan for buffering along the northern border of Lot 27X and the western borders of Lot 1X; police and fire will come forth and address Council member Williamson's concern regarding the existing access; and the traffic study will be made available to the nearby residences. SECTION 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City 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 land described herein. SECTION 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance in its entirety on the City website together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and it this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten (10) days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the 18th day of February, 2014. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 2014. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: EXHIBIT "A" Being described as Lot 1, Greg's Country Addition and Tracts 2A02 and 2A01 of the S. Freeman Survey Abstract No. 525, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas being approximately 13.43 acres, and more fully described below: RESERVED FOR METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT "B" RESERVED FOR APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN