2015-01-13 Meeting Report (Shady Lane)
SPIN MEETING REPORT
Case Number:
ZA14-144
Project Name:
Shady Lane – Residential Development
SPIN Neighborhood:
#4
Meeting Date:
January 13, 2015
Meeting Location:
1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX
City Council Chambers
Total Attendance:
Twenty-eight (28)
Host:
Sherry Berman, Community Engagement Committee
Applicant(s) Presenting:
Kosse Maykus, Maykus Custom Homes
City Staff Present:
Lorrie Fletcher, Planner I
City Staff Contact:
Richard Schell, Principal Planner, 817-748-8602
Town Hall Forums can be viewed in their entirety by visiting http://www.cityofsouthlake.com and clicking on “Learn More”
under Video On Demand; forums are listed under SPIN by meeting date.
FORUM SUMMARY:
ͻ
Eighteen (18) residential lots and three (3) open space lots.
ͻ
Proposed Residential Planned Unit Development zoning (current zoning SF-1A).
ͻ
Approximately 20.5 acres.
QUESTIONS / CONCERNS:
ͻ
What is the plan for the existing house?
Remodel and leave on site – some of it will be removed; family will move in.
o
ͻ
What about the 572 easement line? Won’t that affect lots 7-15?
The easement does prohibit construction of the primary structure, however, we can put
o
pools, cabanas, etc. in that location.
ͻ
The lots are only 100 feet wide or close to 100 feet. I am concerned about the homes being
stacked too close to each other.
ͻ
This is a PUD?
Yes
o
ͻ
Are the lots adjacent to the existing drive being measured using the square footage of that area?
Won’t it be fenced off for public use? But you’re including that property in the square footage for
the lots…
ͻ
I am concerned about Lots 1-5 and drainage.
We have done a lot of study regarding the drainage in this area. We plan to use the
o
existing pipe and bury it to connect with the Corps. property and remove the ponds. We
cannot exceed pre-existing conditions.
ͻ
The north driveway faces my house and I am concerned about head lights…
I can offer to build a natural screen barrier to work with you.
o
ͻ
I am worried about the safety of that driveway so close to the curve in the road; accidents occur
there often.
The traffic counts will be so minimal; we feel most residents will use the southern drive.
o
ͻ
The northwest triangular piece… is Grapevine selling that to you?
Yes, I’m buying it.
o
ͻ
A debate occurred regarding the definition and intent of low density and 1 dwelling unit per acre.
ͻ
I want to see one house on one acre.
ͻ
Would you be willing to flag the proposed entrances so people can get a visual of where they will
be located?
Yes
o
ͻ
Discussion continued regarding net density. The applicant stated he is responding to the market;
talked about creative use of the property and blending into the neighborhood – this is a green
development.
ͻ
I am concerned about increased traffic. Up to 36 cars will come in and out of the development.
This is the least amount of traffic in a development that is low density residential.
o
ͻ
Will you be building sidewalk (along Shady Lane)?
No – it is currently a bar ditch area.
o
ͻ
What is the minimum square footage of the homes?
4,000 minimum / most will average 5,000+
o
ͻ
What will you do with the trail behind the green belt?
The existing 10’ concrete trail will remain. We will extend it with a 6’ trail to connect to the
o
Corps. property.
ͻ
I would like to see broader setbacks between the homes; 40 foot total (20/20).
We are doing what is required; 20 foot total (10/10).
o
ͻ
I would like to see the existing trail something other than concrete.
Concrete is a cleaner material and easier to maintain.
o
ͻ
A resident complimented the SPIN process and thanked everyone for attending. He invited the
neighbors to take a look at what was done in Estes Park. The proposed development will look
similar to the custom home side in Estes Park.
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.