[1. Call to Order.]
[00:00:05]
ALL RIGHT, GOOD EVENING, WELCOME TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR OCTOBER 21, 2021.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD CROWD.
A COUPLE OF THINGS TO KEEP IN MIND TONIGHT.
WE'RE BACK ON THE FIELD, SO WE ALL WANT TO KEEP EVERYTHING POSITIVE, HAVE SOME FUN KIND OF CHEER ON THE DRAGONS AND ENJOY OURSELVES.
SECOND THING IS, WE DO HAVE QUITE A FEW OF YOU HERE, SO WE WANT TO KEEP IN MIND IF A LOT OF YOU WERE GOING TO SPEAK.
WE HAVE A LITTLE CLOCK UP HERE WITH A BUZZER, AND WHEN YOU GET TO THE RED LIGHT, THEN IT'S GOING TO SEND AN ALARM OFF AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STEP DOWN.
SO IF YOU COULD KEEP THAT IN MIND, I'M OBVIOUSLY JOKING.
WE DO HAVE THE RED LIGHT, BUT NO BUZZER.
FEEL FREE TO COME UP AND SPEAK.
I'M GUESSING BASED ON PRIOR MEETINGS WITH CARILLON, HALF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS HERE.
PROBABLY, SO Y'ALL ARE WELCOME TO COME UP AND GIVE YOUR COMMENTS.
IF IT GETS TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S REPETITIVE, YOU'RE STILL WELCOME TO COME UP.
BUT KEEP IN MIND, WE'RE ALL PRETTY COGNIZANT OF WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHAT THE PRIOR COMMENTS WERE.
SO I SAY THAT TO SAY GENTLY, WE DON'T NEED TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE IF WE DON'T HAVE TO.
WITH THAT IN MIND, WE WILL GO TO ITEM NUMBER THREE ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS.
CHAIRMAN THOMAS, I JUST GAVE THOSE AGAIN.
[4. Chairman Comments.]
WE HAVE A RELATIVELY SHORT AGENDA, BUT A FEW ITEMS THAT ARE GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.AND WITH THAT, WE WILL MOVE INTO THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH ARE ITEMS NUMBER FIVE
[CONSENT AGENDA]
AND SIX ON THE AGENDA.EVERYBODY'S BEEN PROVIDED A COPY OF THE MINUTES, WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE, AS WELL AS CONSENT ITEM NUMBER SIX.
IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I'D BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THAT.
MR. VICE CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 7TH, 2021.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
OH, I GUESS THAT ITEM CARRIES SIX-ZERO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SEE IT ON THE SCREEN.
DID YOU DO FIVE AND SIX TOGETHER? NO, I DID THE MEETING SEPARATELY, BUT I ALSO, AS PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH WAS KZA21-0083.
WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
ALL RIGHT, THAT ITEM CARRIES SIX-ZERO, THANK YOU.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, ZA21-0072.
[7. Consider: Ordinance No. 480-788, (ZA21-0072), Zoning Change and Concept/Site Plan forZena Rucker Road Office Park on property described as Lot 4, Block 1, Pecan Creek, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 731 Zena Rucker Rd., Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District. Proposed Zoning: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood #9. PUBLIC HEARING]
MR. CHAIRMAN, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, THIS ITEM WAS PRESENTED AT ONE OF YOUR PAST MEETINGS.I'LL SIMPLY JUMP TO THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE SINCE YOUR LAST HEARING UNLESS ANY OF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THE PRECEDING SLIDES, THAT WORKS FOR ME DENNIS, SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA.
THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN FOR ZONING CHANGE SITE PLAN FOR THE ZENA RUCKER OFFICE.
IT WAS ROUGHLY TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT TWO BUILDING CONFIGURATION, WITH APPROXIMATELY HALF OF THAT MEDICAL HALF OF THAT GENERAL OFFICE.
IT CONTAINED ROUGHLY 114 PARKING SPACES AND WAS THAT APPROXIMATELY 75 PERCENT IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE? UM, SINCE THAT TIME, AFTER HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY DURING PUBLIC HEARING, THE APPLICANT HAS FURTHER REVISED THAT IT IS NOW APPROXIMATELY A TWENTY ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT TWO BUILDING CONFIGURATION.
THE PARKING HAS BEEN REDUCED FROM 114 SPACES TO 93 SPACES, AND IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON THE SITE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM 75 PERCENT TO 62 PERCENT ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY THAT THE PARKING AND HAS BEEN SHIFTED FURTHER TO THE WEST.
THERE'S A SLIGHTLY MORE SIGNIFICANT BUFFER AREA IN THAT AREA.
IT'S APPROXIMATELY THIRTY NINE FEET FROM THE EASTERN BOUNDARY, LIKEWISE, THE BUILDING IN THE MIDDLE HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE NORTH AND THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 45 FEET OF OPEN BUFFER AREA BETWEEN THE BUILDING IN THAT SOUTH BOUNDARY.
I THINK PREVIOUSLY THAT WAS AT ABOUT 10 FEET.
[00:05:07]
THIS IS A LIST OF THOSE CHANGES BRIEFLY SUMMARIZED EARLIER.IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE BUILDING HEIGHT ON BOTH OF THOSE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY APPROXIMATELY TWO FEET AND AN OVERALL PEAK HEIGHT.
ALSO ON THE DRIVEWAY IS ACCESSING ZENA RUCKER ROAD, ORIGINALLY WITH THE PLAN PRESENTED BACK IN SEPTEMBER.
THE REQUIRED STACKING DEPTH ON THESE DRIVES WAS APPROXIMATELY 75 OR REQUIRED TO BE 75 FEET, WITH THE REDUCTION OF PARKING THAT IS NOW BEEN REDUCED TO A MINIMUM OF 50 FOOT STACKING DEPTH, WHICH BOTH DRIVES COME FAIRLY CLOSE TO THAT.
THIS WESTERN DRIVEWAY IS APPROXIMATELY FORTY ONE FEET.
THIS IS A COMPARISON OF THE REGULATIONS AS THEY COMPARE WITH THE 01 OFFICE DISTRICT AND THE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED PLAN IN SEPTEMBER.
AND THE VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED ARE ONCE AGAIN FOR THE DRIVEWAY STACKING.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, FOR THE THEY'RE STILL REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO CONTINUATION OR RETENTION OF THE EIGHT FOOT MULTI-USE TRAIL ALONG THEIR EASTERN BOUNDARY.
AND WITH THAT, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OR REFER BACK TO ANY SLIDES YOU LIKE TO SEE.
ALL RIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NOTHING.
AND I WILL MAKE A QUICK COMMENT.
I KNOW WE HAD A COUPLE OF PEOPLE WALK IN AND WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE MORE.
WE HAVE OVERFLOW SEATING ACROSS THE HALL.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO SIT IN THE COURTROOM.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME DOWN HERE AND HAVE THE SEAT AT THE FRONT IF YOU IF YOU'D LIKE TO DO THAT AS WELL.
IF ANYBODY GOES ACROSS THE HALL, WE WILL GIVE YOU NOTICE IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK SO THAT YOU CAN COME OVER WHILE SOMEBODY ELSE IS SPEAKING.
SO DON'T WORRY, EVERYBODY WILL GET THEIR CHANCE TO COME FORWARD.
WITH THAT, LET'S CALL THE APPLICANT ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
DO ME A FAVOR AND DO THE ROUTINE, IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, FOR THE RECORD.
I'M KERRY CLARK REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER AND I OFFICE AT 6449 NORTH PORT DRIVE IN DALLAS.
THERE WERE A COUPLE OF ITEMS I WANTED TO POINT OUT TONIGHT.
OUR GOAL WAS TO CREATE A WIN WIN SITUATION AND TAKE THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMISSION WHEN WE WERE HERE ON SEPTEMBER 9TH AND PRESENTED TO YOU, AS WELL AS THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE TIMARRON RESIDENTS, AS WELL AS THE MATTHEWS COURT RESIDENTS.
AND SO WE REVISED THE ENTIRE PLAN FROM WHAT WE PRESENTED ON SEPTEMBER 9TH AND GOT IT DOWN TO WHERE WE WOULD HAVE ZERO VARIANCE REQUESTS.
AND BEFORE I CAME BACK IN HERE, I WANTED TO MEET WITH THE MATTHEWS COURT RESIDENTS AND PRESENT TO THEM AND GET THEIR BLESSING.
SO THE ONLY TIME THAT THEY WERE ACTUALLY AVAILABLE TO ME AS A GROUP WAS THE NIGHT BEFORE WHEN WE WERE SUPPOSED TO APPEAR ON THE OCTOBER 7TH P&Z MEETING.
THEY WERE AVAILABLE ON THE 6TH.
SO I MET WITH THEM AND PRESENTED THE PLAN.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE THING, OUR ORIGINAL PLAN HAD A 10 FOOT BUFFER YARD ON THE EAST SIDE.
AND WE ACTUALLY DOUBLED THAT TO A 20 FOOT BUFFER YARD, AND THAT STILL WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THEM.
AND WE SAT DOWN AND LOOKED AT THE PLANS.
I BROUGHT A FULL 24 BY 36 SET A PLAN SO WE COULD PUT IT ON THE TABLE AND ALL SIT AROUND IT AND TALK ABOUT IT AND DECIDE WHAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO THEM AND IN WORKING THROUGH.
THEY DECIDED THAT IF WE COULD INCREASE THAT TO THIRTY EIGHT FEET, THEY WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF IT.
AND AS A RESULT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BRINGING IN TO YOU TONIGHT.
[00:10:04]
WE HAVE MOVED THE SIDE YARDS OF BUILDING NUMBER ONE AND SHIFTED SOME THINGS AROUND TO WHERE WE ACTUALLY HAVE A 38 FOOT SEVEN INCH SIDE YARD FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE EAST SIDE TO THE BACK OF A CURB, WHICH IS RIGHT AT FOUR TIMES OUR ORIGINAL BUFFER YARD THAT WE BROUGHT IN HERE ON SEPTEMBER 9TH.I WAS TOLD BY TERRY HOLMES, WHO REPRESENTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IF WE DID THIS, HE WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT AND THEY WOULD REMOVE ALL OF THE OPPOSITION.
I FILLED OUT A LETTER OF NON OPPOSITION AND SENT IT TO HIM TO HAVE THE RESIDENT SIGN HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM HIM, ALTHOUGH I DO HAVE A TEXT THAT SAID THAT HE WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF IT AND HE WAS PLANNING ON BEING HERE TONIGHT, SO HOPEFULLY HE WILL BE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF.
BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT AT THIS POINT WITH OUR CHANGES THAT WE'VE MADE, THEY ARE IN SUPPORT OF IT.
THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO MENTION TO YOU IS THAT WE ARE DEFINITELY NOT AGAINST THE MASTER PATHWAY TRAIL PLAN AT ALL.
MY CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT TO PUT IN A WHAT I REFER TO AS A TRAIL TO NO.
I'M GOING TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION WITH YOU THAT I HAVE RESEARCHED SINCE THE LAST TIME I WAS IN HERE.
IT IS MY FIRM BELIEF THAT THAT TRAIL IS NEVER GOING TO BE PUT IN, AND I'LL SHARE WITH YOU WHY IN JUST A SECOND.
AND AS OPPOSED TO PUTTING A BUNCH OF CONCRETE ON THIS PLAN, IF THE TRAIL IS NEVER GOING TO EXTEND ALL THE WAY TO THE SOUTH, I WOULD MUCH RATHER LEAVE IT GREEN AND HAVE LESS IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE.
I WAS CONTACTED BY TIMARRON NEIGHBORS AFTER THE LAST MEETING, AND THEY TOLD ME MOST OF THEM HAVE LIVED IN IN THE AREA FOR 22 YEARS SINCE TIMARRON FIRST WENT IN.
THEY WERE THE ORIGINAL OWNERS AND STILL LIVE THERE IN BRYSON SQUARE, AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THIS IDEA OF PUTTING A TRAIL ALONG THIS SIDE HAS COME UP IN THE PAST AND THAT THE TIMARRON RESIDENTS WERE VEHEMENTLY AGAINST IT FOR TWO MAIN REASONS.
NUMBER ONE IS THEY DIDN'T WANT A TRAIL RUNNING BEHIND THEIR HOUSE, AND NUMBER TWO IS THERE IS A LOT OF EROSION IN THAT CREEK RIGHT NOW, AND THEIR FEELING WAS THAT THIS WOULD JUST EXACERBATE IT.
AND SO IN ORDER TO TRY TO VERIFY THIS, I REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL PEOPLE.
THE FIRST PERSON THAT THEY HAD MADE CONTACT WAS A FELLOW NAMED BRIGHTON GREEN, WHO HAS LIVED IN TIMARRON FOR A LONG TIME, HAS BEEN ON THE BOARD BUT HAS ALSO BEEN A VERY INTEGRAL PART ON THE LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE.
AND I TALKED TO BRIGHTON AND HE VERIFIED THAT, YES, HISTORICALLY THERE HAS BEEN A REAL OPPOSITION TO PUTTING THAT LEG OF THE TRAIL IN.
HE ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT I CONTACT A FELLOW NAMED BOB MOORE, WHO HE SAID WAS THE PRESIDENT OF THE TIMARRON OWNERS ASSOCIATION.
I CALLED AND TALKED TO BOB AND HE LET ME KNOW THAT HE WAS NOT THE CURRENT PRESIDENT, BUT HE WAS STILL ON THE BOARD.
AND YES, THAT HE WAS AWARE THAT THERE WAS A HISTORICAL OPPOSITION TO PUTTING THAT TRAIL IN.
SO HE GAVE ME THE NAME OF THE NEW PRESIDENT, ERIC CARLE, AND I ACTUALLY SENT A COPY OF THE TRAIL PLAN AND A COPY OF OUR PLANS AND ACTUALLY CALLED AND TALKED TO ERIC KARL, KARL, AS WELL AS COPIED EVERYONE ON MY EMAIL THAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE TIMARRON OWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD.
AND THERE HAD ABOUT A 20 MINUTE CONVERSATION WITH ERIC.
AND HE SAID, YES, THAT WAS HIS UNDERSTANDING ALSO.
NOW HE DID POINT OUT THAT HE SAID, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NOT POLLED THE RESIDENTS AND I CAN'T TELL YOU WITH CERTAIN FACT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON THIS.
BUT HISTORICALLY, HE WAS AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A REAL OPPOSITION TO PUTTING IN THAT THAT LEG OF THE TRAIL.
SO THOSE ARE PART OF MY FEELINGS.
BUT ANOTHER REALLY IMPORTANT PART THAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU IS IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURES OF THE.
NOT ONLY IF YOU LOOK AT AN AERIAL OF THAT AREA AND WHERE THE PROPOSED TRAIL IS, ANOTHER IMPORTANT ITEM IS THAT IT WOULD APPEAR.
THAT IS NOT REAL LEGIBLE, BUT LET ME POINT OUT.
[00:15:03]
THIS IS THE LEG THAT IS EXISTING ON MY PROPERTY.AND THEN THERE'S A RED DOTTED LINE THAT SHOWS THAT IT ACTUALLY GOES TO THE EAST.
CAN WE GET THAT THING TO ZOOM OUT OR DO WE HAVE AN AERIAL MAYBE DENNIS IN THE PRESENTATION, MAYBE MOVE IT UP, SLIDE IT UP A LITTLE BIT.
OH, YEAH, THAT'S WHERE WE GET.
THAT'S GOOD RIGHT THERE, THANK YOU, SIR.
SO THIS RIGHT HERE IS THE SECTION OF TRAIL THAT'S ACTUALLY ON MY PROPERTY NOW.
WHEN IT LEAVES MY PROPERTY, IT ACTUALLY SHOOTS TO THE EAST ACROSS THE CREEK AND THEN GOES ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE CREEK AS OPPOSED TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE CREEK.
MY FEELING IS WHEN THIS IS DONE, I REALLY DOUBT THAT THE CITY WILL PAY TO PUT THAT BRIDGE IN.
OTHERWISE, THERE'S NO WAY TO GET THAT ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE CREEK.
AND I'M GOING TO SHOW, SHOW IT BLOWN OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
EVERYONE THAT I TALKED TO AS WELL MENTION THAT THE THERE IS A LOT MORE PUBLIC SENTIMENT TO PUT THE TRAIL GO IN FROM HIS ZENA RUCKER ROAD AND CONNECTING BACK DOWN HERE TO THE EXISTING LEG OF TIMARRON TO RUN IT THROUGH THE VACANT PROPERTY ON ZENA RUCKER ROAD ON ZENA RUCKER RIGHT HERE BECAUSE THIS IS YET TO BE DEVELOPED.
AND IF THIS TRAIL WERE INCORPORATED INTO THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, THE TRAIL CAN BE PUT IN PRIOR TO HOMES BEING PUT IN THERE AND PROBABLY EASE A LOT OF CONTROVERSY IN THE PROCESS.
SO THOSE ARE REALLY MY MAIN POINTS, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE DECREASED OUR DENSITY IMMENSELY.
WE'VE DROPPED ABOUT 18 PERCENT OF OUR PARKING IN ABOUT 12 PERCENT OF OUR ACTUAL OFFICE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE AS A RESULT OF TRYING TO KEEP EVERYBODY HAPPY AND GETTING EVERYONE'S SUPPORT.
BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
DENNIS, CAN YOU HELP ME AND PUT THE ARIEL BACK UP FOR A SECOND, PLEASE? YEAH, THAT ONE THERE.
DO WE KNOW WHERE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARY IS AS IT RELATES TO THIS PROPERTY IN MATTHEW'S COURT? GENERALLY SPEAKING, I MEAN, I KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE A..
YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, IT APPEARS THAT THE SCHOOL PROPERTY DOES DIRECTLY ABUT MATTHEWS COURT AND THEN THE RUCKER FAMILY PROPERTY JUST SOUTH OF MATTHEWS COURT BETWEEN THE ATKINS TRACT AND MATTHEWS COURT, THERE IS A STRIP OF PROPERTY THAT'S ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE OFFICE COMPLEX THAT'S NORTH OF ZENA RUCKER ROAD, THAT FRONT SIDE ON SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD, IT'S A TWO OFFICE CONFIGURATION AND THEN IT HAS A LONG PANHANDLE STRIP THAT ACTUALLY EXTENDS ACROSS ZENA RUCKER ROAD AND THAT ACTUALLY DIVIDES THEIR PROPERTY FROM DIRECTLY ABUTTING MATTHEWS COURT PROPERTY.
SO PRESUMABLY, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WOULD HAVE TO AGREE TO THE TRAIL MASTER PLAN TO GO THROUGH ITS PROPERTY, CORRECT? AND DO WE HAVE ANY INDICATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS INDICATED A WILLINGNESS TO DO THAT OR...
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I DO HAVE A QUESTION, AND I THINK YOU HEARD MY QUESTION IN IN THE WORK SECTION SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO BRICK PAINTING AND MAINTENANCE OF BRICK.
MY EXPERIENCE BEING A PART OF AN HOA AND HOME IS BEING PAINTED IS THAT THE LIFE CYCLE OF A PAINTED BRICK FINISH IS PRETTY FINITE, MAYBE THREE TO FIVE YEARS, DEPENDING ON HOW WELL THE PROJECT IS DONE.
WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE LOOK OVER TIME TO ENSURE THAT THAT NOT BECOME AN ISSUE? ABSOLUTELY.
THE THIS IS GOING TO BE A CONDOMINIUM FOR SALE
[00:20:03]
PRODUCT AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING FOR RENT.AND AS SUCH, WE WILL SET UP AN OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR ALL MAINTENANCE, NOT ONLY THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGS, BUT THE PARKING LOT AND ALL THE LANDSCAPING AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
SO THE OTHER THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT AS THESE ARE SOLD, EACH OF THESE OFFICES ARE GOING TO COST OVER A MILLION DOLLARS AND THESE ARE GOING TO BE PEOPLE'S BUSINESSES.
AND YOU BETTER BELIEVE THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE PRIDE AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE LOOK TOP NOTCH, MUCH LIKE ANYBODY WOULD WITH THEIR HOME.
SO I WOULD NOT BE TOO CONCERNED IF I WERE YOU ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE AND THE THE LACK OF UPKEEP.
THESE FOLKS WILL TAKE EXTREMELY GOOD CARE OF IT AND IT'LL BE WRITTEN INTO THE OWNER'S ASSOCIATION AS WELL.
ANYBODY ELSE? I JUST HAD A QUESTION.
FIRST, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH THESE NEIGHBORS SO CLOSELY AND LISTENING TO US SO CLOSELY WITH WHAT WE FROM OUR LAST CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS.
BUT MY ONLY SPECIFIC QUESTION IS, I THINK IT'S A BENEFIT THAT RETENTION POND DOES GO UNDERGROUND.
I THINK IT'S JUST KIND OF A STALE POND RIGHT NOW, PROBABLY COLLECTS TRASH AND DEBRIS, BUT THE DURABILITY OF THE UNDERGROUND ATTENTION, IS IT STILL GOING TO BE WHAT YOU GUYS TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY? JUST CONCRETE CULVERT BOXES UNDERNEATH, NOT SORT OF THE PLASTIC THINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST.
NO, IT WILL BE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU CAN WALK UP UNDERNEATH IT.
IT'LL BE AT LEAST SEVEN FEET TALL CONCRETE CULVERT.
IT WILL BE TO THE PUBLIC WORKS SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE COST OF THIS PROJECT EXCEEDS HALF A MILLION DOLLARS.
SO I MEAN, IT IS A FIRST CLASS PROJECT.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY KIND OF FLIMSY SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO FAIL AND NEED A LOT OF MAINTENANCE.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING.
I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHES TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
NOBODY, NOW'S YOUR CHANCE TO GET YOUR FEET WET.
ALL RIGHT, SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO WE HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? I MEAN, I GUESS MY COMMENT WOULD BE THAT THEY'VE DONE JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING THEY CAN.
I THINK THEY'VE RESPONDED TO THE CRITICISM.
I GUESS THE ONE ISSUE OUT THERE IS THE TRAIL, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
KEN, IS IT POSSIBLE OR DENNIS? YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE TREAT SIDEWALKS WITH ESCROW AND DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I MEAN, IT SEEMS KIND OF POINTLESS TO ME TO REQUIRE THEM TO PUT IN THE TRAIL PORTION OF IT IF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DOESN'T WANT IT IN.
IS THERE A WAY TO ADDRESS IT, MAYBE FROM THAT STANDPOINT? YEAH I MEAN, ESCROWING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S TO BUILD IT IN A FUTURE DATE.
YOU KNOW, GIVEN THEIR PARKING AND THEIR BUFFER YARDS TO PUT A TRAIL IN AFTER THAT, TO DEVELOP WOULD BE DIFFICULT.
BUT THE APPLICANT HAS RAISED SOME GOOD POINTS.
AND KEEP IN MIND TO THAT A PATHWAYS PLAN IS SOMEWHAT GENERAL IN NATURE AND OUR INTENTION IS TO GET A CONNECTION POINT THROUGH THE ZENA RUCKER PROPERTY ONCE IT'S DEVELOPED, WE EXPECT IT TO BE DEVELOPED RESIDENTIALLY AND TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION BACK TO ZENA RUCKER AND TO THE SCHOOL TO CREATE WALKABILITY, TO CREATE CONNECTION BACK TO [INAUDIBLE] AND THEN TO THE SOUTH.
WE ARE CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING AT OUR MOBILITY PLAN AND PATHWAYS PLAN AND IN FACT, WE HAVE ONE THAT'S GOING TO BE COMING TO THE PLAINS ZONING COMMISSION HERE VERY SHORTLY, AND WE CAN ABSOLUTELY LOOK AT THAT LOCATION.
I STILL THINK CONNECTION THROUGH THERE IS IS VIABLE AND NEED IT FOR WALKABILITY, PARTICULARLY THAT CLOSE TO A SCHOOL.
BUT WE CAN LOOK AT A MORE WESTERN ALIGNMENT AS PART OF THAT PROCESS.
AGAIN, THE GOAL IS TO HAVE THAT CONNECTIVITY SOMEWHERE, WHETHER IT'S HERE OR MAYBE 200 FEET TO THE WEST, I THINK DOESN'T MATTER AS MUCH THE CITY AS THE CONNECTION IS EVENTUALLY MADE AT SOME POINT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I MEAN, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK THIS SITE PLAN IS SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN THE FIRST ONE.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE ALL JUST KIND OF KNEW THAT DIDN'T FEEL RIGHT WITH THAT LAST ONE THAT THEY PRESENTED IN SEPTEMBER.
AND I THINK THIS IS MUCH BETTER.
SO I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE TWO VARIANCES THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
DR. SPRINGER, YOU HAVE NOTHING.
THE ONLY, YOU KNOW, THE TRIAL PART IS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF IMPORTANT TO ME.
AND IF YOU KNOW, IF THE CITY IS OK WITH AN ALTERNATE LOCATION FOR IT, YOU KNOW,
[00:25:06]
I'M GOOD WITH THAT TOO, BECAUSE I THINK THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THE CONNECTIVITY IS THERE, NOT NECESSARILY AT THIS ONE PARTICULAR SPOT.SO ESPECIALLY IF IT, AS YOU SAID, IF IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE SCHOOL PROPERTY AND IF THEY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS BECAUSE IT IS SORT OF A HEAVILY TREED AREA IN THERE, THERE DEFINITELY HAVE TO BE SOME DESTRUCTION GOING ON TO GET IT THROUGH THERE.
SO AS LONG AS YOU KNOW IT WINDS UP SOMEWHERE ELSE, I THINK WE NEED TO ALL KEEP THIS IN THE BACK OF OUR MIND FOR LATER ON WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT GOES IN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REMEMBER TO GET THAT IN THERE AND DON'T LET IT GET PUSHED.
OH, WELL, THE NEXT DEVELOPMENT OVER WILL DO IT OR THE NEXT ONE OVER WILL DO IT.
SO AS LONG AS IT GETS IN THERE, THAT'S ALL I'M HAPPY WITH.
ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT, IF NOT, BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN CASE NUMBER ZA21-0072.
ZONING CHANGE IN CONCEPT SITE PLAN FOR ZENA RUCKER ROAD OFFICE PARK.
SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED OCTOBER 15, 2021 AND THE CONCEPT SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER FIVE DATED OCTOBER 15, 2021 .
AND ACKNOWLEDGING THE AGREEMENT BY THE DEVELOPER TO CREATE AN OWNER'S ASSOCIATION TO ENSURE PROPER MAINTENANCE OF THE BUILDINGS IN THE COMPLEX AND AN AGREEMENT TO CONSTRUCT THE UNDERGROUND DETENTION POND AS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED AT THE LAST MEETING.
THE VARIANCES? OH, I'M SORRY, AND IMPROVING THE VARIANCES IT REQUESTED.
ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION DO I HAVE A SECOND? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.
ALL RIGHT, THAT ITEM CARRIES SIX-ZERO, CONGRATULATIONS, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK, SIR.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
[8. Consider: Ordinance No. 480-464e, (ZA20-0029), Zoning Change and Development Plan for Carillon Pare on property described as Tracts 1,1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, 3A, 3A01, 3A03, 3A04, 3A04A, 3A05, and 3A01B, Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 1775, 1781 and 1801 N. White Chapel Blvd., 1840 Riviera Ln., 201 E. Kirkwood Blvd., 1700 N. Carroll Ave. (addressed as 1900 N. Carroll Ave. by Tarrant Appraisal District) and 100 through 300 E. State Hwy. 114, generally located east of N. White Chapel Blvd., south of E. Kirkwood Blvd., west of Riviera Ln., and north of E. State Hwy. 114. Current Zoning: "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District. Proposed Zoning: "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District. SPIN Neighborhood #3. PUBLIC HEARING]
AND IF YOU'RE GOOD, DENNIS, I'M GOOD WITH YOU SKIPPING OVER THIS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND WE'LL CALL UP THE APPLICANT IF THAT'S OK WITH THE APPLICANT.I'M GUESSING I DON'T HAVE TO REMIND YOU OF THE PROTOCOL HERE, BUT.
I'M A SOUTHLAKE RESIDENT, MY OFFICE ADDRESS IS WHAT IS MY OFFICE ADDRESS? 121 SUMMIT AVENUE AND SUITE 200 HERE IN SOUTHLAKE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU.
I ALMOST TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE UP TO COME UP, AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, TO SPEAK AND GET MY FEET WET JUST BEFORE THIS ONE.
BUT THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT A LONG TIME, AS YOU KNOW.
AND SO I'LL JUST JUMP RIGHT INTO IT AND TIME MOST OF THE FOLKS OUT IN THE AUDIENCE ARE HERE FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
JUST TO AS A RECOLLECTION, BECAUSE I KNOW SOME OF YOU WEREN'T ON P&Z AT THE TIME, BUT WE REALLY STARTED THIS PROCESS BACK IN TWENTY SEVENTEEN.
AND THE FIRST MEETING THAT WE ACTUALLY HAD WAS A PUBLIC MEETING THAT THE NUMBER OF ATTENDEES WERE SO LARGE THAT WE HAD TO HAVE IT AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER OVER AT THE MARK.
WE HAD A JOINT MEETING BETWEEN P&Z, CITY COUNCIL, THE PARKS BOARD, THE LIBRARY BOARD, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP AND MAYBE ANOTHER.
BUT AT THE END OF THAT, ALL FOUR HUNDRED FOLKS STOOD UP WITH A STANDING OVATION FOR THAT.
AND THEN WE WENT ON TO HAVE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL, WHICH WAS UNANIMOUS BACK IN JUNE OF 2018.
AND I JUST PUT SOME OF THE LINKS TO THE VIDEO ON DEMAND.
IF YOU HADN'T HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THOSE AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO, THAT CERTAINLY GIVES A LOT OF DETAIL FROM BACK WHEN WE FIRST STARTED.
THE LAST CITY PRESENTATION THAT WE ACTUALLY MADE WAS JUST PRIOR TO COVID IN SEPTEMBER OF NINETEEN.
AND I WILL REFRESH MEMORIES A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THE CHANGES WERE BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION AND THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS APPROVED AND THE PRESENTATION THAT WE MADE IN 2019, WHICH WAS A WORK SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
SINCE THEN, WE HAVE HAD NUMEROUS OTHER PRESENTATIONS, BUT MOST RECENTLY, THE CORRIDOR PLANNING COMMITTEE ON AUGUST 23, THE SPIN MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 28TH AND THEN EVEN SEVERAL MEETINGS SINCE THAT TIME.
JUST AS INFORMATION WE AFTER GETTING APPROVAL, WE WERE READY TO GET STARTED AND BREAK GROUND, PROBABLY IN MID 20.
AS ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE, COVID STRUCK AND THE FOCUS OF OUR DEVELOPMENT WAS ALL ABOUT MIXED USE RETAIL, HOSPITALITY, ENTERTAINMENT, RESTAURANTS AND THAT PARTICULAR SECTOR OF REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT WAS JUST CRUSHED.
PLUS, NOBODY COULD GO TO ANY MEETINGS AND SO EVERYBODY WAS LOCKED UP.
THAT REALLY HAD AN IMPACT ON NOT ONLY FINANCING, BUT THE THE VIABILITY OF A LOT OF WHAT WE HAD PLANNED FOR THIS.
WE ARE THREE, MY PARTNERS LARRY FAIRCHILD, EDWARD CHU AND MYSELF ARE THREE INDIVIDUALS
[00:30:01]
WHO INVESTED A LOT OF MONEY IN THE CITY IN THIS PROJECT.WE REALLY WERE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO WITHSTAND A MUCH LONGER PERIOD OF TIME COMING OUT OF POCKET TO HOLD A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WE WEREN'T ABLE TO DEVELOP.
SO WE CALLED THE CITIZENS IN CARILLON, TOLD THEM OF OUR CONCERNS AND THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT THE PROPERTY UP FOR SALE, WHICH WE DID, AND WE LISTED THE PROPERTY WITH JONES LANG LASALLE.
THERE WERE A NUMBER OF INTERESTED FOLKS, BUT ALL OF THEM WERE FOR, YOU KNOW, ISSUES OR POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT I DON'T THINK THAT THE CITY WOULD PARTICULARLY CARE FOR OUT ON THIS SITE.
WE TOLD THE CITIZENS OF CARILLON AT THE TIME THAT WE WERE GOING TO DO OUR ABSOLUTE BEST, THAT WHILE WE WERE PUTTING IT UP FOR SALE, THAT WE WOULD TRY TO FIND A BUYER THAT WOULD PROCEED WITH THE VISION THAT WE HAD AND WE WOULD LOOK FOR THAT KIND OF EITHER PURCHASER OR A JV PARTNER.
WE ALSO RAN INTO ISSUES DURING THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION THAT JUST ESCALATED TREMENDOUSLY.
INSURANCE COSTS ALSO INTERESTED AND THEN POLITICAL CONCERNS THAT CONTINUE TO BE RAISED TO THIS DAY ABOUT DENSITY.
WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD A DENSITY ISSUE AND THERE'S NO HIDING THAT IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE.
BUT WE DID RECEIVE APPROVAL FOR THE MIXED USE AND THE LOFTS, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED EVEN UNDER THE HYNES DEVELOPMENT, TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL LOFTS IN THAT DEVELOPMENT.
WE WERE VERY, VERY FORTUNATE TO FIND NOT ONLY AN INTEREST IN JV PARTNER WHO HAD GREAT VISION THE SAME AS OURS, BUT ARE ALSO SOUTHLAKE RESIDENTS.
THEY HAD THE SAME KIND OF VISION AND THEY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT CAN HELP US GET THERE.
THE LETTER OF INTENT HAS BEEN SIGNED.
WE ARE CURRENTLY FINALIZING CONTRACTS.
WE DID TERMINATE THE LISTING AGREEMENT WITH JLL, TOOK DOWN SIGNS AND NO LONGER IS THAT PROPERTY FOR SALE BECAUSE WE BELIEVE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE PARTNERS AND THEY HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL THAT WE CAN GET THIS BROKEN GROUND.
IF, OF COURSE, WE RECEIVED THE APPROVALS FROM P&Z AND COUNCIL IN THE NEXT THREE MEETINGS.
I MADE A PRESENTATION TO CARILLON RESIDENTS ON AUGUST 10TH, SHOWING THE NEW PLANS AND THE CONCEPT.
EVERYONE TO THE PERSON WAS SUPPORTIVE.
THEY WERE INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL THAT WE HUNG TIGHT AND TOUGH THROUGH THIS TIME AND ARE VERY GLAD THAT WE ARE COMMITTED TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE VISION.
SO KIND OF GOING THROUGH SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED AND BECAUSE OF THE VARIOUS ISSUES THAT I PUT OUT THERE, WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED WAS 50 LUXURY LOFTS IN THE MAIN BUILDINGS.
WE LATER CAME BACK IN AND ACTUALLY NOT JUST 50 LUXURY LOFTS, BUT ALSO 70 HOTEL ROOMS IN A BOUTIQUE, IN A BOUTIQUE HOTEL THAT WAS ON THE CORNER RIGHT HERE ON THE OLD PLAN AND THAT WAS A BOUTIQUE HOTEL, THE THERE WERE ALSO 12 RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT WERE RIGHT HERE.
THEY WERE THE EXACT SAME SIZE AND WERE TO MATCH THESE BUILDINGS OR THESE RESIDENTIAL LOTS RIGHT HERE SO THAT YOU HAD THE SAME FEEL CONSISTENCY? AND WE HAD ALREADY AGREED TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE ORDINANCES, ZONING REGULATIONS, ET CETERA, THAT APPLIED TO THE VILLA DISTRICT INTO THOSE HOMES.
THEN NOT APPROVED, BUT THROUGH THE WORK SESSION WITH COUNCIL, WE MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS AND CHANGED THE LOFTS, OPEN UP A PASEO AND IT ENDED UP BEING 97 LUXURY LOFTS AND COUNCIL WHILE NOT VOTING, ALL I WILL READ TO YOU THE COMMENTS OR WON'T READ TO YOU, BUT I WILL SHOW YOU EVERYONE WAS IN SUPPORT OF THOSE 97 LUXURY LOFTS AND STILL THE 12 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
BUT WE WERE GOING TO REMOVE THE HOTEL FROM THAT, THE BOUTIQUE HOTEL AND REDUCE IT TO ONE.
THE PROPOSED PLAN NOW TAKES IT DOWN TO 50 PERCENT OF WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN 25 LUXURY LOFTS AND 74 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR A TOTAL OF 99.
THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES WOULD BE UNDER STILL THE SAME IDENTICAL ZONING AS WAS ACROSS THE STREET ON THE VILLA DISTRICT, AND WE INITIALLY WE'VE ACTUALLY MADE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS IN SOME PAST MEETINGS THAT THE HOA HAD ALREADY AGREED TO ACCEPT THIS INTO THEIR HOA.
I HAD A RECENT MEETING WITH THE HOA BOARD AND WHAT THEY SAID WAS THEY WERE A LITTLE PREMATURE IN THEIR APPROVAL.
THEY DIDN'T OFFICIALLY APPROVE, THEY JUST SAID THEY WOULD.
THEY NEED TO TAKE A VOTE FOR THE ENTIRE HOA TO ACCEPT IT, BUT THE BOARD IS RECOMMENDING IT.
THEY WON'T TAKE IT TO A VOTE UNTIL AFTER WE RECEIVE APPROVALS, WHICH JUST MAKES
[00:35:02]
SENSE.BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE HOA IS VERY INTERESTED IN MOVING FORWARD, AND WE DO HAVE THE BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITIZENS THERE TO BRING THESE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS INTO THEIR HOA.
THIS PLAN DOES STILL RETAIN THE MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT, AS WAS ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED.
THE WE ALSO MET WITH CITY STAFF AND WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT KIND OF UP HERE IN THE YELLOW WAS THE FIRST KIND OF LAYOUT OF THE PLAN.
CITY STAFF SAID REALLY, YOU CAN'T PUT IN THIS KIND OF A RESIDENTIAL.
WE CAN'T HAVE THE CUL DE SACS WE NEEDED TO SHOW DIFFERENT ALLEYWAYS, AND THIS ALLEYWAY WAS COMING OUT INTO THE ENTRANCE HERE AT AN INAPPROPRIATE LOCATION.
THEY DIDN'T, THEY NO LONGER WANTED THIS ALLEYWAY TO COME OUT INTO KIRKWOOD.
THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE PREVIOUSLY WHEN THIS WAS JUST A SINGLE ROW OF HOMES.
SO THEY WANTED THIS TO COME OFF OF HERE AND CREATE A DIFFERENT ACCESS, WANTED US TO SHOW A LITTLE BIT BETTER, THE BUFFER AND SIDEWALKS.
THEY INDICATED, YOU KNOW, WE WILL ULTIMATELY NEED A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WHICH HAS BEEN ORDERED.
AND I WILL SAY THOUGH, THAT FROM A TRAFFIC IMPACT ON THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS AREA NOW YOU'LL HAVE AN ENTRANCE HERE AND AN ENTRANCE DOWN HERE FOR THE COMMERCIAL, THERE NO LONGER IS ANY ENTRANCE OFF OF KIRKWOOD.
SO FROM A TRAFFIC IMPACT, YOU WILL NO LONGER HAVE THE COMMERCIAL ACCESS OFF OF KIRKWOOD.
IT WILL BE WHITE'S CHAPEL AND THE SERVICE ROAD AND THE AMOUNT OF USAGE OF THE ROADWAYS, BASED ON THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY VERSUS THE COMMERCIAL IS GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS.
WE DON'T HAVE THE RESULTS OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT, BUT THAT'S JUST PRETTY MUCH AN OBVIOUS STATEMENT.
ALSO, WE WORKED A LITTLE BIT ON THE FIRE LANES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD AN APPROPRIATE ACCESS INTO WHAT WILL BE THE LIBRARY, WHICH I'LL TALK ABOUT IN A MINUTE.
BUT THE ACCESS WOULD BE A FIRE LANE AND NOT AVAILABLE FROM THIS LOCATION FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMING INTO THE LIBRARY SO THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE ACCESS BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL AND THE RESIDENTIAL, THERE WILL BE A SEPARATION AND NO VEHICULAR ACCESS BETWEEN THE TWO.
SO THERE WILL BE A GATED TYPE OF ACCESS OFF OF THIS LOCATION TO GET THE FIRE EQUIPMENT INTO THE PROPERTY.
I SHOW YOU THIS JUST TO SHOW YOU THAT KIND OF HOW THIS LOOKS IN TERMS OF THE LOTS THAT WE'VE PLANNED AND THE LOTS THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT.
THEY ARE IDENTICAL IN TERMS OF THE SIZE OF THE LOTS AND THE TYPE HOMES THAT WERE GOING TO BE THERE.
IT'S VERY CONSISTENT TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF USAGE BETWEEN THIS LOCATION.
YOU CERTAINLY DON'T GO LESS DENSITY AS YOU GET TO THE LARGER ROADWAYS.
SO THAT'S WHY THIS PLAN IS AS IT IS.
AND THEN THESE ARE A COUPLE OF VIEWS AS YOU LOOK HERE.
THE CARILLON MONUMENT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS LOCATED RIGHT OVER HERE.
WE PLAN TO BUILD A SIMILAR MIRROR, RIGHT ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROADWAY, SO THAT THAT BECOMES THE MAIN ENTRANCE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE AND AS YOU LOOK AT THE CODE RESTRICTIONS AND HOW THE HOA PUT IN THEIR RESTRICTIONS AS TO HOW THESE HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED, YOU CAN SEE THE KNEE WALLS AND THE LANDSCAPING.
AND THESE INDIVIDUALS ACTUALLY PAY ABOUT I THINK IT'S $1000 MORE THAN ALL OF THE OTHER HOMEOWNERS IN THE PARK SO THAT THE HOA MAINTAINS ALL OF THEIR LANDSCAPING AND THESE THIS AREA BETWEEN THE ROADWAY AND THE FRONT FACE OF THEIR HOMES.
SO THAT WILL CONTINUE OVER HERE AS WELL AND AS IF THEY BECOME PART OF THE HOA, WHICH I BELIEVE THEY WILL.
AND IF THEY DON'T BECOME PART OF THE HOA, WE WILL PUT THAT RESTRICTION IN AS WELL SO THAT THE KNEE WALL AND THAT LANDSCAPING AREA WILL BE COVERED BY THE HOA AND WILL NOT BE UNSIGHTLY AREA FOR ANYONE.
ADDITIONALLY, AS WE I'LL SHOW YOU KIND OF ON THE NEXT MAP, THERE IS A WALL THAT WILL BE AROUND THIS AREA OF THE PARK, AS ARE THE RESIDENTIAL, AS WELL AS A BUFFER AND SCREENING BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL AND THIS LOCATION.
SOMETHING JUST TO NOTE FROM THIS.
AND AS YOU MOVE INTO SOME OF THE OTHER SLIDES, IF YOU KNOW THE VAST MAJORITY OF TREES IS LOCATED IN THIS AREA WHERE WE ARE PROPOSING THE PARK.
THIS ELEVATION AND TOPOGRAPHY, THIS AREA IS ACTUALLY SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN WHAT THE RESIDENTIAL WILL BE.
AND I WILL SHOW YOU IN A BETTER DEPICTION HERE IN A MINUTE, BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA.
THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ELEVATED WALL ABOVE THIS AREA AND THERE WILL BE A ROADWAY COMING DOWN HERE TO ACCESS THE LIBRARY, WHICH I'LL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE.
BUT ALL THE WALLS THAT THE SCREENING WALLS AND SO FORTH AROUND THIS PROPERTY WILL MATCH THE WALLS THAT ARE CURRENTLY DOWN KIRKWOOD AND SURROUNDING THE REST OF THE CARILLON AREA.
THIS IS A DEPICTION OF WHERE THOSE WALLS WOULD BE PLACED.
THIS IS WHERE THAT FRONT ENTRY SIGN WOULD BE, AND YOU CAN SEE THE ROAD THAT I
[00:40:03]
REFERRED TO COMING DOWN RIGHT HERE TO ACCESS.THIS IS ACTUALLY SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THIS ELEVATION BECAUSE THIS ROADWAY IS ACTUALLY GOING TO GO UNDER AN ELEVATED PARK, KIND OF LIKE A MINI CLYDE WARREN PARK IN DALLAS.
SO THIS IS AN ELEVATED PARK, AND THIS ROADWAY GOES UNDER THAT TO ACCESS THE PARKING AREA BEHIND THE LIBRARY.
AND THIS IS THE EMERGENCY ACCESS AT THIS LOCATION, WHERE EMERGENCY VEHICLES CAN COME IN OFF OF RIVIERA AND ACCESS THE BACK OF THE LIBRARY.
SOMETHING ELSE I WILL MENTION IS THAT IN THE LAST SPIN MEETING THAT WE HAD JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, THERE WERE A COUPLE OF NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE RIGHT HERE, AND THEIR CONCERN WAS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A BAD VIEW THE BACK OF THE LIBRARY AND THE PARKING LOT.
SO WE ACTUALLY TOOK THE ARCHITECT, WE MET WITH THEM AT THEIR HOME, WE VIEWED ALL OF THIS AREA AND WE'VE AGREED TO PUT IN ANOTHER WALL THAT WOULD BE PART OF THIS WHOLE LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT.
THAT WOULD BE A VERY NICE SCREENING WALL AND PLANT MAGNOLIAS THROUGH THIS AREA, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT EVIDENTLY THEY REALLY WANTED.
AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT, AND I BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE NOW IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT AS WELL.
THE ZONING CHANGE THAT WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS WHEN, AS A REMINDER, BECAUSE A LOT OF YOU WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED BY HINES, HINES HAD A 1.2 ACRE PARK, EVERYTHING ELSE WAS PAVED.
THEY HAD SURFACE PARKING AND THE ENTIRE AREA WAS COVERED IN CONCRETE.
WE CHANGED THAT IN A PARTNERSHIP BECAUSE WE KNOW HOW MUCH THE CITY LOVES THE OPEN SPACE, LOVES THE TREES.
WE SEE THE TREES AS HUGE VALUE TO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, BUT IT COMES AT A COST AND STRUCTURED PARKING.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO PARK THIS AREA, YOU CAN'T DO IT IN STRUCTURED PARKING FOR THE SAME PRICE.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, IT'S A MULTIPLE OF THE COST FOR SURFACE PARKING.
BUT WE IN FACT DID INCREASE THE ORIGINALLY THE ONE POINT TWO ACRES TO TEN POINT TWO, AND NOW IT'S APPROACHING 12 ACRES IN TERMS OF WHAT WE WOULD BE DONATING TO THE CITY AND AS A PARK.
WE BELIEVE CONSERVATIVELY THAT VALUE OF THE 12 ACRES IS PROBABLY IN EXCESS OF $10 MILLION OF VALUE THAT WE WOULD BE CONTRIBUTING AND AS A PARK, WHILE IT WILL BE GREAT TO HAVE IT AS A DRAW TO THE DEVELOPMENT IT WILL ALSO BE A DRAW TO THE ENTIRE CITY AND IT WILL NOT BE A REVENUE GENERATOR FOR US.
SO THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT DEDICATION OF LAND WITH GREAT VALUE TO THE CITY.
IT ALIGNS WITH THE VISION FOR THE CITY TO HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE'S SOME BONDS TRYING TO BE PASSED NOW TO SET ASIDE FUNDS FOR FUTURE OPEN SPACE TO MAKE SURE WE HANDLE THAT.
THIS COMES AT NO COST TO THE CITY IN TERMS OF HAVING TO USE THOSE BONDS TO GET THAT.
SO THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL 12 ACRES.
IT ALSO REPRESENTS ABOUT 29 PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE SITE.
AND I THINK I WOULD CHALLENGE TO SAY THAT THERE ARE VERY FEW DEVELOPERS THAT HAVE COME IN WITH A 29 PERCENT OF THE SITE AS A DEDICATED PARK.
IT DOES, AND THIS WILL BE MORE OF A DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
BUT IN OUR BELIEF, THIS REMAINS THE OBVIOUS CHOICE FOR A LIBRARY LOCATION.
THE OTHER LOCATION THAT THE CITY ALREADY OWNS, IT'S EQUAL FOOTING.
IN TERMS OF THAT, BOTH WILL BE FREE LAND TO THE CITY.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER POSSIBLE SITE, WHICH IS OVER BY THE OLD SENIOR CENTER AT BYRON NELSON AND 1709 TYPICALLY WHEN THE CITY IS GOING TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT OF A CITY IMPROVEMENT LIKE TOWN HALL OR THE LIBRARY, THEY PUT IT SOMEPLACE WHERE NOT ONLY IS THERE INVESTMENT IN THAT FACILITY, BUT IT'S AN INVESTMENT AND AN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.
SO AT THE OTHER LOCATION, YOU HAVE NO OPPORTUNITY TO RECEIVE BENEFIT BY ANCILLARY DEVELOPMENT SURROUNDING IT.
AND SO YOU BUILD IT SOMEPLACE AND YOU'RE NOT USING IT AS AN ATTRACTANT.
ADDITIONALLY, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ON 1709, BILLED THIS AS A DESTINATION ON 1709 AND BYRON NELSON, AND IT JUST INCREASES THE TRAFFIC ON 1709.
ONE MORE THING IS THAT AT THAT LOCATION, THE OTHER LOCATION, YOU DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPER WILLING TO SPEND 50 PERCENT OF $14 MILLION TO BUILD A PARK AT THEIR EXPENSE.
WITH FOUNTAINS AND ALL THE OTHER ANCILLARY RETAIL, RESTAURANTS AND AMENITIES THAT WOULD BE AROUND THE LIBRARY AND MAKE IT PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST PREMIER LIBRARIES ANYWHERE AROUND, SO I JUST MENTIONED THAT IT DOES REMAIN PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, WHICH
[00:45:03]
HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE CASE, AND IT DOES RETAIN A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TREES AND IT REMAINS CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE PRIOR ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY.AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT DOES ELIMINATE THE TRAFFIC ON KIRKWOOD.
AS YOU GO BACK, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS, WE ACTUALLY TOOK EVERY SINGLE STUDY ANALYSIS THAT INCLUDES THE RETAIL SATURATION STUDY.
IT INCLUDES THE LIBRARY STUDY, THE 2030-2035 PLANS, THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY STUDIES AND WE DISSECTED THAT ALL OF THOSE AND MADE SURE THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT CHECKED THE BOX THAT THIS CITY HAS ENVISIONED FOR DEVELOPMENT GOING FORWARD FOR THE LAST TWENTY YEARS.
SO WE HAVE LOOKED AT CREATING A SENSE OF PLACE THAT WE WERE TRYING TO BE A DIVERSE AND VIBRANT COMMUNITY THAT WE WANTED AN ENTIRE MIX OF USES THAT WOULD SUPPORT AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY AND CREATE SUSTAINABLE REVENUE FOR THE CITY TO CONTINUE TO SUSTAIN ALL OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
WE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT THE INTEGRATED AND FUNCTIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND HOW WE HAVE PEDESTRIAN WALKABILITY, THE CYCLIST, HOW THE AUTOMOBILES MOVE IN AND THROUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
IT WAS VERY CONSCIOUS EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT, UNLIKE TOWN SQUARE AND TOWN SQUARE IS A GYM, I AM NOT BEATING THE TOWN SQUARE, IT IS A HEARTBEAT OF OUR CITY CURRENTLY.
WHAT WE WANTED TO CREATE WAS AN ENVIRONMENT THAT HAD PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY WITHOUT ANY VEHICULAR ACCESS INTO THE CENTER OF THE PARK.
YOU CAN HAVE YOUR KIDS OUT THERE PLAYING AND YOU'RE NOT WORRYING ABOUT CARS BECAUSE THEY'RE OUT AROUND THE FOUNTAINS AND BUBBLERS IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, WHICH COINCIDE AND KIND OF LINKS IN WITH THE ENTIRE PARKS AND OPEN SPACES AND NOT ONLY PRESERVING THE SPACE BUT MAKING IT INCREDIBLY USABLE AND USER FRIENDLY FOR OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
THE 2035 PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS SAID RETAIN UNDERLYING MIXED USE DESIGNATION.
THERE WAS A HUGE FOCUS ON RESTAURANTS AND RETAIL AND SPECIALTY OVERLAYS.
THERE WAS A UNIQUE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE WE BELIEVE AND HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THIS CREATES A CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE THAT IS UNLIKE ANYTHING ELSE THAT IS ANYWHERE AROUND AND A SENSE OF PLACE.
WE ALSO, IT SAID, DO A CHEF DRIVEN RESTAURANT CLUSTER.
THAT'S WHAT SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE ON MULTIPLE STUDIES DRIVEN.
AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A CULINARY EXPERIENCE THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A CULINARY ART SCHOOL, FOOD HALLS, CHEF DRIVEN RESTAURANTS AND SOME ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT WILL BE MAKING AT THE COUNCIL MEETING ABOUT WHO'S COMING AND WHAT KIND OF RECOGNITION THIS CITY IS GOING TO HAVE BY THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE READY TO COME AND BRING THEIR RESTAURANTS AND VISION INTO THIS PARTICULAR PARK.
WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
IT'S SENSITIVE TO POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON ADJACENT RESIDENTS, WE HAVE ALWAYS TAKEN THE CASE THAT THE RESIDENTS COME ABSOLUTELY FIRST ARE THE ONES THAT ARE THE MOST IMPACTED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT, AND SINCE AND PRIOR TO DAY ONE EVER MAKING A PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE JOINT BOARDS, WE HAVE ALWAYS COMMUNICATED VERY CLOSELY WITH THE RESIDENTS AND HAVE HAD ALWAYS THEIR ENTIRE SUPPORT.
SO FAR, WE HAVE HAD NO ONE IN OPPOSITION IN ALL OF CARILLON AGAINST THIS PROJECT AND IN FACT, JUST THE OPPOSITE, THEY WANT THIS TO MOVE FORWARD AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
ALL OF THESE CONTINUE TO ADDRESS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE REVISED PLAN.
AS YOU LOOK AT THIS, THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES UNDER THE IDENTICAL ZONING I ALREADY MENTIONED ABOUT THE CAROLINA HOYA VOTE RECOMMENDED BY THE BOARD, THE PARK DEDICATION AND THE INCREASE THERE, THE VALUE OF THAT AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE OVERLAY AND UNDERNEATH THIS OVERLAY, HOW MANY TREES ARE ACTUALLY LOCATED IN THAT AREA.
WE BELIEVE THAT THOSE TREES TRULY DO ADD VALUE TO THE ENTIRE SITE, AND IT WILL MAKE IT SEEM AS IF IT'S BEEN THERE A LONG TIME INSTEAD OF SOME KIND OF BRAND NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT IS COMING INTO PLAY.
SOMETHING THAT I MIGHT NOTE AND JUST POINT OUT WE HAD BEEN PLANNING TO DO THIS ENTIRE SPACE.
THIS IS NOT AN ACCIDENT, THAT THERE IS A SEPARATION.
THIS WAS A SMALL BUILDING THAT I'LL SHOW YOU HERE IN JUST A MINUTE ON ONE OF THE OTHER SITES THAT COULD BE A TOURIST AND CHAMBER TYPE BUILDING IF THAT WAS THE DESIRE OF THE CITY AND THE CHAMBER.
WE DIDN'T WANT TO LOCK IT DOWN AS PARK DEDICATION IN CASE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, BECAUSE THAT BUILDING COULD ACTUALLY BE SOMETHING THAT IS ANOTHER SPECIAL, YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITY AT THAT LOCATION.
THIS IS JUST THAT ON AN AERIAL.
THIS IS THE EVOLUTION OF THESE CONCEPT PLANS.
THIS WAS THE FIRST ONE THAT WAS APPROVED AND YOU CAN SEE ALL THE RESIDENTIAL.
THIS WAS THE HOTEL AT THIS LOCATION.
THIS WAS THE LUXURY LOFTS AND THESE WERE ALL LUXURY LOFTS.
[00:50:02]
WE MOVED INTO AN AREA WHERE THIS WAS GOING TO BE JUST AN ALLEYWAY, BASICALLY WITH SOME RETAIL ON THE LOWER FLOOR ON EITHER SIDE OF IT BEING THE PARKING GARAGES.AND THEN WE SAID WELL, WHY DON'T WE CREATE SOMETHING THAT OPENED THAT UP AND CREATED ANOTHER EXPERIENCE? AND THAT'S WHAT THE COUNCIL WAS PRETTY MUCH LOOKING AT AND WHY THEY ADDITIONALLY WENT UP ON THOSE RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT AND THEN AS YOU LOOK, WE'RE BASICALLY KEEPING THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE SOUTHERN HALF OF THE SITE ALMOST IDENTICAL TO AND I'LL SHOW YOU IN SOME NEW DRAWINGS AS TO SOME OF THE CHANGES AND THEN ADDING THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AND I ALSO MIGHT NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE CONCERN THAT WE GO IN AND DO THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THEN THE OTHER NEVER GETS BUILT.
WE WILL BE PUTTING ASSURANCES IN PLACE AND IN FACT, IN THE PHASING THE CITY WILL NEVER APPROVE THIS UNTIL ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE PARK HAS BEEN BUILT.
SO WHEN WE PUT IN ALL THE ROADS AND UTILITIES, IT ENSURES THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE BUILT THIS WAY AND NOT LEFT AS VACANT LAND HAVING THIS BUILT, AND THEN THIS GOES AWAY.
SO WE ARE GOING TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT IS THE CITY IS ASSURED THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
AS YOU LOOK BACK, I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR THIS, YOU GUYS KNOW AND I JUST KIND OF BRIEFLY WENT OVER.
BUT THE SEPTEMBER 19, WHEN WE CAME BACK WITH THE ADDITIONAL PLAN THAT WENT FROM THE APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN TO THE PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN HERE ARE SOME OF THE CHANGES.
THE HOTEL WENT AWAY AND WE REPLACED IT WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY OR NOT SINGLE FAMILY, THE RESIDENTIAL LOFTS, THE LUXURY LOFTS.
SO THAT JUST REPLACED WHAT TOOK OUT.
AND THAT WAS BECAUSE A HOTEL STUDY SAID WE SHOULDN'T BUILD A TWO HOTEL DEVELOPMENT.
WE SHOULD FOCUS EVERYTHING ON THE FRONTAGE BECAUSE THE ONE WOULD JUST KILL THE OTHER ONE.
WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE RESTAURANT AND POOL CLUBHOUSE AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES THAT WERE THERE.
THOSE HAVE BEEN MODIFIED SLIGHTLY, BUT IT WAS ONE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL IS AN ICONIC FEATURE THAT EVERYONE ABSOLUTELY LOVED ON THAT.
AND THEN WE AT THE TIME HAD A MINIMUM OF ABOUT SIXTEEN HUNDRED SQUARE FEET ON THOSE UNITS.
WE'RE GOING TO BE CLOSER TO TWENTY THREE HUNDRED SQUARE FEET ON THE NEW UNITS, AND THEY WILL ALL BE FOR SALE.
I'LL JUST ANNOUNCE THAT NOW, THERE IS NOTHING IN THERE THAT IS FOR RENT.
THOSE ARE ALL FOR SALE PRODUCT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
THE PASEO WAS KIND OF ENHANCEMENT AGAIN AS A MINIMUM OF SIXTEEN HUNDRED.
THIS IS KIND OF WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE THAT WE'RE REMOVING THE PASEO PIECE AND THEN I PUT THIS UP HERE BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT WAS APPROVED.
THIS IS THE 50 UNITS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY APPROVED AT THAT TIME, AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE FAR RIGHT THE VIEW THAT YOU WERE LOOKING AT DOWN THERE AND WE ARE GOING TO KEEP THAT LOOK THAT FEEL, BUT REMOVE A BUNCH OF THOSE UNITS, SO THIS WAS THE FIRST DRAWING THAT WE ACTUALLY TOOK TO I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE CORRIDOR COMMITTEE AND THEN TO SPEND, WE DIDN'T HAVE SOME OF THE RENDERINGS, BUT THIS SHOWS YOU PRETTY CLEARLY NOW HOW YOU'RE LOOKING.
EVERYTHING NORTH OF THE TOWER ARE THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND THIS PARK EXTENDS ACROSS THE ROADWAY SO THAT THERE IS AN ACCESS POINT AND THIS PART BECOMES THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AS WELL.
YOU CAN CONVENIENTLY AS A PEDESTRIAN WALK FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACROSS, AND IT BECOMES ANOTHER ENTRANCE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT, JUST LIKE WE CREATED ON THE EAST SIDE.
THAT IS A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND ENJOY THIS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PIECE, AS YOU CAN SEE SLIGHTLY, THAT THERE IS A ROAD THAT GOES UNDERNEATH THIS BRIDGE.
THAT BRIDGE ACTUALLY HITS AT A SECOND LEVEL OF WHAT WAS USED TO BE THE LIBRARY.
THE PIAZZA, WHICH WAS UNDER THIS, IS NOW ALMOST FULLY COVERED BY THIS ELEVATED PARK AND IT MAKES A CONNECTION.
AND AT THE ELEVATED PARK, YOU STILL HAVE YOUR RETAIL ON THE FIRST FLOOR EASILY ACCESSIBLE ACROSS TO THE LIBRARY.
BUT NOW WHAT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT IS IN THE LIBRARY INSTEAD OF HAVING TO HAVE A PART A GARAGE OVER BEHIND THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
NOW THERE IS A SINGLE FLOOR OF PARKING UNDER THIS PARK AND UNDER THE LIBRARY SO THAT THE LIBRARY IS ELEVATED TO WHERE THE FOUNTAIN IS AND TO WHERE THIS ELEVATED PARK IS AS FIRST FLOOR.
AND THEN SECOND FLOOR ONE STORY HIGHER IS THE WHAT WOULD BE THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER OR WHATEVER THE CITY DECIDES TO PUT ON THAT.
SO THIS WE ALSO WANTED IT BECAUSE IF WE HAD JUST TAKEN THE PARK ACROSS TO THE SECOND LEVEL OF THE LIBRARY WHERE THE PERFORMING ARTS IS, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THE RIGHT SCALE IN
[00:55:01]
TERMS OF THAT BUILDING BEING ONE STORY NEXT TO THE FOUNTAIN AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S THREE STORIES OR FOUR STORIES.SO WE THINK THAT THIS IS AND SOME OF OUR DISCUSSIONS IN THE CORRIDOR COMMITTEE AND SO FORTH, I THINK THAT THAT'S MORE PALATABLE AND YOU GET A DESIGNATED PARKING DIRECTLY UNDER THE BUILDING.
AND AS YOU LOOK AT THE LIBRARY STUDY LIBRARY STUDY TALKED ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS, ONE ABOUT BRINGING THE OUTDOORS IN AND THE INDOORS OUT.
IT IS GOING TO HAVE ALL SORTS OF ACCESS INTO THE PARK, BOTH ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE, TOWARDS THE FOUNTAIN AND ONTO THIS ELEVATED PARK.
IT HAS IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO ALL OF THE OTHER RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS.
IT ALSO TALKED ABOUT TECHNOLOGY.
WE'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT THIS AND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT CAN GO IN HERE.
SOME OF THE CONCERNS OF THE EXISTING FACILITY HERE IN TOWN SQUARE IS HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO ACCESS IT.
IT'S, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE CALLED IT THE DUNGEON.
IT IS STILL AN INCREDIBLY GOOD LIBRARY.
IT IS ONE OF THE MOST TRAFFICKED LIBRARY ON A PER CAPITA BASIS, AND THAT'S WHY THE LIBRARY IS SO IMPORTANT.
IT IS ONE OF THE MOST USED, HEAVILY USED LIBRARIES IN NORTH TEXAS ON A PER CAPITA BASIS.
SO I THINK THAT THE LIBRARY WILL PROBABLY CONTINUE, AND IF IT DOES, IT NEEDS TO BE RIGHT HERE.
BUT WE HAVE CHECKED THE BOX ON THE LIBRARY STUDY TO MAKE CERTAIN TO EVEN INCLUDING THE ONE OF THE LIBRARY STUDIES SAID POINT SAID YOU NEED TO HAVE A DROP OFF LOCATION.
THAT'S THAT'S A MAIN PART OF A BOOK DROP OFF IS WHERE THAT PARKING LOT IS ON THE KIND OF NORTHEAST SIDE OF THE LIBRARY IS SO THAT FOLKS CAN PARK THAT.
AND THAT WOULD BE KIND OF IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.
NOW, THIS IS THE OLD ICONIC LOOK THAT BRIDGE CROSSING NOW LONG NO LONGER IS NEEDED AND THAT THAT ELEVATED PARK ACTUALLY IS ALMOST AT THE BASE OF THAT BRIDGE IS HOW THAT COMES ACROSS THAT ICONIC PIECE OF WHERE WE HAD KIND OF THE CLUBHOUSE AND SOME OF THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE CORNER OF THE LUXURY LOFTS WAS SO IMPORTANT THAT WE WANTED TO CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT ONLY EYE CATCHING ICONIC, BUT HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE UTILITY.
BECAUSE AS WE REDUCE THAT, WE WANTED TO PUT MORE FRONT FACE OF THAT ARCHITECTURE ONTO AND VISIBLE TO THE PARK, THE FOUNTAINS, ET CETERA.
SO WE MODIFIED WHAT THIS ICONIC PIECE WAS INTO.
THIS WAS THE FIRST DRAWING AND RENDERING OF HOW THAT MIGHT TAKE FORM.
AND AS YOU LOOK AT IT NOW, YOU HAVE A GREAT ICONIC BUILDING AND AS IT DOESN'T SHOW IN THIS ONE, BUT WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER RENDERING THAT RIGHT NOW YOU'RE SEEING KIND OF THE SITE PLAN WITH THIS TOWER AND THIS TOWER.
BUT THERE IS ANOTHER TOWER DOWN AT THIS END, AND SO IT'S GOING TO BE AN ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL BUILDING.
AGAIN, THIS RENDERING IS EARLY.
IT'S BETTER THAN THE SKETCH, BUT WE'VE GOT MORE COMING BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF COLORATION THAT IS ON THIS.
THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A WHITE BUILDING, SO IT'S GOING TO LOOK VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS SHOWN IN TERMS OF THE COLORATION AND FEEL OF THIS BUILDING IN THE NEXT RENDERING.
THIS IS JUST TO SHOW YOU THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED AND WHAT IS PROPOSED NOW, GOING FROM TEN POINT TWO TO APPROXIMATELY 12 ACRES.
A LOT OF THIS WILL TAKE PLACE WHEN SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL SURVEYS ARE DONE AND REMINDER TO EVERY ONE OF THESE AS WE COME IN.
WHILE THIS IS MORE OF A CONCEPT PLAN AND GETTING THE OVERALL ZONING, WE STILL HAVE TO COME IN FOR SPECIFIC SITE PLAN APPROVALS ON THESE DIFFERENT PROJECTS SO THAT A LOT OF THE SIGNIFICANT DETAILS WILL BE IN THOSE SITE PLANS.
THE PARKS PREVIOUSLY, THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE CULTURAL EXPERIENCES, COMMON OUTDOOR EATINGS, WE'VE GOT THE AREAS WHERE WE'VE GOT THE FOCUS ON PRESERVING THE NATURAL TREE STANDS AND USING THE EXISTING TREE STANDS TO CREATE INVITING OPEN SPACES.
WE'VE GOT THE BELL TOWERS, WHICH WE WILL STILL HAVE THREE.
WE'VE GOT CITY INFORMATION BOOTHS AND SIGNAGE THAT WILL BE PARTNERING WITH THE CITY ON HOW TO DO THAT.
SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT, THE WATER FEATURES.
AGAIN, SOME OF THE COST AND SO FORTH IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE REDUCED IN OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY BECAUSE THE WATER WALL, WHICH WAS A SIGNIFICANT COST AND ONE OF THE WATER FEATURES IN THE PIAZZA GO AWAY.
AND WE PUT MOST OF THE EFFORT NOW IN THE GIANT ALMOST $4 MILLION FOUNTAIN THAT IS IN THE CENTER OF THE PARK.
WE ARE STILL IDENTIFIED LOCATIONS FOR YOUR UBER AND LYFT STOPS SO THAT THOSE ARE KIND OF OUT OF THE WAY, BUT CONVENIENT AND THOUGHTFUL IN TERMS OF IN ADVANCE AND NOT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW FOLKS STOP AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS AND BLOCK TRAFFIC.
THE BRIDGE GOES AWAY, AS I MENTIONED, AND NOW THAT WILL BECOME THE ELEVATED PARK.
IT WILL BE A BRIDGE, BUT IT WILL BE THE WIDEST BRIDGE YOU'VE EVER SEEN, GOING ALL
[01:00:02]
THE WAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY INTO THE FOUNTAIN AREA PRACTICALLY.AND THAT IS STILL SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING AND THEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL THE FESTIVALS.
WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING A LOT OF CULINARY FOCUS.
SO WE'RE A LOT OF OUR FOCUSES ARE GOING TO BE CENTERED AROUND THE CULINARY SIDE.
THIS IS A RENDERING THAT KIND OF SHOWS THE HOW THE CENTER FOUNTAIN.
AND RIGHT NOW, THE DESIGN SHOWS THOSE FOUNTAINS GOING UP ABOUT 90 FEET.
THEY ARE SYNCHRONIZED WITH BOTH LIGHTS AND MUSIC.
AND SO AND THEN THE UNDULATING WITH THE ARCHES AND THOSE CAN ACTUALLY BE WALKED UNDER.
AND THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT A SMALL BUBBLER SYSTEM THAT'S A LITTLE CLOSER INTO THE LIBRARY FOR THE KIDS, AS WE HAD MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY.
THIS IS THE OLD RENDERING OF THE PARK AND IT WAS BEAUTIFUL AT THAT TIME AND EVERYBODY ABSOLUTELY LOVED IT.
BUT WE ALSO FIGURED OUT THAT THE ENTIRE WATER FEATURE THAT HAS SUCH AN EXPANSE WAS A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT WASTE OF SPACE FOR FESTIVALS AND SO FORTH.
SO WE TIGHTEN THAT UP, AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER VIEW FROM THE ENTRANCE.
AND NOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS THIS IS THE MOST RECENT RENDERING.
AND IF YOU CAN SEE THE RESTAURANTS NOW HAVING A DECK THAT CONNECTS ALL THE RESTAURANTS AND ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE FOOD HALLS AND THE OFFICE BUILDINGS, THAT'S GOING TO BE AN INCREDIBLE OBSERVATION AREA FOR ANY OF THE ENTERTAINMENT THAT HAPPENS TO BE DOWN IN THE FOUNTAIN AREA.
LIBRARY STILL LOOKS VERY, VERY SIMILAR, ALTHOUGH IF YOU JUST BUMP THIS UP AND PUT A PARKING GARAGE UNDER THIS, THE VIEW OF THIS WILL BE VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT THE THE BUILDING WAS BEFORE.
I WON'T BORE YOU WITH ALL OF THE COMMENTS, BUT NEEDLESS TO SAY, WHEN WE BROUGHT THIS BACK IN SEPTEMBER 19, WE HAD POSITIVE COMMENTS FROM EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL MEMBER AND ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE CITIZEN COMMENTS WERE IN SUPPORT.
THE APPROVED CONCEPT, I JUST PUT THIS UP THERE FOR KIND OF A DISCUSSION PURPOSES, BUT WE ACTUALLY THE CITY GOT BACK ALL THE RESPONSES FROM THE CITIZENS IN CARILLON PARK, WHERE THEY HAD TO SEND OUT NOTICES.
AND TWENTY SEVEN RESPONSES, TWENTY SIX ARE IN FAVOR AND ONE UNDECIDED, BUT EVEN THE ONE UNDECIDED SAID, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE LIBRARY HERE.
AND SO I PUT THAT UP THERE FOR YOU GUYS, AND YOU CAN DEFINITELY TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE COMMENTS.
BUT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, JUST AS YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THEM THEY'RE THANKING US FOR THEIR OUR SUPPORT.
IT'S EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE, WE'RE THANKING THEM FOR THEIR SUPPORT.
THEY HAVE BEEN HANGING WITH US AND FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, IT'S BEEN FOUR YEARS SINCE WE STARTED THIS PROJECT.
THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PROMISED A PROJECT LIKE THIS SINCE THEY BOUGHT THEIR HOUSES AND BEFORE.
THIS WAS A HINES PROJECT THAT NEVER MADE IT TO FRUITION, AND THE CITIZENS REALLY WANT SOMETHING SPECTACULAR TO HAPPEN HERE.
SO WE'RE INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL FOR THEM HANGING WITH US.
A FOUR YEAR PROCESS IS REALLY, REALLY TOUGH TO GET PEOPLE TO STAY.
AND I THINK YOU'LL SEE JUST BY THE SUPPORT TONIGHT AND WHO I BELIEVE IS GOING TO SHOW UP FOR THE SECOND IS GOING TO BE WE PROBABLY WILL BE USING THE OVERFLOW ROOM.
BUT YOU KNOW, THE ONE THAT KIND OF SUMMARIZES IT, IT PLEASE BUILD THE PARK, PLEASE BUILD THE LIBRARY, MAKE THIS HAPPEN.
WE'VE WAITED FOREVER TO GET THIS DONE.
AND SO WE'RE EXCITED, I PUT THIS UP JUST AS THE NEW KIND OF RENDERING AS TO WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE, AS WELL AS THE SITE PLAN.
AND I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT EVERYONE MIGHT HAVE THIS EVENING.
VERY GOOD, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
ON THE SCREENING BY THE LIBRARY, YOU MENTIONED THE MAGNOLIAS AND THE WALL.
IF.. THAT WOULD BE KIND OF RIGHT HERE.
I WOULD CONSIDER MAYBE BEFORE YOU GO TO COUNCIL IF YOU CAN AND YOU PROBABLY ALREADY ARE BECAUSE I KNOW YOU REFERENCED ADDITIONAL RENDERINGS, MAYBE TRY AND GET A LITTLE BIT BETTER RENDERING THERE.
WELL, I THINK I FOLLOW YOU ON WHAT YOU'RE INTENDING, BUT OBVIOUSLY IF THE NEIGHBOR IN THAT AREA IS PLEASED, THEN I THINK THAT'S A GOOD INDICATOR.
WE'RE ON THE RIGHT PATH, THE YOU MENTIONED THE THE PARK BOARD IN THE PARK AND HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH RESPECT TO THAT.
WHAT ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE ON THE PARK? SO MAINTENANCE THE CITY COUNCIL IS DETERMINING WHICH WAY THEY WANT TO GO.
WE'RE WILLING TO EITHER SPLIT 50/50 ON THE PARK AS A WHOLE OR THERE HAS BEEN SOME SUGGESTION NOT BY US, BUT BY COUNCIL, THEY WOULD ALMOST PREFER THAT WE TAKE ALL THE MAINTENANCE OF THE FOUNTAIN AND JUST KEEP THE BALANCE OF THE PARK WITH THE CITY.
WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT AS WELL.
WHATEVER CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO DO IN THAT REGARD, EITHER ONE OF THOSE CHOICES WORK FOR US.
YOU MENTIONED THE ENTRANCE, I THINK, ON WHITE CHAPEL AND YOU WERE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER,
[01:05:01]
DID I GET THAT RIGHT ON WHITE CHAPEL, YOU WERE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER MONUMENT SIGN OR WAS THAT ON PURPOSE? NO, NO, WHAT WE'VE GOT IS THERE'S THERE'S JUST A ROADWAY HERE THERE WOULD BE NO MORE ACCESS.THERE IS A SIGN OVER HERE THAT WOULD COME INTO PLAY, BUT THE I THINK PROBABLY MENTIONED THE BELL TOWER.
SO WE GOT ONE UP RIGHT HERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE GOT ONE HERE IN THE CENTER OF THE PARK AND ONE OVER BY THE WHITE'S CHAPEL SIDE.
OK, ARE THERE GOING TO BE ANY IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO WHITE CHAPEL OR KIRKWOOD? I GUESS WOULD BE THE QUESTION.
NOT TO KIRKWOOD, OTHER THAN SOME OF THE ENTRANCE AREAS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO DO, AND THAT'S A DEVELOPER COST.
WE HAVE ALREADY PREVIOUSLY AGREED WITH THE CITY THAT THE CITY WOULD BUILD THREE OF THE FOUR LANES AND THE MEDIAN, AND WE WOULD BUILD THE NORTHBOUND, THE WEST, THE EASTERLY NORTHBOUND ROAD LANE.
AND SO THAT THAT'S YES, THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE CITY PREVIOUSLY.
I THINK THAT IS ALL STILL IN PLACE.
I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, BUT THAT WOULD BE OUR EXPECTATION IS THAT SAME AGREEMENT WOULD BE IN PLACE.
OK, AND THEN YOU MENTIONED THE PHASING, THE FACT THAT YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE THE SITE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE ROADWAYS, UTILITIES AND THE PARK IN PLACE BEFORE THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WERE RELEASED.
AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I WAS CLEAR THERE, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO GIVE YOU A MEMORY QUIZ HERE, BUT IN THE ZONING BOOKLET, YES, I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 13, WHICH HAS THAT PHASING.
AND I WONDERED IF MAYBE WE COULD CLARIFY THAT AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ADDRESS IN A EMOTION.
JUST TO BE CLEAR THAT WE'RE NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE SITE INFRASTRUCTURE BEING THE ROADWAYS AND UTILITIES, BUT THE PARK AND THE FOUNTAIN ALL COME BEFORE THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.
THE FOUNTAIN, SO IT LOOKS LIKE A PRETTY IMPRESSIVE FOUNTAIN, AND WE ALL HAVE A HISTORY IN SOUTHLAKE OF PTSD FROM FOUNTAINS.
AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS NOT A FOUNTAIN.
SO WE'VE HAD A BIRD BATH CALLED THE FOUNTAIN.
WE'VE HAD A FOUNTAIN THAT DOESN'T WORK, THAT'S BEEN CALLED A FOUNTAIN.
AND I GUESS I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO COMMENT.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS FOUNTAIN ACTUALLY WORKS AND THAT YOU USE A CONTRACTOR THAT KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING TO BUILD THE FOUNTAIN? SO THE CONTRACTOR IS A COMPANY CALLED OTL OUTSIDE THE LINES.
THERE'S ANOTHER COMPANY CALLED WET AND THEN OTL OF THE TOP TWO WATER FEATURE COMPANIES IN THE COUNTRY.
THIS THIS ISN'T A FOUNTAIN, IT'S A WATER FEATURE.
AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A VAULT THAT, UNLIKE SOME OF THE PRIOR WHERE THEY ACTUALLY COVERED UP SOME OF THEIR EQUIPMENT IN CONCRETE WHERE YOU COULDN'T ACTUALLY GET IT TO MAINTAIN THIS HAS A 40 BY 20 FOOT VAULT UNDER THE PARK THAT HAS PIPES THAT ARE HUGE, THAT RUN ALL OF THIS IN SYNCHRONIZATION AND LIGHTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
THAT'S, I BELIEVE, WHY THE CITY COUNCIL OF DESIRED THAT WE TAKE THE FOUNTAIN AND NOT AND THEY TAKE THE REST OF THE PARK AND WE ARE FINE WITH THAT AND WE'RE WILLING TO MAKE WHATEVER KIND OF COMMITMENT IS NECESSARY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS CONSTANTLY FUNCTIONING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. TERRELL.
FIRST OFF, I'M VERY IMPRESSED BY THE DESIGN, THE THOUGHTFULNESS OF THE DESIGN.
I LOVE THE PROJECT, FRANKLY, WITH ONE EXCEPTION.
EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THESE LUXURY LOFTS ARE NOT THE SAME HIGH DENSITY THAT THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE HAS REJECTED TIME AND TIME AGAIN AS RECENTLY AS A FEW MONTHS AGO OUT ON CARROLL ROAD.
HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT? WELL, IT'S PART OF WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS PROJECT WORK AS A WHOLE.
AND THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT EXPLAINING HOW IT'S DIFFERENT.
THAT'S EXPLAINING THE JUSTIFICATION.
HOW IS IT DIFFERENT? IT'S PART OF A PROJECT INSTEAD OF ONE DEVELOPMENT PIECE.
IT'S PART OF A $300 MILLION PROJECT THAT IT IS ENTICING TO COME INTO THE OVERALL DEAL, AND THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.
WE'VE GOT A $300 MILLION INVESTMENT IN THIS PROJECT, BUT IT IS A HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY LUXURY LOFTS.
IT IS LUXURY LOFTS, YES SIR, AND IT'S HALF OF WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
AND IF YOU WANT TO BUILD WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, YOU CAN'T, BUT YOU'RE ASKING FOR A ZONING CHANGE HERE.
AND WE HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT AT CITY COUNCIL FOR ALL THE TIME THAT YOU WERE ON IT.
AT PREVIOUS ZONING BOARDS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED THE LAST TIME THIS CAME UP THAT WE WILL NOT APPROVE THESE SORTS OF THINGS.
WE DID ACTUALLY APPROVE THIRTY EIGHT UNITS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET OR RIGHT IN TOWN SQUARE FOR RESIDENTIAL LUXURY LARGE..
[01:10:02]
CONDOMINIUMS, YES.AND THIS IS THE SAME KIND OF OVERLAY FOR A DOWNTOWN DISTRICT.
WELL, I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT.
BUT MY POINT IS, HOW DO WE TELL THE NEXT GUY THAT COMES ALONG I'M PUTTING UP A PROJECT AND I NEED HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY IN ORDER TO MAKE IT WORK? HOW DO I TELL HIM NO, WHEN WE'VE SAID IT'S OK FOR YOU? SO WHAT I HEAR IS WHAT I WOULD SAY TO THAT IF SOMEONE ELSE CAME IN WITH A $300 MILLION PROJECT WITH TWENTY FIVE LUXURY LOFTS I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF STANDING OUT HERE IF THEY CAME IN SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THAT, THERE'S ONLY ONE OR TWO ADDITIONAL PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT COULD EVEN ACCOMMODATE THAT KIND OF A PROJECT.
AND SO I BELIEVE WE'RE PROBABLY THE LAST SITE THAT COULD DO THAT.
WELL, I GUESS THAT'LL BE UP TO EACH CITY COUNCILMAN TO REGISTER THAT VOTE IN PUBLIC.
AND I THINK TO ONE OF THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCES, TOO, IS THAT THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OPPOSITION TO THAT.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE ELECTED TO DO IS FOLLOW WHAT THEIR CITIZENS ARE ASKING THEM TO DO, AND WE'VE BROUGHT TREMENDOUS SUPPORT IN ADVANCE OF THIS.
SO YES, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, ALWAYS THROUGH CITY COUNCIL.
MAY I SUGGEST THAT THE CITY AS A WHOLE IS NOT AWARE OF THIS FEATURE? THE CITY AS A WHOLE HAS BEEN HAVING THIS FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS, SIR.
AND WE HAD I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PUBLIC HEARINGS WE'VE HAD, BUT IT'S HUGE.
THE APPLICANT, THE ONLY QUESTION I'VE GOT, JOHN, AND I APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION IN AND HOW THIS HAS EVOLVED IN THE PRIOR PRESENTATION, THE PRIOR CASE WE LOOKED AT, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION OF THESE BUILDINGS BEING IN THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT, BEING CONDOS AND FOR SALE.
ARE YOU CONSIDERING THESE BUILDINGS, A CONDO TYPE AN ARRANGEMENT OR THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE SURROUNDING THE PARK AREA ARE IN FACT FOR SALE? THEY ARE ONLY FOR SALE.
NOT THE LOFTS I'M TALKING ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL PART OF IT THE SOUTH, THE SOUTH AND WEST SIDE OF THE PARK ITSELF, WHERE YOU HAVE THOSE SIX OR EIGHT BUILDINGS THAT FRONT 114.
WELL, SOME OF THOSE WE'LL PROBABLY BUILD AND OWN SOME OF THOSE RESTAURANTS, SO NOT EVERYTHING WILL BE FOR SALE.
SOME OF IT WE MAY SELL TO OTHER DEVELOPERS TO BUILD, BUT ONLY WHAT IS BEING APPROVED.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE KEEPING A LOT OF THIS OURSELVES.
AND, JOHN, ON THE I KNOW PREVIOUSLY IN THE OTHER ITERATIONS THIS WHERE YOU WERE GOING TO LIKE TURN THE WATER OFF IN THE FOUNTAINS TO USE AS SORT OF A, YOU KNOW, A PERFORMANCE AREA OR WHATEVER LIKE THAT.
IS THAT GOING TO BE THE SAME CASE HERE THAT STILL WE ACTUALLY HAVE A REMOTE FEATURE THAT CAN ACTUALLY TURN THOSE OFF IF WE NEED THAT SPACE FOR ANY KIND OF ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES.
BUT WITH THE REDUCTION, IF YOU RECALL TOO, AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS A VERY LARGE WIDE WATER FEATURE THAT WAS KIND OF A POOL AREA, AND THAT'S WHEN WE WERE GOING TO TURN IT OFF.
WE MAY NOT HAVE TO DO THAT BECAUSE THERE'S AMPLE SPACE, EVEN WHILE IT'S RUNNING TO STILL BE ABLE TO PERFORM IN FRONT.
WE MAY DO IT JUST AS A SAFETY FEATURE, SO WE DON'T HAVE WATER WITH THE ELECTRICITY AND EVERYTHING GOING ON WITH THE BAND.
AND IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME WAY THERE'S GOING TO BE LIKE STADIUM TYPE SEATING BUILT.
SO IF YOU LOOK BACK AT LET ME JUST SHOW YOU.
REAL QUICK, I WILL SCROLL BACK TO RIGHT HERE.
AND SO IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A STADIUM, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE MORE NATURAL.
THIS DOESN'T REFLECT ALL THE TREES AND SO FORTH THAT ARE IN THERE YET.
THOSE ARE TO BE RENDERED IN THE NEXT DRAWINGS, BUT THIS IS A VERY HEAVILY TREED AND GRASS AREA, BUT WILL BE PROVIDING KIND OF A SLOPE BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT ALMOST A 15 FOOT DROP FROM THE RESTAURANTS DOWN TO THIS SITE.
SO YOU'VE GOT A GREAT VIEW NOT ONLY FROM THE LOWER LEVEL OF THE RESTAURANTS, BUT FROM THAT UPPER BALCONY.
IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE STAGE SEATING ALL THE WAY BACK WITH THE BALCONY SEATING AT THE RESTAURANTS.
ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE APPLICANT? I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION.
I NOTICED ON ONE OF YOUR SLIDES IT MENTIONED A TROLLEY.
ARE YOU FORESEEING HAVING SOME KIND OF TROLLEY OR SOMETHING THAT'S GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE TOWN SQUARE AND THIS DEVELOPMENT? SO YES, MA'AM.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE HAD AND THIS WAS PRIOR DISCUSSIONS, WE HAVEN'T HAD DISCUSSIONS SINCE COVID, BUT I BELIEVE EVERYBODY WOULD STILL BE INTERESTED BETWEEN THE CITY.
MULTIPLE DEVELOPERS, THE CITY OF WESTLAKE AS WELL IS HAD HAD PRIOR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT A RUBBER TIRE TROLLEY SYSTEM THAT WOULD LINK THROUGH TOWN SQUARE, GATEWAY CHURCH, THIS DEVELOPMENT AND OVER TO ALL THE CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS, INCLUDING THE SABOR, TD AMERITRADE, VERIZON AND THEN ALL THE STUFF THAT'S OVER IN WESTLAKE THAT WOULD THEN
[01:15:05]
BRING THEM TO OUR DEVELOPMENTS AND SOUTHLAKE FOR THE RESTAURANT DINING AND RETAIL SHOPPING.JOHN, I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF POINTS.
ONE, I WOULD JUST WANT TO SAY IT IS BEAUTIFUL AND I LOVE THE CLEANUP OF THE SITE PLAN, MEANING YOU HAD THERE PREVIOUSLY WAS A LOT OF PARKING UP AGAINST 114.
I LIKE THAT, [INAUDIBLE] I THINK THAT'S A HUGE IMPROVEMENT.
OF COURSE, THE PARK IMPROVEMENT AND THE GROWING OF IT IS GREAT.
ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT AND PROBABLY A STRANGE COMMENT, BUT JUST SOMETHING TO THINK THROUGH, IS THE ACCESS OFF OF ONE 14 WHERE YOU'RE KIND OF YOU'RE TURNING NORTH AND THEN YOU'RE TURNING LEFT AND THEN NORTH TO ACCESS IT.
I CAN ENVISION THAT BEING BACKED UP ON 114'S FRONTAGE ROAD BECAUSE OF THAT AS PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO EXIT AND COME OUT.
I BELIEVE, AND I ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.
I BELIEVE AT THAT LOCATION, WE ALSO HAVE A DECEL LANE ON THE SERVICE ROAD THAT IS BEING BUILT TO ACCOMMODATE JUST WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
GOOD POINTS, ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, SIR.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT ON THE AGENDA DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING.
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK ANYONE WHO WISHES TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
AND I GUESS TO MAYBE KICK THIS OFF, I HAVE THE GREEN CARDS THAT SOME OF YOU FILLED OUT.
AND IMPORTANTLY, THEY'RE GREEN AND THE DRAGONS ARE UP TWENTY ONE TO SEVEN.
SO I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE AND CALL YOUR NAME.
SOME OF THEM DON'T SAY WHETHER OR NOT YOU WISH TO SPEAK.
SO IF YOU DON'T WISH TO, THAT'S FINE.
IF YOU DO WISH TO THEN JUMP UP AND WE'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU.
AND IF I SAY YOUR NAME WRONG, DON'T BE OFFENDED.
I'VE ALWAYS HAD TROUBLE WITH NAMES, SO DON'T HOLD IT AGAINST ME.
HEYMAN GOLA WISHES TO SHARE, HERE WE GO.
SHARE YOUR OPINION ON THIS ITEM.
WHEN YOU GET UP HERE, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
THAT WAY WE HAVE IT ON ON RECORD, PLEASE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
PROBABLY ONE OF THE CLOSEST HOMES TO THE CARILLON PARK AND THE INTERSECTION OF KIRKWOOD AND SAINT TROPEZ.
THAT'S OUR [INAUDIBLE] HOME RIGHT THERE.
SO FIRST THING, I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE CARILLON PARK, THE DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT ARE THE LATEST PLANS.
THANK YOU FOR THE TEAM FOR ALL THE CHANGES.
OBVIOUSLY, WALKING ABILITY TO WALK TO THE RESTAURANT AND LIBRARY IS FANTASTIC, ESPECIALLY WITH YOUNGER KIDS THAT WE HAVE AT HOME.
SO HAVING SAID THAT, THERE ARE ONLY TWO THINGS THAT I WANT TO ASK.
I MEAN, IF THERE IS NOT TOO LATE, RIGHT? SO.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME PLANS IN PLACE TO ADDRESS PARKING ISSUES AND ALSO THE TRAFFIC.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS IT POSSIBLE NOT TO HAVE AN ENTRANCE ON THE CODE TO THE CARILLON PARK THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO CREATE A LOT OF TRAFFIC MEAN COMING THROUGH THE COURT KIND OF THING? IF NOT, IF THAT'S NOT AN OPTION, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO ADD SECURITY CAMERAS AT THE INTERSECTION OF KIRKWOOD AND SAINT TROPEZ SO THAT WE HAVE SOME KIND OF AN ACCOUNTABILITY? AND SECOND THING IS, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO ADD PERMITTED RESIDENT PERMITTED PARKING SIGN ON THE SAINT TROPEZ SO THAT WE'RE NOT HAVING OUTSIDERS COMING IN PARKING IN THE SAINT TROPEZ, CAUSING SOME ISSUES.
SO WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE A PERMITTED PARKING FOR THE RESIDENTS ONLY ON THE SAME PROPERTY? THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO THINGS OTHER THAN THAT.
LOOKING FORWARD FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, THANK YOU.
AND WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL WRITE DOWN YOUR QUESTIONS AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP AND ADDRESS THEM LATER.
NEXT CARD I HAVE IS TOMMY MCFALL.
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK? NO, SIR.
OK, I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU REGISTERED YOUR SUPPORT OF THE ITEM.
LOOKS LIKE YOU WANT TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE ITEM.
HOW ARE YOU DOING TONIGHT? VERY GOOD.
GUY MIDKIFF, 1901 MILLER CREEK DRIVE, SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS I'D LIKE TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR YOUR VOLUNTEER EFFORT.
I USED TO BE A CITY COUNCILMAN IN ANOTHER TOWN ONCE UPON A TIME, AND I KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS GO THROUGH, SO I APPRECIATE YOU VERY MUCH.
MR. TERRELL, I THINK YOU DID AN AWESOME JOB.
SO LET ME BEGIN BY I ALWAYS LIKE TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS FROM A SERIES OF QUESTIONS, THEN I LIKE TO BUILD DOWN FROM THOSE.
DOES THIS PROJECT MAKE SOUTHLAKE EVEN EVEN MORE DESIRABLE? DOES THE CITY BENEFIT? DOES HOMEOWNERS BENEFITS? IS THIS IS THE DEVELOPERS ACCOMMODATING TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO THE CITY?
[01:20:03]
IS THIS A WIN-WIN PROPOSITION? AND AS I LOOK AT THIS, I CAN'T HELP BUT COME TO A COUPLE OF CONCLUSIONS.FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THE DEVELOPER HAS SHOWN EXTREMELY GOODWILL, IS VERY ADAPTIVE, AND I THINK THAT THEY'RE MAKING MULTIPLE CONCESSIONS IN A POSITIVE WAY TO MAKE THIS A CROWNING JEWEL OF OUR CITY.
TO ME, THE ARCHITECTURE LOOKS TO BE EXTREMELY VISIONARY, SOMEWHAT STUNNING, MAYBE EVEN WORLD CLASS.
I'VE BEEN LUCKY ENOUGH TO LIVE ALMOST ALL OVER THE WORLD, AND I AM VERY PROUD OF WHAT I SEE RIGHT HERE.
I SEE A DISCUSSION ABOUT DENSITY.
NO DOUBT DENSITY IS GOING TO COME UP.
LAST NIGHT, I WAS AT A CONCERT WITH ANDREA BOCELLI.
MY WIFE'S FAVORITE ITALIAN TENOR, AND I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET IF HE WAS SINGING IN THE BATHROOM THAT PEOPLE NEXT DOOR WOULD NO DOUBT BE ABLE TO HEAR HIM.
SO WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF HIGH DENSITY? I THINK THAT DOG DOESN'T HUNT ANYMORE IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND I THINK WE'RE DOWN TO ONE OR TWO PARCELS LEFT BIG ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT COULD BE HANDLED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
ABOUT 90 PERCENT OF THIS CITY HAS BEEN BUILT OUT.
IF I UNDERSTAND THIS COMPLETELY.
I WILL TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE LIBRARY.
THAT WAS MY PET PROJECT WHEN I WAS A CITY COUNCILMAN AND WAS GETTING A LIBRARY APPROVED.
AND I CAN ASSURE YOU, IT HAS BECOME A FOCAL POINT OF WASHINGTON, MISSOURI.
IT BECOMES THE HEARTBEAT OF THE COMMUNITY AND TO HAVE A LIBRARY AND A BASEMENT.
I'M SORRY THAT'S UNSATISFACTORY, PARTICULARLY FOR A CITY LIKE SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS.
I WOULD SAY, DOES IT ADDRESS THE THE CHANGING DEMOGRAPHIC? AND BY THE WAY, YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE CHANGING DEMOGRAPHIC, I JUST TURNED SIXTY THREE.
AS AN AIRLINE PILOT, I HAVE TO RETIRE IN TWO YEARS.
BUT GUESS WHAT? I DON'T WANT A FOUR THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT HOME.
I WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A PLACE JUST LIKE THAT AND CONTINUE TO CALL SOUTHLAKE HOME UNTIL I CAN'T ANYMORE.
I THINK I'M VERY IMPRESSED AT WHAT THE PLAN ORIGINALLY STARTED AT, AND THEY'VE CONTINUALLY SCALED IT DOWN TO MEET THE ACCOMMODATIONS OF THE CITY FROM A TAX STANDPOINT, TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS IN THE POCKET OF THE CITY BEING GENERATED FROM THIS PROJECT, THAT'S EXTRAORDINARY.
I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF A LARGE PORTION OF THE PARK.
THEY'RE TURNING OVER TWENTY NINE PERCENT OF THIS PROJECT, IN PART GREEN SPACE.
I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT BEFORE, EVER.
THAT'S ONE OF THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY THINGS I'VE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFE.
I SEE THEM DOWN TO 15 SECONDS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME, AGAIN I APPRECIATE YOU AS VOLUNTEERS.
ALL RIGHT NEXT GREEN CARD WE HAVE IS DERICK MURWAY.
I LIVE AT 829 SIENNA DRIVE, SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS.
I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS ONE QUICK QUESTION OR ONE QUICK COMMENT THAT YOU HAD SIR ABOUT I'M A DEVELOPER, I ALSO I DO RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY, MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL.
YOU MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO YOU SAID THAT THIS PROJECT HAS HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY.
GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHEN I GO INTO A CITY AND I SAY, WHAT IS THE DENSITY OR WHAT'S THE FUTURE LAND USE OR WHAT IS THE DENSITY OF THAT ACREAGE? WHEN I'M LOOKING AT A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT, I'LL SAY, WHAT'S THE DENSITY? WHAT CAN I GET ON THERE? MOST OF THE TIME WHEN I'M GOING INTO A CITY, IT'S 14 TO 20 UNITS OF DENSITY PER ACRE.
THIS MULTIFAMILY RIGHT HERE HAS ACTUALLY ONE UNIT OF DENSITY PER THE 20 ACRES THAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED RIGHT FOR THE COMMERCIAL SECTION.
SO THERE'S TWENTY SOME TWENTY TWO ACRES, I THINK IS THE COMMERCIAL SECTION.
I MEAN, IT MAY BE MAYBE CONDENSED, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY ONE UNIT OF DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL UNIT PER ACRE OF WHAT IS IN THIS COMMERCIAL SECTION.
SO I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT.
CINDY, DO YOU, YOU DON'T WISH TO SPEAK, BUT I WILL NOTE YOUR SUPPORT OF THE ITEM.
NEXT UP IS ED CHU, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK BUT WANTS TO SUPPORT THE ITEM.
JENNIFER PANTER, DID I SAY THAT RIGHT?
[01:25:01]
YEAH.HEY, JENNIFER DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK BUT WANTS TO RECORD SUPPORT.
DAVID PANTER DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK UNLESS I CAN TEMPT YOU.
YOU SURE YOU DON'T COME UP, BUT YOU WANT TO RECORD YOUR SUPPORT.
KEVIN LILLIS, I BELIEVE, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK BUT WISH TO RECORD SUPPORT.
DID I GET THE NAME RIGHT? CLOSE ENOUGH, RIGHT? OK.
ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT I'VE NOT CALLED YOUR NAME THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES, MA'AM.
I HAD NO INTENTION OF COMING UP TONIGHT, BUT AFTER EVERYTHING I'VE HEARD, I DO WANT TO GIVE MY LITTLE TWO CENTS.
MY NAME IS TISH TRAUTMAN, 105 WILMINGTON COURT.
I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE SOUTHLAKE COMMUNITY FOR 15 YEARS.
MY HUSBAND AND I ARE RECENTLY TURNING 50.
WE PUT THREE GIRLS THROUGH D1 SCHOOLS STILL TRYING TO GET THEM OFF THE PAYROLL.
SO NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT OURSELVES, SAY, WHERE ARE WE GOING TO GO? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? WE DON'T NEED THE BIG HOUSE.
I WANT TO ECHO WHAT WAS SAID EARLIER THAT THIS PARTICULAR UNIT OR THESE PARTICULAR UNITS WOULD BE PERFECT FOR US.
I DON'T WANT TO MOVE OUT OF SOUTHLAKE, BUT I DON'T NEED THE BIG HOUSE ANYMORE.
I HAVE A WEALTH MANAGEMENT COMPANY.
I WANT TO WALK AROUND THAT PARK.
I'M JUST IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE LIKE ME AT MY AGE OR THAT HAVE CHILDREN THAT HAVE GROWN.
CISD HAS DONE A WONDERFUL THING FOR OUR CHILDREN.
IT PUT THEM IN A GREAT PLACE TO BE SUCCESSFUL, BUT IT ALSO TOOK MONEY TO GET THEM THERE.
AND SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE RETIRING.
AND SO I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE SOUTHLAKE AND I THINK THIS PROJECT MIGHT BE JUST FOR ME.
HOW ARE YOU THIS EVENING? VERY GOOD.
GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE, AND I'M [INAUDIBLE].
I LIVE IN WESTLAKE, BUT WE DO OWN THE 10 ACRES RIGHT NEXT TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.
SO MY ONLY QUESTION IS THAT BUILDING IS TOO CLOSE TO OUR PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE ANY TROUBLE IN FUTURE.
OK, WE'LL WE'LL ASK THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THAT WHEN HE COMES BACK UP.
ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO COME UP AND ADDRESS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT ON THE AGENDA, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST GOING ONCE GOING TWICE? ALL RIGHT, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND JOHN, IF YOU WOULD COME BACK UP, MAYBE REAL QUICK AND LET'S ADDRESS.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR MEMORY IS AS GOOD AS MR. ROTHMEIER, BUT YOU RECALL THOSE QUESTIONS FROM THE FIRST SPEAKER TO THE LAST SPEAKER.
BUT I DO REMEMBER THE LAST SPEAKER.
OK, LET'S START WITH THE LAST ONE FIRST COMMENT ABOUT THE BUILDING, AND WE ARE CERTAINLY GOING TO FOLLOW THE ORDINANCES IN TERMS OF SETBACKS OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
THE APPROVED THERE'S ALREADY APPROVED ZONING ON THE 10 ACRE SITE AND IT'S FOUR OFFICE BUILDINGS.
SO OUR OFFICE BUILDING IS GOING TO BE BASICALLY THE SAME SCALE, SIZE AND SO FORTH.
BUT WE WILL SET BACK FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE EXACTLY.
HOWEVER, THE CITY SAYS WHATEVER'S REQUIRED THERE AND THAT IS A PLACEHOLDER CONCEPT PLAN RIGHT NOW.
WE DON'T KNOW THE EXACT SIZE CONFIGURATION OF THAT BUILDING.
IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE THE LAST BUILDING BUILT ON THIS SITE.
AND WHAT WE WOULD HOPE TO DO IS TO ACTUALLY WORK WITH YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HOW IT'S ALMOST SET ASIDE FROM THE REST OF IT.
IT'S PROBABLY A NATURAL FIT TO WORK IN COORDINATION WITH THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER ON HOW TO BUILD THAT, MAKE THE CONNECTIVITY AND ALMOST MAKE THAT A PART OF THE PROJECT.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THEM.
BUT AT THIS POINT, WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY, YOU KNOW, EXACTLY HOW FAR WE'RE GOING TO BE, BUT WE WILL NOT GET ANY CLOSER THAN WHAT THE CITY ORDINANCES AND ZONING REQUIRES.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR SO THAT SO THAT YOU'LL KNOW THERE WILL BE A SITE PLAN THAT COMES BACK FORWARD.
SO THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE ADDRESSED IN MUCH MORE DETAIL.
AND I'M SURE THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT AS WELL.
I WROTE DOWN TWO OTHER ITEMS FROM THE FIRST SPEAKER.
I THINK THE FIRST WAS MAYBE IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THE ENTRANCE OFF OF KIRKWOOD, I BELIEVE.
DID I GET THAT RIGHT, COMMISSIONER ROTHMEIER? YES, THERE WERE.
THERE WERE TWO QUESTIONS, ONE OF THEM RELATED TO THE ACCESS OF KIRKWOOD OR THE CONSIDERATION OF SECURITY CAMERAS TO MONITOR THAT LOCATION.
[01:30:05]
AND THERE WAS ALSO A SECOND QUESTION IT WAS ASKED BY THE GENTLEMAN RELATING TO RESTRICTING PARKING ACCESS ON SAINT TROPEZ, WHICH I WOULD GUESS TO BE A CITY ISSUE, NOT A DEVELOPMENT.SO LET ME ADDRESS BOTH THOSE AND LET ME GET TO ONE OF THE OH, NOT THAT ONE DOWN HERE.
ALL RIGHT, SO THE IN TERMS OF SECURITY CAMERAS, THAT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IF THE HOA WERE TO ACCEPT IT, THEN WE WANT TO PUT IT INTO THE HOA HANDS AND LET THEM DICTATE AS TO WHAT KIND OF SECURITY CAMERAS AND SO FORTH WOULD BE IN THERE, IF THE HOA DOESN'T ACCEPT IT, WHICH I THINK IS UNLIKELY BUT POSSIBLE, THEN WE ACTUALLY CONSIDERED WHICH WOULD COME BACK WITH A SITE PLAN DOING THAT AS A GATED COMMUNITY SO THAT NOT ONLY DO YOU NOT NEED NECESSARILY THERE WOULD PROBABLY BE SECURITY AT THE GATE IN THAT AREA IF THEY DIDN'T ACCEPT IT AS THE HOA, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THEY'RE GOING TO, AND WHEN THEY DO, WE WOULD WANT THEM TO DECIDE SO THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE HOA BECAUSE THE REST OF THE HOA HAS TO PICK UP ANY KIND OF COST JOINTLY.
SO THAT WOULD BE FOR THEM TO DECIDE.
AND THEN THE OTHER WAS SEA, RIGHT? THE OTHER QUESTION RELATED TO RESTRICTED PARKING, BUT AGAIN, I KIND OF THINK THAT'S MORE OF A CITY ISSUE THAN A DEVELOPER ISSUE.
IT IS, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL TO SAY ANYTHING, BUT THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF NOT ALLOWING ANY ACCESSIBILITY ALONG HERE.
VEHICULARLY WAS TO ENCOURAGE ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL TO COME IN HERE AND COME INTO THE GARAGES.
THE CITY CAN VERY EASILY ENFORCE THIS NO PARKING AREA.
SO AGAIN, LIKE YOU SAID, THIS IS A CITY DEAL.
WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO RESTRICT THAT PARKING.
BUT I THINK PREVIOUSLY THE CITY HAD ALREADY AGREED TO POTENTIALLY PUT UP NO PARKING SIGNS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS, SO.
A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AND THEN I THINK MAYBE WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS IF WE'RE GOING TO GET A MOTION, I THINK WE WANT TO ADDRESS A FEW ITEMS AND THEN I'M GOING TO SHARE MY COMMENTS AND OBVIOUSLY I WANT TO HEAR EVERYBODY ELSE'S.
I THINK MAYBE NOTE IN THE MOTION THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RENDERINGS ON THE SCREENING BY MAGNOLIA.
I'M SORRY, THE SCREENING WITH THE MAGNOLIAS BY THE LIBRARY.
I THINK WE WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE PHASING PLAN DOES IN FACT INCLUDE THE SITE INFRASTRUCTURE BEING THE ROADWAYS, UTILITIES, ALL SITE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE PARK, THE FOUNTAIN AND ALL OF THAT JUST CONFIRM WILL OCCUR BEFORE THE RESIDENTIAL IS ACTUALLY RELEASED TO BUILD OR PERMITTED, I GUESS.
IS THAT THE RIGHT LANGUAGE KEN? YES.
I THINK YOU WANT TO STRUCTURE IT, THAT THE THE INFRASTRUCTURE PARK AND FOUNTAIN WOULD BE PART OF THE PHASE ONE, AND THAT UNTIL THAT'S COMPLETED AND ACCEPTED BY THE CITY, THERE WILL NOT BE ANY RELEASE.
WE REFER TO RELEASE OF LOTS TO BUILD ON.
SO DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND THEN DO WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO ADDRESS THEMSELVES THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PARKS WITH THE CITY? OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S PART OF THE PACKAGE AND THAT'S GOING TO OCCUR NATURALLY WITH PARK BOARD AND ALL THAT? THAT OCCUR, THEY'LL VISIT WITH THE PARK BOARD AND THAT AGREEMENT WILL BE WORKED OUT AS THIS GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS.
TYPICALLY, THAT'S MORE IN THE PARK BOARD'S REALM.
AND OF COURSE, YOU CAN ALWAYS COMMENT ON IT.
BUT I THINK I WOULD RECOMMEND LEAVING THAT TO THE PARK BOARD TO RECOMMEND HOW THAT MAINTENANCE IS HANDLED TO CITY COUNCIL.
AND THEN WHAT ABOUT WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPROVEMENTS ON WHITE CHAPEL? THAT'S KIND OF PART OF THE PROCESS AS WELL I UNDERSTAND.
YES, SIR, THAT'LL BE PART OF, THERE WAS A PREVIOUS DEVELOPER AGREEMENT IN PLACE THAT WILL BE REVISED AND DISCUSSED AS IT GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS.
SO I GUESS MY PERSPECTIVE ON THIS, I THINK I WAS ACTUALLY A CHAIRMAN BACK WHEN THIS CAME THROUGH IN 2017.
I ATTENDED THE MEETING AT THE MARK, I BELIEVE NO, YES, THE MARK.
IT WAS A JOINT, I WILL NOTE FOR THE RECORD, IT WAS A JOINT CITY COUNCIL P&Z MEETING.
I THINK PROBABLY EVERYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WAS THERE, SIGNIFICANT TURNOUT.
AND I SAY ALL THAT TO SAY THIS PROJECT WAS HEAVILY VETTED BEFORE IT EVER CAME
[01:35:04]
TO THAT JOINT MEETING, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUS SUPPORT AT THAT TIME.AFTER ALL OF THAT WORK WAS PUT IN AND THAT IT WAS VETTED AND I THOUGHT IT WAS WELL PRESENTED.
THEN I THOUGHT IT WAS WELL PRESENTED TONIGHT.
AND I THINK FOR THIS SCALE OF A PROJECT IN THIS LOCATION, I THINK IT REQUIRES THAT KIND OF VETTING AND THAT KIND OF WORK TO BE PUT INTO IT.
AND I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WAS DONE.
I WAS PLEASED AND PROUD TO SUPPORT IT THEN.
I'M PLEASED AND PROUD TO SUPPORT IT NOW.
AND I THINK IT'S A WELL-DONE DEVELOPMENT.
AND I THINK ALL OF YOU AND CARILLON DESERVE CREDIT FOR BEING SUPPORTIVE OF IT AND ACTUALLY COMING OUT AND VOICING YOUR SUPPORT.
YOU WOULD BE SURPRISED HOW MANY ITEMS WE HAVE IN OUR AGENDA THAT DON'T GET MUCH CITIZEN INPUT.
SO THE FACT THAT YOU'RE HERE SPEAKING NOT ONLY ON THE MICROPHONE BUT WITH YOUR PRESENCE IS OBVIOUSLY APPRECIATED, AT LEAST FROM MY STANDPOINT.
I HAVE KIND OF TO GO ALONG WITH THAT.
I CERTAINLY RECOGNIZE AND APPRECIATE CONCERNS ABOUT DENSITY.
I DON'T HAVE THOSE CONCERNS ON THIS BECAUSE, AS I SAID, IT WAS VETTED BACK IN 2017 AND SEVERAL YEARS BEFOREHAND.
IT WAS DONE BEFORE ANY OF THESE ISSUES IN TOWN SQUARE WERE DONE AND I WOULD COMMENT, I DON'T KNOW IF FRANK BLISS IS HERE, BUT MANY OF THOSE SAME CONCERNS OCCURRED WITH THE CONDOS AND LOSS IN TOWN SQUARE.
AND I THINK THE RESOUNDING ANSWER AFTER THOSE WERE DEVELOPED WAS THAT THOSE ARE A NON-ISSUE, AT LEAST WITH RESPECT TO THESE, AND I WOULD FULLY EXPECT THE SAME OUT OF THIS PROJECT AND SEE NO REASON TO THINK THAT IT WOULD BE OTHERWISE SO.
I AM GLAD TO SUPPORT THIS AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORT THAT EACH OF YOU HAVE PUT INTO IT.
ANYONE ELSE? YEAH, I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO REMEMBER IS THIS IS A DOWN ZONING FROM WHAT WAS EVEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, SO IT'S LESS DENSITY THAN WHAT WAS BEFORE.
I THINK IF YOU ASK MOST SOUTHLAKE RESIDENTS AND SAW THESE RENDERINGS AND SAW, YOU KNOW, A 12 ACRE PARK, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE SURVEY COMMENTS THAT COMES BACK FROM THE CITIZEN SURVEYS IS, YOU KNOW, MORE OPEN SPACE, MORE WALKABILITY AND MORE PARKS THAN THIS DOES THAT.
I THINK, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, BRINGING THE PARKING BELOW GRADE IS IS A HUGE PLUS.
AND THEN I THINK THE FACT THAT THESE LOFTS ARE GOING TO BE OWNED LOFTS, I THINK, IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN IN THE DOWNTOWN FEEL.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT DISTINCTION TO MAKE HERE.
SO OVERALL, I'M I MEAN, I'M SUPPORTIVE FOR ALL OF THOSE REASONS.
I'M NOT SURE I CAN ADD TO THE WORDS SO ELOQUENTLY SPOKEN BY BOTH OF YOU, BUT I THINK AS WE'VE WATCHED IT EVOLVE AND I WAS I WAS PRIVILEGED TO BE A PART OF THAT JOINT MEETING WHEN WE HAD IT IN THE BEGINNING AND THERE WAS TREMENDOUS EXCITEMENT.
I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF FACTORS AND MR. TERRILL WILL CERTAINLY ADDRESS THOSE THAT CAUSED THE DELAY.
I THINK THE RESIDENTS STICKING WITH THIS, CONTINUING TO SUPPORT IT, CONTINUING TO REINFORCE THE IMPORTANCE OF IT IS COMPLIMENTED VERY WELL BY THE DEVELOPER'S WILLINGNESS TO LOOK AT OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AND TO LISTEN TO SOME OF THE THINGS BEING HELD ARE BEING SAID.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT STRIKES ME IS THE DISCUSSION SIMPLY OF THE FOUNTAIN IN THE WATER FEATURE BEING REDUCED SO THAT WE HAVE MORE OF A PLAZA AND A PARK FIELD TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE GATHERINGS AND SO ON.
AND I, YOU KNOW, PRIVILEGED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH JOHN A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT THIS WAS EXCITED TO COME IN TO HEAR THIS TONIGHT, AND I'M THRILLED TO SEE IT COMING BACK BEFORE US AGAIN FOR A VOTE.
DOCTOR SPRINGER, WELL, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT MORE TO BE SAID OTHER THAN WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE SAID.
I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THE IDEA FOR THE TROLLEY SET UP FOR BECAUSE I KNOW SOUTHLAKE IS NOT REALLY SET UP FOR MASS TRANSIT, BUT I KNOW THAT DURING THE OKTOBERFEST AND DURING THE 4TH OF JULY, FIREWORKS WHEN WE HAD OUR SHUTTLE BUSSES SET UP COMING FROM VARIOUS LOCATIONS AND MY WIFE AND I TOOK THOSE THAT I FOUND THAT TO BE REALLY NICE FOR, YOU KNOW, ELIMINATING THAT TRAFFIC AND THE CONGESTION THAT YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH EVEN IF THERE IS A PARKING GARAGE THERE.
SO I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT AND HOPEFULLY IT'LL BE SUPPORTED AND USED BECAUSE IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THIS TO BE JUST AN EXTENSION OF TOWN SQUARE.
VERY GOOD, COMMISSIONER PHALEN.
I MEAN, I WOULD JUST I WOULD JUST REFLECT WHAT YOU ALL HAVE ALREADY SAID.
I MEAN, I AGREE THIS IS PRETTY MUCH A DOWN ZONING.
AND I THINK IT DOES REFLECT KIND OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE MARKET WITH.
I THINK HE'S BEING SENSITIVE TO NOT, YOU KNOW, NOT SURE IF THERE'S GOING TO BE
[01:40:02]
DEMAND FOR AN ADDITIONAL HOTEL.HE'S REFLECTING THAT WE'RE SEEING A LOT MORE DEMAND FOR RESIDENTIAL THAN WE ARE FOR RETAIL AT THIS POINT.
AND SO I THINK THIS DOWN ZONING IS REALISTIC AND WHAT THE MARKET'S WHAT THE MARKET DEMAND IS IN TODAY'S MARKET.
SO I THINK I FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH IT THAN I WOULD HAVE WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN IN TODAY'S MARKET, SO I COULD SUPPORT IT.
WELL, I HATE TO BREAK UP THE LOVE FEST, BUT THE FACT THAT IT'S DOWN ZONING FROM A PRIOR MISTAKE BY THIS BOARD AND BY THE CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T MAKE IT ANY BETTER.
I UNDERSTAND BETTER THAN MOST DEVELOPERS SPEAK.
AND IF WE KNOCK THE STANDARD 20 PERCENT OFF FROM THESE ASPIRATIONAL DRAWINGS, IT'S STILL A GREAT PROJECT.
BUT I CAN'T IN GOOD CONSCIENCE VOTE FOR MULTIFAMILY DENSITY ZONING OR PROJECTS HERE IN SOUTHLAKE.
YOU CAN CALL IT WHATEVER YOU WANT, BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT IT IS 25 UNITS ON WHATEVER ACRE TRACT THAT IS.
THAT IS NOT WHAT THE CITIZENS OF SOUTHLAKE WANT.
AND WHILE I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE ECONOMICS OF THIS MR. TERRILL STATED, IT CAN'T BE DONE WITHOUT THE LUXURY LOFTS.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THAT'S NOT TRUE, BUT IT'S NOT MY PROJECT.
SO I DON'T I CAN'T MAKE THAT CLAIM DEFINITIVELY.
HOWEVER, WE ARE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT HERE AND FOR THIS BOARD TO APPROVE THIS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL DOWN THE ROAD, IF THEY CHOOSE TO APPROVE IT, WE ARE GOING TO BE VERY HARD PRESSED AND PERHAPS LEGALLY CHALLENGED FOR ANY DEVELOPER THAT COMES IN HERE AND WANTS TO PUT IN MULTIFAMILY OR HIGH DENSITY.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAY NO.
SO WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF THAT BEFORE WE VOTE FOR THIS.
AND I SAY THAT WITH SOME BACKGROUND IN LEGAL CHALLENGES TO ZONING ISSUES.
BUT AS LONG AS IT HAS THE MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT AND I DON'T THINK THAT THE BOARD SHOULD EITHER.
OK, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENTS WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS AND COMMISSIONER ROTHMEIER, YOU HAVE YOUR WORK CUT OUT FOR YOU ON ALL OF THE ITEMS, BUT I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO PULL IT OFF.
THERE IS A VARIANCE RELATED TO THE DRIVEWAYS AND THE STAFF REPORT AND THE TWO DRIVEWAYS ACCESSING OR THE WHITE CHAPEL 114 DRIVEWAYS DO NOT MEET THE STACKING DEPTH CONSIDERING THOSE ROADWAYS AND THEIR DEBT FROM THOSE RIGHT OF WAYS.
THEY DO HAVE TURN LANE, DECEL LANES ATTACHED TO THEM THAT MITIGATE THAT STACKING ISSUE, BUT NONETHELESS, IN THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT PLANS, AS WELL AS THIS ONE, THAT VARIANCE NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.
SEE IF I CAN INCLUDE IT THIS TIME, RIGHT? AND IF I CAN READ MY WRITING.
BUT MR. CHAIRMAN, WITH THAT, I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT CASE NUMBER ZA20-0029 SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED OCTOBER 15, 2021 IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER FOUR DATED OCTOBER 15TH, 2021 AND FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING THE AGREEMENT OF THE DEVELOPER TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S LANDSCAPING FRONTING RIVERA LANE IN THE EVENT THAT THE HOA DOES NOT APPROVE THE ASSIMILATION OF THIS PROJECT INTO THE EXISTING CARILLON HOA.
ACKNOWLEDGING THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY AND THE PARKS BOARD SURROUNDING MAINTENANCE OF THE FOUNTAIN ITSELF AND THE WATER FEATURES, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE SITE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE PARK AND THE FOUNTAINS ARE ALL PART OF PHASE ONE.
AND BEFORE THOSE ARE COMPLETED AND THERE'S NO RELEASE OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THEY'RE COMPLETED AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CITY AND AN AGREEMENT BY THE DEVELOPER TO TAKE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL ADDITIONAL RENDERINGS FOR THE LIBRARY SCREENING AS I'M SORRY RECOMMENDED AS AN AGREED TO IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE RESIDENTS ACROSS FROM THE LIBRARY AND FURTHER APPROVING THE VARIANCES AS REQUESTED BY THE DEVELOPER.
[01:45:02]
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.DO I HAVE A SECOND? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU, EVERYBODY FOR ATTENDING, PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND CONGRATULATIONS, GO DRAGONS.
I DON'T KNOW NOW I'M BEING ASKED FOR A SCORE UPDATE.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER NINE ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-647A
[9. Consider: Ordinance No. 480-647a, Zoning Change and Site Plan for Mody Southlake on property described as Lot 2, Block 1, Gumm Scifres Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 2101 E. Southlake Blvd., Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: "S-P-1" Detailed Site Plan District. Proposed Zoning: "S-P-1" Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood #8. PUBLIC HEARING]
AND DENNIS, IS IT OK IF I GO AND OPEN UP THE SIGN BOARD MEETING AS WELL? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN.OK, I'LL OPEN THE SIGN BOARD MEETING SO THAT WE CAN CONSIDER ITEM NUMBER FIVE FROM THE SIGN BOARD IN CONJUNCTION WITH ITEM NUMBER NINE FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING SINCE THERE FOR THE RELATED PARCEL.
AND WITH YOUR PERMISSION, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL JUMP DIRECTLY TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND SIMPLY SHOW THE MODIFICATION TO THE CURRENT SITE PLAN AND ZONING.
AND THEN FROM THERE, IF YOU WISH, I WILL JUMP OVER TO THE HIGH POINTS OF THE SIGN.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, THE BUILDING PARKING FIELD'S LANDSCAPE AREAS ARE ALL CURRENTLY APPROVED UNDER THE CURRENT SB ONE ZONING AND SITE PLAN.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ADD A COVERED CANTILEVERED AWNING OFF OF THE EAST PORTION OF THE BUILDING TO COVER A ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PATIO SEATING AREA THAT WAS ADDED TO THE PLAN UNDER WHICH A PERMIT IS ACTIVELY BEING CONSTRUCTED UNDER RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS AN ELEVATION SHOWING THAT CANTILEVERED OVERHANG THE FRONT AREA OF THE BUILDING IS COVERED UNDER A SECOND FLOOR PORCH COVERING, AND IT WOULD ALSO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THIS PATIO AREA AND THIS APPROXIMATELY A 10 FOOT KIND OF CANTILEVERED CANOPY SUSPENDED WITH THE STEEL BAR STRUCTURE.
AND IT IS APPROXIMATELY FIVE FEET OFF OF THAT EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT IS THE ONLY CHANGE PROPOSED TO THE PLAN AS IT IS APPROVED TODAY.
AND I MAY HAVE MISSED IT, I WAS LOOKING AT THE STAFF REPORT HERE.
WHAT ARE THE ARE THERE COLUMNS ON THAT THAT HAVE WHAT KIND OF MATERIAL? NO, NO COLUMNS PROPOSED ON THAT OVERHANG.
IT WOULD SIMPLY BE SUSPENDED OFF OF THAT EAST PORTION OF THE BUILDING AND SUPPORTED BY SOME UPPER STEEL STRUCTURES ATTACHED TO THAT EAST FACADE.
OK, ANY QUESTIONS FOR DENNIS ON THIS PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION BEFORE WE GET INTO THE SIGN BOARD PORTION? NOTHING.
YOU WANT TO GO AND HIT THE SIGN BOARD? CERTAINLY.
THE SIGN PROPOSAL INCLUDES THREE AREAS COVERED UNDER THE CITY SIGN ORDINANCE.
THE FIRST WOULD BE SOME ACCENTING OF THE UPPER PARAPET COPING OF THE BUILDING.
THE SITE PLAN HERE SHOWS THOSE AREAS AND READ.
ADDITIONALLY, THEY ARE ASKING FOR UPPER FLOOR SIGNS AND THESE TWO LOCATIONS ON THE NORTH FACADE AND THE EAST FACADE OF WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY CONTAIN EITHER TWO TENANTS OR A SINGLE TENANT, JUST DEPENDING ON HOW THE TENANT MIX IS MADE UP.
AND THEN THEY ARE ASKING FOR ONE ADDITIONAL MONUMENT SIGN.
THE SIGN ORDINANCE PERMITS ONE MONUMENT SIGNED PER STREET FRONT.
HOWEVER, IN A CASE WHERE A PROPERTY HAS OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT, THE MONUMENT SIGNS MUST BE AT LEAST 500 FEET APART FOR WHICH THEY ARE NOT.
AND IN THE ELEVATIONS ON THE MONUMENT SIGNS, THEY ARE ALSO NOT WRAPPED WITH THE
[01:50:01]
SIX INCH OF MASONRY MATERIAL AROUND THAT SIGN FACE.THIS IS THE ELEVATION SHOWING THE UPPER LIGHT ACCENTING.
ALTHOUGH SHOWN IN RED, THE LIGHTING OF THIS WOULD BE A NEUTRAL WHITE LIGHT.
THE AREA IN YELLOW IS A PROPOSED LOCATION FOR UPPER FLOOR SIGN THAT DEPENDING ONCE AGAIN ON THE TENANT MIX, COULD CONTAIN EITHER ONE OR TWO SIGNS WITHIN THIS YELLOW SIGN AREA, A SIGN LETTER SIZE AND LOGO IS PROPOSED JUST TO CONFORM WITH WHAT THE SIGN ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW FOR THE LOCATION.
AND SAME APPLIES TO THE EAST UPPER SIGN.
THE APPLICANT STILL WOULD RETAIN PROVISIONS UNDER THE PROPOSAL.
THEY HAVE TO HAVE ANY PERMITTED LOWER FIRST FLOOR SIGNAGE ONCE AGAIN BASED ON THE TENANT MIX, ONE TENANT WOULD BE PERMITTED ONE SIGNED PER STREET FRONT CONGRUENT WITH THEIR LEASE SPACE, AND MUST FIT WITHIN THE PERMITTED SIGN AREA AND PERMITTED LETTER HEIGHT.
ONE OTHER THING JUST ADD ON THE UPPER STORY SIGNS.
THE PROPOSAL DOES PROVIDE A PROVISION THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT SIGNAGE FOR THE ONE OR TWO TENANTS SCENARIO TO NOT NECESSARILY BE CONGRUENT WITH THE TENANTS LOCATION IN THAT BUILDING, BUT ONCE AGAIN MUST STILL FIT WITHIN THE THE DEFINED YELLOW BOUNDARY AREA.
ONCE AGAIN, AREA OF LIGHTING, ACCENT ON THE BUILDING, AND THESE ARE THE PROPOSED MONUMENT ELEVATIONS.
AND THIS WOULD BE THE MONUMENT SIGN AT THE ENTRY DRIVE OFF VILLAGE CENTER.
BOTH MONUMENTS MEET THE ORDINANCE REGULATIONS IN THEIR SIZE AND AREA.
I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OTHER THAN THAT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR DENNIS? SO, DENNIS, THAT THERE'S CAN WE MAKE THIS WHERE THERE'S A MAXIMUM OF TWO TENANTS ON THE SIGNAGE UP THERE? I MEAN, IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY, THEY WOULD SPLIT THIS THING WITH THREE.
I THINK THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE A JUMBLED UP MESS.
SO I MEAN, IS IT HAVE THEY SAID IT'LL BE A MAXIMUM OF TWO TENANTS? FOR THE UPPER FLOOR, THEY ARE UNDER THEIR PROPOSAL OR JUST REQUESTING TWO TENANT SLOTS FOR UPPER FLOOR SIGNAGE.
SO WE COULD THEY DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW THE FULL TENANT MIX AT THIS TIME.
I'M SURE, GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING, THERE'S LIMITATIONS AS TO WHAT THAT COULD BE.
DENNIS, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE UPPER STORY SIGNS, SAY TO ONE TENANT SIGN PER SIDE, THEN THE APPLICANT COULD COME BACK, DEPENDING ON THE TENANT MIX, TO REQUEST APPROVAL FOR A SECOND SIGN OR A VARIANCE, I SUPPOSE.
THAT OPTION WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THEM, AS WELL AS TO HOW YOU MANAGE AND MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THIS.
YES, YOU COULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF TENANTS AND THAT THAT WOULD HAVE RIGHT TO THAT UPPER STORY SIGN.
AND YES, THEY COULD COME BACK IF THEY NEEDED IT FOR SOME REASON, THEY WOULD HAVE THAT OPTION.
OK, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR DENNIS? ALL RIGHT.
FOR THE RECORD, LET'S CALL THE APPLICANT UP ON BOTH ITEM NUMBER FIVE FROM THE SIGN BOARD AGENDA AND ITEM NUMBER NINE FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA.
MY ADDRESS IS 3849 VAN NESS LANE AND I'M REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, THE OWNER.
REGARDING THE THE AWNING, I THINK IT'S SELF-EXPLANATORY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR THERE.
I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION DURING THE PRELIMINARY MEETING AS TO HOW BIG THAT WAS AND HOW MANY TABLES OR CHAIRS THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE.
WE THINK IT'S JUST 12 TO 16 SEATS ON THAT SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
[01:55:01]
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, THE PATIO AREA WRAPS AROUND THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.SO IT'S REALLY AN L-SHAPED PATIO AND THAT FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS COVERED.
SO IT'S MORE OF A CONTINUATION OF THE PATIO THAT WE HAVE ALREADY.
AND WE DO HAVE A RESTAURANT PLAN FOR THAT IN, AND THAT'S FAIRLY IMPORTANT TO THEM THAT WE COVER THAT PATIO.
AND THERE'S THE AWNING COMES OUT FROM THE BUILDING, SO IT HAS NO STRUCTURAL SUPPORT ON THE OUTSIDE OF IT, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
IT'S OVERHEAD RODS AS DEPICTED THERE ON THE ELEVATION.
OK? IT'S A ALUMINUM AWNING FLAT AWNING.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THE AWNING PORTION OF THE CASE? ALL RIGHT.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE SIGNS, AND I'M GOING TO JUST TELL YOU RIGHT UP FRONT, I THINK YOUR CHANCES OF GETTING THE LIGHTING AROUND THE TOP PERIMETER ARE ABOUT ZERO.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO ADDRESS IT IF YOU WANT.
AND I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GET APPROVAL FOR EVERY TENANT GETTING A SIGN ON THE UPPER STORY, BUT CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT THAT.
AND THEN I THINK PROBABLY THE MONUMENT SIGN WARRANTS DISCUSSION AS WELL, RIGHT? WELL, THE COVE LIGHT IS AN IDEA TO ADD A SOFT GLOW AROUND THE TOP OF THE BUILDING.
IT'S BUILT INTO A CAST STONE COVE, SO YOU WON'T ACTUALLY SEE THE FIXTURE AND IT IS WHITE LIGHT, IT'S NOT COLOR CHANGING, IT'S JUST TRYING TO CREATE A SOFT GLOW FOR ARCHITECTURAL EFFECT.
SHOULD YOU NOT APPROVE IT, WE WON'T DO IT, BUT WE REALLY THINK IT ADDS TO THE ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING.
ON THE UPPER STORY SIGNAGE, I MEAN, WE ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT WE DIDN'T NEED A VARIANCE FOR IT.
SIGNAGE WAS DEPICTED ON THE ORIGINAL ELEVATIONS THAT WAS APPROVED AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL ZONING, AND IT WAS SHOWN ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
IT WAS JUST RECENTLY WE LEARNED THAT THAT DOES REQUIRE A VARIANCE.
WE DO NOT EXPECT IT TO BE ANY MORE THAN TWO TENANTS.
WE WOULD REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL FOR UP TO TWO TENANTS IF POSSIBLE.
THOSE LETTERS, I BELIEVE, ARE LIMITED TO 18 INCHES IN HEIGHT.
I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE SIGN CLUTTER AT THAT SIZE WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE TWO SMALL SIGNS ON THAT FACADE.
THE MONUMENT SIGNS WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING ON THE BRICK IS JUST A VARIATION OF DESIGN.
YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE YEAH, WE HAVE AS MUCH MASONRY AS AS IS REQUIRED.
WE'VE JUST OFFLOADED IT TO ONE SIDE INTO THE BASE INSTEAD OF THE TRADITIONAL WRAPPING THE SIGN FACE WITH BRICK ON THE TOP AND BOTH SIDES.
WE JUST THINK IT'S A MORE INTERESTING SIGN.
IT'S NOT ANY LARGER AND IT'S NOT ANY TALLER THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED.
WE JUST WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE ALTERNATE DESIGN.
AS FAR AS TWO SIGNS GO, WE DO HAVE FIVE HUNDRED AND FORTY FEET OF FRONTAGE.
UNFORTUNATELY, WE CANNOT LOCATE THE SIGNS FIVE HUNDRED FEET APART JUST BECAUSE OF WHERE IT HAS TO BE ON SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD, OUR ONLY ENTRANCE DRIVE IS ON SOUTH VILLAGE, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A SIGN ON SOUTH VILLAGE.
AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW THE ONE ON SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TO US.
ALL RIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THE SIGN BOARD AGENDA ITEM? SO WHY DO YOU HAVE SIX PANELS ON THE SIDE? WE CURRENTLY ANTICIPATE FOUR TENANTS ON THE GROUND FLOOR, WE HAVE A SMALL RESTAURANT ON EACH END AND WITH TWO TENANTS IN THE MIDDLE AND UP TO TWO TENANTS ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
AND WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO FOR SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING FOR THOSE GUYS, YOU'RE JUST YOU'RE OK WITH JUST NOT HAVING ANY FOR THEM.
SIGNAGE FOR ALL THE OTHERS YOU'RE ASKING.
THEY'LL DO THE FIRST FLOOR SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING AS ALLOWED UNDER YOUR CODE.
AND WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY EXCEPTIONS ON THE SIZE OF THE LETTERS COLORS, ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE SIGN ORDINANCE.
JUST THE ABILITY TO HAVE TWO SIGNS ON THE SECOND FLOOR, FOR THOSE TENANTS.
ISN'T THE SIGNAGE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING ON THE EAST SIDE THAT'S NOT EVEN GOING TO BE VISIBLE IS IT FROM SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD? IT IS QUITE VISIBLE COMING WESTBOUND ON SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD.
YOU'VE HEARD MY QUESTION, I BELIEVE IN THE WORK SESSION ABOUT THE FACE, AND FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE MONUMENT SIGNS THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT A WRAP, A MASONRY WRAP AROUND IT.
BUT MY QUESTION IS AND THERE IS AT LEAST ONE LOCATION IN SOUTHLAKE THAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO NOTE, AND I COMMENTED ON IT AND WORK SESSION WHERE THE BACK THE FACE OF THE SIGN IS NOT FULLY POPULATED BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS NOT POPULATED YET, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT CINDER BLOCK AS WE DRIVE BY THERE.
WHAT IS THE MATERIAL THAT IS ON THE FACE OF THE SIGN HERE IN THE EVENT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ALL SIX OF YOUR ANTICIPATED SPACES LEASED TO A TENANT? THE SIGN CABINET ITSELF IS ALUMINUM, AND THEN THEY'LL THEY'LL ROUTE OUT THE
[02:00:04]
LETTERS AS TENANTS COME IN WITH PUSH THROUGH LETTERS THAT GET ILLUMINATED.SO IF WE ONLY HAD FIVE TENANTS, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE TENANT WOULD OR ONE PANEL WOULD BE BLANK ALUMINUM.
WHICH IS NOT ATYPICAL OF MOST OF THE SIGNS IN THE CITY WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE EVERY TENANT ON A PANEL.
AND I JUST IN ASKING THE QUESTION WAS TRYING TO AVOID A REPEAT OF WHAT IS A FAIRLY UNATTRACTIVE MONUMENT SIGN ON ANOTHER PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE LIGHTING OF THAT IS ANY ISSUE FROM A CITY STANDPOINT, SINCE IT'S ROUTED OUT AS OPPOSED TO MOUNTED SOMEHOW.
I GUESS THAT'D BE A QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF.
ITEM NUMBER NINE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING, OPEN PUBLIC HEARING TO SEE IF ANY ONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHES TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SINCE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO TWO DIFFERENT MOTIONS FOR THIS.
LET'S GO IN AND GET ANYBODY'S COMMENTS ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING CASE FOR THE AWNING.
ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? I THINK THAT LOOKS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD IN MY OPINION.
I MEAN, I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT BEING A AN ISSUE, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY COLUMN.
ANY COMMENTS OVER HERE? OK, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A MOTION ON THAT ONE, IF WE CAN, OK.
THEN, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE TO APPROVE.
ITEM NUMBER NINE CASE NUMBER ZA21-0080.
SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED OCTOBER 15TH, 2021 AND THE SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER TWO DATED OCTOBER 15, 2021.
I HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE A SECOND.
SECOND, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.
THAT ITEM CARRIES SIX-ZERO, AND LET'S TALK ABOUT ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE SIGN BOARD AGENDA.
BEFORE WE GET A MOTION ON THAT ONE.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE THE UPPER STORY COVE LIGHTING DR.
SPRINGER WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? I DON'T KNOW, I'M KIND OF TORN BETWEEN IT.
I'VE SEEN A FEW BUILDINGS THAT HAVE THAT, AND AS LONG AS IT'S NOT DIRECTLY OBSERVABLE, IT'S AN ACCENT LIGHT.
I DON'T HATE IT, ESPECIALLY THINGS HOW IT'S GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, A CONSTANT COLOR.
IT'S GOING TO BE BASICALLY AN ACCENT LIGHT AS LONG AS IT'S GOING TO BE SOFT WHITE OR WHATEVER THE WHATEVER COLOR IT IS, WHATEVER TEMPERATURE THE LIGHT IS, I THINK IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE THOUGHTS ON THE UPPER STORY COVE LIGHTING? NO.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO GET PASS CITY COUNCIL, BUT I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU, I THINK IT LOOKS COOL WHERE IT IS USED.
OK, WHAT ABOUT THE MONUMENT SIGNS? THOUGHTS ON THOSE.
I THINK THE ONE ON SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD IS FINE, BUT THE OTHER ONE FEELS REDUNDANT, UNNEEDED.
I AGREE, I'M NOT FOR THE SECOND SIGN AT ALL.
BECAUSE I MEAN, VILLAGE DRIVE THERE DOESN'T HAVE ANY TRAFFIC ON IT, AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO TURN ONTO VILLAGE DRIVE, YOU PROBABLY GOT A PRETTY GOOD IDEA YOU'RE GOING TO THIS PLACE.
YEAH, YOU'VE ALREADY MADE THAT DECISION.
AND THEN I GUESS FINALLY, THE UPPER EVERYBODY'S GOOD WITH THE MATERIALS ON THE MONUMENT SIGN I PRESUME.
OK, WHAT ABOUT THE UPPER STORY SIGNAGE? WHAT DO YOU THINK ON THAT, DR.
AS LONG AS IT'S LIMITED TO TWO.
ANYBODY, HAVE ANY DIFFERENT THOUGHTS? YEAH, I ACTUALLY AM A LITTLE SURPRISED.
IT WENT TO TWO BECAUSE THE SIZE OF THIS BUILDING AND LOOKING AT THE FOOTPRINT ON WHICH THIS BUILDING SITS, TWO IS GOING TO COVER PRETTY MUCH THE WHOLE FACADE OF THAT BUILDING.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET ADDITIONAL TENANTS AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GIVE THEM THE SIGNAGE TO GET THERE.
BUT I I DON'T THINK I COULD SUPPORT TWO SIGNS ON AN UPPER FACADE.
REYNOLDS, WHAT DO YOU THINK? I DON'T KNOW, I WORRY ABOUT IT BEING A LITTLE CROWDED AND RUNNING TOGETHER.
I DON'T KNOW, I KIND OF FAVOR ONE AS WELL.
[02:05:10]
THEY WANT TWO THEY HAVE TO COME BACK AND THEN WE CAN SEE HOW IT LOOKS THEN.YEAH, I KIND OF PREFER ONE, BUT WE ACTUALLY HAVE CONSENSUS ON THE OTHER TWO ITEMS FOR THIS SIGN PACKAGE.
SO I'M GOOD WITH WHATEVER WE GOT TO DO TO SEND IT ON UP.
WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK, COMMISSIONER PHALEN, COMMISSIONER KNIGHT? I THINK I'D BE GOOD WITH ONE, TOO.
I MEAN, I JUST KEEP PICTURING SIX SIGNS ON THERE AFTER HE STARTED TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT TENANTS AND I'M LIKE, I THINK ONE WOULD BE MY LIMIT FOR THE UPPER STORY.
BECAUSE CONSISTENCY IS CLEARLY MY THEME FOR THE NIGHT.
ARE YOU IN A GOOD SHAPE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS COMMISSIONER ROTHMEIER? ALL RIGHT.
I WILL MR. CHAIRMAN, MAKE A MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER FIVE, THE SIGNBOARD CASE NUMBERS SB21-0021.
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING APPROVAL OF THE CODE LIGHTING ACKNOWLEDGING AS THE PRESENTER ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT WILL NOT BE VISIBLE.
NUMBER TWO, DENYING A SECOND MONUMENT SIGN AND NUMBER THREE, LIMITING THE UPPER STORY SIGNAGE TO ONE SIGN NOT TWO AS REQUESTED.
ALL RIGHT AND SPECIFICALLY, WITH RESPECT TO DENYING THE SECOND MONUMENT SIGN, SHOULD WE GO AHEAD AND SAY WHICH ONE? YEAH.
AND ALSO, YOU MAY WANT TO MAKE A CONDITION OF THE CODE LIGHTING THAT IT BE A WHITE LIGHT.
WELL, FURTHER, I'LL AMEND MY MOTION TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE STATEMENT THAT THE CODE LIGHTING WILL BE WHITE, AND THE SECOND MONUMENT SIGN THAT IS DENIED WOULD BE THE ONE ON VILLAGE CENTER DRIVE.
I HAVE A MOTION, DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.