Loading...
Item 7ACITY OF SOUTHLAI<,,E Department of Planning & Development Services STAFF REPORT July 26, 2016 CASE NO: ZA16-029 PROJECT: Zoning Change and Development Plan for the Carillon Corporate District EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On behalf of Hines Southlake Land, LP, Jacobs Engineering, Inc. is requesting 1s' reading approval of a Zoning Change and Development Plan from `ECZ' Employment Center Zoning District to `ECZ' Employment Center Zoning District to amend the approved Carillon Development Plan layout for the Corporate District and to allow a hotel as a permitted use in the District on approximately 15.36 acres located between the 200 and 400 block of E. State Hwy. 114, being approximately 1,100 feet east of the northeast corner of E. State Hwy. 114 and N. White Chapel Blvd. Southlake, Texas. SPIN Neighborhood # 3 DETAILS: Jacobs Engineering Inc. is requesting 1s' reading approval of a Zoning Change and Development Plan from `ECZ' Employment Center Zoning District to `ECZ' Employment Center Zoning District to amend the approved Carillon Development Plan layout for the Corporate District and to allow a hotel as a permitted use in the district. The applicant is proposing the following amendments to the `ECZ' zoning regulations for the Corporate District. All other aspects of the district and previous conditions of approval are to remain unchanged. Proposed amendments to the `ECZ Zoning District 1. Amend the permitted uses to allow a hotel as a permitted use in the Corporate District. The hotel height maximum is 100' as indicated in the Plaza District restrictions. The hotel architectural design is to generally conform to the Hotel -specific Plaza District requirements in the ECZ zoning. 2. Redefine the parking standards for the Hotel use based on 1.2 spaces per hotel room. 3. Revise the Development Plan to incorporate a Hotel use along S.H 114 and to remove the Plaza Street `C' connection to S. H. 114. 4. Amend the zoning to allow loading zones at the front entrance. Case No. ZA16-029 The following two development plans shown below are a comparison of the changes to the Corporate District: O.p..b, 131 h d Play O Ares A 0 A— B Original Corporate District (November 2008) -- 'Irt - .RE PABN y �a J Y w VILLA PARK SOOTHE , '�SI ' y♦I FUTURECARILLON COURT"': '..i •JY J J a CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER ' -- ADDED HOTEL USE IN CORPORA - „ DISTRICT CORPORATE PARK i f Cmp-1311— PIM I— DE, -ELO',:_VT O A—A oAreaB Proposed Corporate District (August 2016) Carillon Corporate District The following information is from the Carillon Master Plan approved by City Council in November of 2008: The Corporate District is comprised of primarily office with the opportunity for additional retail or commercial uses. A 25 foot landscape buffer and a 50 foot building setback is adjacent to S.H. 114. In addition, a 20 foot landscape buffer Case No. ZA16-029 Tj� rhm} 1 i i)y +.rzIC T -ern 1I'•. CJI O.p..b, 131 h d Play O Ares A 0 A— B Original Corporate District (November 2008) -- 'Irt - .RE PABN y �a J Y w VILLA PARK SOOTHE , '�SI ' y♦I FUTURECARILLON COURT"': '..i •JY J J a CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER ' -- ADDED HOTEL USE IN CORPORA - „ DISTRICT CORPORATE PARK i f Cmp-1311— PIM I— DE, -ELO',:_VT O A—A oAreaB Proposed Corporate District (August 2016) Carillon Corporate District The following information is from the Carillon Master Plan approved by City Council in November of 2008: The Corporate District is comprised of primarily office with the opportunity for additional retail or commercial uses. A 25 foot landscape buffer and a 50 foot building setback is adjacent to S.H. 114. In addition, a 20 foot landscape buffer Case No. ZA16-029 is proposed along Kirkwood Boulevard and the parkway to the north of the Corporate District. This request is being processed in conjunction with a Site Plan for Hotel Indigo - Carillon, a five -story hotel with 119-121 rooms, under Planning Case ZA16-030. The Zoning Change and Development Plan for the Carillon Corporate District must be approved at 2nd reading prior to City Council consideration of the Hotel Indigo Site Plan since the existing zoning does not allow a hotel as a permitted use in the Corporate District. However, since the purpose of the Zoning Change and Development Plan is directly related to the proposed hotel, the Site Plan, elevations and other plans associated with the hotel will be presented with the 1s' reading of the Zoning Change and Development Plan for informational purposes. VARIANCE REQUESTED: A variance to Driveway Ordinance No. 634, as amended, Section 5.2(d), requiring a stacking depth of 75' for both driveways on the proposed hotel site, is requested to allow approximately 20' of stacking depth on the west driveway and approximately 25' of stacking depth on the east driveway. ACTION NEEDED: Consider 1St reading approval of a Zoning Change and Development Plan ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) SPIN Report dated March 22, 2016 (D) 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Report dated (E) Plans and Support Information — Link to PowerPoint Presentation (F) Development Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated July 22, 2016 (G) Surrounding Property Owners Map and Responses (H) Ordinance No. 564b (1) Full Size Plans (for Commissioners and Council Members only) STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker Richard Schell Case No. ZA16-029 (817) 748-8067 (817) 748-8602 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER: Hines Southlake Land, LP APPLICANT: Jacobs Engineering, Inc. PROPERTY SITUATION: Located between the 200 and 400 block of E. State Hwy. 114, being approximately 1,100 feet east of the northeast corner of E. State Hwy. 114 and N. White Chapel Blvd LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tracts 3132 and 3B and a portion of Tract 3A1, Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300 LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use CURRENT ZONING: "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District PROPOSED ZONING: "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District HISTORY: - On November 18, 2008 the City Council approved a Zoning Change and Development Plan from `NR -PUD' Non -Residential Planned Unit Development and `C-2' Local Retail Commercial District to `ECZ' Employment Center Zoning District for Carillon under Planning Case ZA08-031 (Ordinance No. 480-564). SOUTHLAKE 2030: - On April 20, 2010 the City Council approved a Site Plan for the Children's Medical Center at Southlake under Planning Case ZA10-017. - On September 4, 2012 the City Council approved a Zoning Change and Development Plan from `ECZ' Employment Center Zoning District to `ECZ' Employment Center Zoning District to amend some of the development regulations for residential development in Carillon concerning Building Standards and Architectural Controls in the EC Edge Village District and the EC Neighborhood Chateaux District under Planning Case ZA12-066 (Ordinance No. 480-564a). Consolidated Land Use Plan The Southlake 2030 Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Mixed Use. The Mixed Use land use designation is defined within Southlake 2030 as the following: "The range of activities permitted, the diverse natural features, and the varying proximity to thoroughfares of areas in the Mixed Use category necessitates comprehensively planned and coordinated development. New development must be Case No. Attachment B ZA16-029 Page 1 compatible with and not intrusive to existing development. Further, special attention should be placed on the design and transition between different uses. Typically, the Mixed Use designation is intended for medium- to higher -intensity office buildings, hotels, commercial activities, retail centers, and residential uses. Nuisance -free, wholly enclosed light manufacturing and assembly uses that have no outdoor storage are permitted if designed to be compatible with adjacent uses. Other suitable activities are those permitted in the Public Parks/Open Space, Public/Semi-Public, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Retail Commercial, and Office Commercial categories previously discussed." Urban Design Plan The Urban Design Plan also includes a few recommendations pertaining to the State Highway 114 corridor where this site is proposed to be located. They are as follows: o Establish appropriate scale and bulk standards for buildings along the highway, specifically at mid -block locations. Buildings should be 4 — 6 stories tall and step down as they move away from the highway corridor. Buildings over three stories should be articulated along the first three floors. Materials on the lower floors should be brick, stone or other approved masonry. Low -profile, single story pad buildings that tend to blend into the background and have limited visibility from the highway are discouraged o The view of surface parking from the highway should be limited. Surface parking lots should be designed to be in smaller pods (no more than 200 parking spaces) with increased landscaping and pedestrian accessways. o Structured parking is encouraged over surface parking. Specifically, shared parking is also encouraged between adjoining complementary land uses. Special attention should be given to the design of parking garages to avoid plain facades with views of parked cars from adjoining properties and rights -of -ways. Fagade details, vertical and horizontal courses such as cornices, lintels, sills, and water courses should be used to add interest along facades. To the extent possible, parking garages should be located behind principal structures to limit views from the highway. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: Area Road Network and Conditions The proposed hotel development will have two points of access onto Carillon Court and right -out only access to the Sh. H. 114 frontage road. Two future driveway connections to the property to the east are also provided. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was conducted in May of 2008 during the initial proposal of the master planned Carillon development. Since its approval, an addendum was done in March of 2010 during the proposal of Children's Medical Center to address the reduction of approximately 94,000 square feet of office/retail uses and an addition of 70,000 square feet of a medical center use. The Conclusions and Recommendations Case No. Attachment B ZA16-029 Page 1 from the 2008 TIA in addition to an approval letter from the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) can be found under Attachment `D' of this report. CITIZEN INPUT: A SPIN meeting was held on March 22, 2016 for the Hotel Indigo — Carillon, which included some discussion of the proposed amendment to the `ECZ' corporate District zoning. A copy of the SPIN Report is included in Attachment C of this report. The 2035 Corridor Planning Committee discussed the proposed Hotel Indigo — Carillon at their May 10, 2016 meeting. A copy of the meeting report is included in Attachment D of this report. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION: May 19, 2016; A motion to deny the item as presented received a (2-2) vote. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Development Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated July 22, 2016. Case No. Attachment B ZA16-029 Page 1 Vicinity Map Carillon Corporate District E { q{hl O6 B_18 ZA16_o29 Zoning Change and Development Plan 0 5011 1 000 2,0 Feet s Case No. Attachment B ZA16-029 Page 1 SPIN Meeting Report © SOUTH LANF E SPIN MEETING REPORT Case Number: SPIN16-011 Project Name: Boutique Hotel in Carillon SPIN Neighborhood: SPIN #3 Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Meeting Location: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX City Council Chambers Total Attendance: 41 Host: Ben Siebach, CEC Applicant(s) Presenting: Ron Smith, Mayse and Associates, email:Rsmith(a)mayseassociates.com Phone: 972-386-0338 City Staff Present: Patty Moos, Planner I City Staff Contact: TBD Attached to the end of this report are the Blackboard Connect Delivery Results for the March 22. 2016 SPIN Town Hall Forum Presentation begin: 6:00 pm Presentation end: 6:45 pm Town Hall Forums can be viewed in their entirety by visiting http://www.cityofsouthlake.com and clicking on "Learn More" under Video On Demand; forums are listed under SPIN by meeting date. FORUM SUMMARY: Property Situation: In the Carillon development along the E. SH114 access road east of White Chapel Blvd. in the retail, commercial and office area of Carillon. Details: Boutique Hotel with 121 rooms designed in the French Provincial architectural style. Not a franchise hotel. • 211 parking spaces, may try to reduce to 145 parking spaces to save existing trees. Will include small meeting space, restaurant, bar, balconies, patio, and bigger rooms. Original master plan had the hotel located along N. White Chapel Blvd. Master Plan may have to be revised by the developer to place the hotel along SH 114. • Traffic study has been completed. • Will try to save as many existing trees as possible and may revise parking lot layout to save trees. Case No. Attachment C ZA16-029 Page 1 • Landscape buffer along Carillon Court to be installed prior to hotel construction. • The proposed building materials are natural stone, stucco and slate roof shingles. Metal frame construction will be utilized with the building. • Master Plan changes by Jeff Kennemer of Hines will submit a zoning change request to move the hotel location. The site plan will be revised to relocate the hotel to SH114 (2nd building pad east of N. White Chapel Blvd.). Presentation: u , Tx 1 !10 i - 1 i ! i i I _ � __ ___-_-_________- S.H. N0. 11A _. - - -_ -� M2 Site Plan Rendered Aerial View Case No. Attachment C ZA16-029 Page 2 u Mj. m ouiIIr Lr -1 U Li- QUESTIONS / CONCERNS: 1. Concerns with increased traffic on Carillon Court. Response: Drive to SH114 has always been in the master plan. 2. Concerns about the traffic around the future park north of the hotel at Riviera. Response: there will be traffic on Carillon Court as designed in the master plan. 3. How significant will the landscape buffer and trees along Carillon Ct.? Concern with highway noise when the existing trees are removed for the hotel construction. Wants additional landscaping to control noise between SH 114 and the access road (TxDOT owns). Response: Can consider additional landscaping in front of hotel. Case No. Attachment C ZA16-029 Page 4 M.,,. ova. � �,. -- Feu o Y o B i.p It U n p;+; 11 _ `a QUESTIONS / CONCERNS: 1. Concerns with increased traffic on Carillon Court. Response: Drive to SH114 has always been in the master plan. 2. Concerns about the traffic around the future park north of the hotel at Riviera. Response: there will be traffic on Carillon Court as designed in the master plan. 3. How significant will the landscape buffer and trees along Carillon Ct.? Concern with highway noise when the existing trees are removed for the hotel construction. Wants additional landscaping to control noise between SH 114 and the access road (TxDOT owns). Response: Can consider additional landscaping in front of hotel. Case No. Attachment C ZA16-029 Page 4 4. Can the landscape plan be enlarged to create additional buffer for the north side of the hotel? Response: Can consider it. 5. Can there be a direct access off SH114 access road into the hotel parking lot? Response: No, TxDOT will not allow it due to the close proximity to the access ramp. 6. What is the lighting for the parking lot and hotel? Downward facing parking lot lights and hotel lights with 1-1.5 foot candles and will comply with city regulations. Several citizens made comments that they liked the new proposed location, the hotel concept design; and look forward to the construction. SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations o` SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives_ The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes, rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials. City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council- ,,11XU Cl.faa'laka,b,u Mal -Fwd 81-dCan tDa11 yRawls SPIN Mm"wM-IJ (Ci) USOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts sjpo"cl.soutdeke tx.us> Fwd: Blackboard Connect Delivery Results: SPIN Meeting on March 22, 2016 3117/2016 5:45:00 PM (CT) 1 message Pilar Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:19 PM To Jerod Polls <Jpotls@ci, swdhlake,ix,us> Kind Regards, Pile Schenk Deputy Director of Communication City of southlake, Texas (o) 817-74&8006 Follow the City: www GtyolSouthuakecorn www MySouthla0mNews. corn Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and pnvileged information. Any mceipt andror response to this email maybe considered a PUBLIC RECORD. If you have roceived this email in enoc please nobly the sender immediately. Any unauthorized review, use, rksclosum, or distribution is prohibited. - Forwarded message - From: <conneclsupport�4blackhoard,com> Date: Thu. Mar 17, 2016 at 6:18 PM Subject Blackboard Connect Delivery Results SPIN Meeting on March 22, 2016 3/17/2016 5 45:00 PM (CT) To: AORTOWSKIgCi.southlake.tx,us, dcortez@a.soulhlnkgtx,us, PSCHANK@ci,southlako-tx,us Blackboard connect_ This message has been sent' Mem is a summary of the delivery results. Click here to view more information online. Delivery summary Him, lhnwl.a»dacanlmaNuo'ni =tea=cafiafaclbrsNaw=piardv,romYr= t fi3Bb�6]ro6.d+csrml=153Bfi.oB3dYB.d1c Case No. Attachment C ZA16-029 Page 5 YtauChs I, I-, :'al•fwd elawaord Cax•a D6I1Wy RwIY SPH MaNrem Mach a 2016Y174V65'.4500PM(CT) Tide Si' IN LLz:t ng on March 22, 2016 Message Type Outmnr Site CITY (N I OUTHLAKE Scheduled By Daniel C, 0.1, Send Time 03117', n I. 115:45 PM (CT) Voice Completed 03!17;2016 06:18 PM (CT) Text Completed 03/17/2016 05:47 PM (CT) Email Completed 03/17/2016 05.45 PM (CT) Selected Contacts 11015 Successfully reached 7554 (69%) Languages English' Devlea Deq-d.. N 66%(7321) 10821 u 97%(168) 174 i98%(543) 574 D•tsiled D•livry Rack• 1- Voice 6,sten) Good Afternoon this is Daniel Code[ with the City of Southlake. A SPIN town hall forum will take place next week on Tuesday March 22nd at bpm on the folkw+ing items: In SPIN Dstnct F3. An applicant would eke to propose a boutlquo hotel designed in the French Provincial style to be located withn the Cannon master planned development along Stale Hwy, 114 and east of N. Wi4s Chapel Boulevard. In SPIN District 06, An applicant would taus lhnyl.rP•dwwm/m•L1/7�/=7Lk=c9G1�Octbas.xw:: rel.yrcle,.puaR-157E6pa7c69�dt�m1=151ad�p6:kbB�dlc Ytaw, C,,ui✓rlakxA..n u.1 • +'d ekckersd C-1 Uxllvay 4a.4a SPIN Mwnry m Mach 22 2016 Yt 1120165: 4500 PM ICl) like to propose a residential subdi— c, co^.;is:lnq d 1^1drrn i' 1, I:,,h:— (18) acres located along Davis Boulevard at tats faa a a:ha ,^:ay. A S'IN 'ow.n Fall Forum.11 b. —Id March 22nd at 6pm n the Southlake Town FW (7, nx �d Ch,j,hur,, Fr,r r';nmatian about SPIN, please go to vvrNs n.it'1lik-D� - . --a^k yce t,,r year xtnn'ion. K— a great Cayl thirteen (13) lots on eighteen (18) acres I=..r.::: su�rnsst..l �clrvedes nom+._:, 1"sJ') .r• Delivery 1727 A-&ohng Machine '':,1-4 L.1--essful Dei -nes 32'-., I lt,' lang.rp 1,' "1—, 246 �J:;Ie;1Lvt 20 3., s 166 Nr. Answer 2681 Jndellverable 1 Phone Network Busy 38 Bad Phone N—ber 279 Email C—d A`ler• aoh_ A S=IN tr,w.., - .11 'cru n :, 1 1 i., 1 r, , ,.,-,-k on Tuesday March 22nd y at *pn- I• t^n f-11 q rr In FSFIN D" , - 1 ' ..1 .Id Irk. to propos. a boutique hotel designed in the French FT. -.t; -: t ,-•-t :d .lin tic C rllon master planned development along State h 1'4 s ] '1 A I'' '•1,k, � ,I In SPIN District N5. An applicant would lik ,:,„kksv .:et al 'f thirteen (13) lots on eighteen (18) acres I=..r.::: Email Sent 95%(543) Email Opted -Out 5%(31) 471'1 L.i SMS A SPIN Town Hall Forum will be held on March 22nd at 6:00 PM, for mora information follow the link: http:l/tNt.lylSPIN2016Ma22 Text Email Sent 97%(168) Text Not Sent 2%(4) Tact Opted -Out 1% (1) rqx rmrrl.wad.mmrm•Wd)'+u=2LY=cafisoc/am�;.w=vds+rclFxmasv 1s3Be.0aic6B.dlcYiml=15]86.06]cuB.dlc Case No. Attachment C ZA16-029 Page 6 3nfl2n6 ClaaflMep.0 MaFwe&echOoae CorvclpelvsyRWh6PIN MeeYgm Ms<e ]S A16Y)lalt65'.a5a]PM �CT7 Malid Teri Phone 1% (1) For support, please call (866; 3662155 or email connect—Pon@blackboard.com ®8nbsp Copyright ® 2004-2013. Blackboaml Conned Inc. All ngMs neserveo, emsfl.Mml 2K Mp:llnal,gmQ�cvnlmeeAY'N=]ti4=c9ea0ctbbNwr-pbavtic�Cmbtle �SYB.M'kt6EtWcim=15'1®RRbcb]rOtr Case No. Attachment C ZA16-029 Page 7 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Report CITY OF SOUTHLAKE TEXAS ITEM #3 DISCUSSION — Hotel Indigo: • Staff made presentation to the Committee • Questions for staff following presentation Q: Why do they want to remove the access point? A: Driveway spacing JO 0O Ln203S Q: As part of the rezoning are they removing the other hotel location from the site or will it remain? A: It will remain an option • Ron Smith, representing the project, made a presentation to the Committee. The following includes comments by the presenter: Great boutique hotel in the French renaissance style of architecture Carillon zoning manual was taken very seriously, think it is important to have that strong presence to influence what is around us Not allowed to have driveway on 114 because we are passed the safe point Carillon master plan worked out regulations with TXDOT allowing curb -cuts on 114. Several hundred feet to the east and to the west of us Going to build the road so people can exit the freeway and safely turn into the hotel Did a parking study, showed the parking provided is more than what is needed. By adding additional parking able to save trees between us and residential Area covered in Post Oaks and Oaks. In lieu of the residences looking at the back of the hotel, leave natural beauty. The problem is if you do a lot of work around Post Oaks they don't live Hotel will front on SH 114. Office (?) may have another entrance in the future Extending Carillon Ct. May add sidewalks, trails for a gazebo area Think hotel will spur additional development in the area. Have people interested in adjacent pieces of land. Ideal site for retail or restaurant Trying to preserve trees on north and east side Think it is acceptable not to have drive on 114 access road All trees on Carillon zoning book initially showed no trees to be preserved Not a chain hotel. Hotel Indigo is a boutique brand with custom interior design with what is needed for Southlake. Other hotel brands strict about room size, color, furniture: more freedom with Hotel Indigo Client that is developing just opened Indigo Hotel in EI Paso Hotel is in the French style: it is a 5 story building Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Item #2 — Hotel Indigo Meeting #4 — May 10, 2016 Page 1 Case No. Attachment D ZA16-029 Page 1 Putting rooms in the Mansard Roof. Will have huge roof wells in the middle of the roof to hide equipment o Not going to ask for PTAC or VTAC grills on the outside of the building o Will have a porte cochere drive up with covered patio on the back side o Site plan shows outdoor amenity spaces with outdoor ballroom (?) partially covered by a balcony that serves the floor above it (?) v Have been working on this project for more than 6 months o Will have landscape berm between us and 114 • Questions for the presenter Q: Eating facilities? A: Have a great bar in the lobby. Will have hotel service where we can have room service in the morning. Great place for people in the neighborhood to have coffee in the morning. Not trying to compete with restaurant. The bar is more the heart of the lobby Q: Can you talk more about the roof? What will it look like when people get up there? A: The French style - will have a very vertical roof surface. Roof wells you won't even know they are there. RESPONSE BY COMMITTEE: Q: What is it going to look like? A: No one can get on the roof. Q: All ground parking? A: All ground parking. Very large site for this size hotel Q: Typically valet parking or self -park? A: Self park, or valet for events... Planning to have limestone veneer on first floor and stucco above Q: Do you have more of a concept plan for the landscape? A: The front is going to be planted with trees. Shrubbing the parking to meet the ordinance. Not trying to build a four or five (?) feet berm RESPONSE BY COMMITTEE: Like to see trees saved Q: What concerns did you hear from the neighbors in SPIN? A: Leaving trees. Site plan shown had an additional 50 parking spots, did not show the dog park or more trees. Still parking a lot more than is traditional for a building of this size Q: How many rooms? A: 118-121 Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Meeting #4 — May 10, 2016 Case No. ZA16-029 Item #2 — Hotel Indigo Page 2 Attachment D Page 2 Q: How many parking places? A: 1.2 per room (145 spaces) Q: Could you drill down more into the optional dog park? What are you committing to as you go through this project? A: If we don't show the option in this process we will have to go back through this process. Going to look at how big, grades. The size of the fenced area is subject to change. Hotel will allow you to bring your dog - think having the park will be a plus. Same with the gazebo and walking trails: want to have the option but don't want to obligate ourselves RESPONSE BY COMMITTEE: Q: Is your initial plan to leave it natural? A: Initial plan is to trim existing trees, do high landscaping along 114 and the hotel and more minimal natural in the back. Planting all those trees along the road. New trees to be planted. Landscaper needs to assess what we can do. Can't do a lot of earthwork and expect the trees to live. RESPONSE BY COMMITTEE: Not sure City Council will embrace something that vague. May be good to get a better idea of what you will commit to doing. Will there be trails? Gazebo? RESPONSE BY APPLICANT: Trail - yes. Gazebo- maybe Q: Can you talk through the landscape lighting plans - how do you envision lighting the building? If the park is put in place would there be lighting in the trees? A: Anticipate uplit light from ground lights. 25 foot led poles at 100 ft. intervals to get light patterns to what we need. IHG has a minimum of 40 footcandles at the entrance. Gazebo would have power so it could be lit, and have fans. Will leave natural landscaping on the north side Q: Have you thought about a water feature. fountain, in that park area? A: If you do the dog park you do the dog fountain and they are freeze protected. Other than outdoor space off meeting room there isn't a lot of outdoor space RESPONSE BY COMMITTEE: It might be worth considering it. People like water. Think it might be a draw when people are driving by 114 if in a park area there was a decorative fountain feature that was lit up Q: If it is not going to be a dog park what is it going to be? A: A natural preserve area with sidewalk so neighborhood people can come to the hotel Q: Does park system connect A: It all connects Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Meeting #4 — May 10, 2016 Case No. ZA16-029 Item #2 — Hotel Indigo Page 3 Attachment D Page 3 Q: What will you be doing for the areas that do not have trees now? Is it going to be finished at all? A: will not leave it as just dirt. If you do a dog park you have to put in the right kind of turf. If we don't do a dog park it will be turf. Q: Forecasts between leisure travel vs. business? Destination type or favored to business type users? A: More business type Q: If there is a belief there may be a second hotel how do you feel about this? A: Wanted to let market dictate this. If this corridor continues to grow there might be demand for another hotel at some point in the future. This area continues to grow, think it would be prudent to still keep the opportunity for that other site (not said by applicant - said by Jeff Kennemer) Q: Did the dog park idea come out of what the people of Carillon wanted? A: Carillon people seemed more interested in the bar and coffee served in the morning. Concerned with parking. Q: Is this project required to dedicate park land? A: Dedicated acreage; this would be a private park. Q: How similar will this be to the Hotel Indigo in Athens, Georgia? A: All kind of individual. Q: When do you go to PZ? A: Next week Q: You don't know the color? A: Think limestone, there are variations to limestone • Comments by the Committee Think it would be good to focus on that park - could capture revenue you might be missing RESPONSE BY APPLICANT: Want to focus on ballroom inside. This is the direction we are headed. If we can't have the option we will take it all. Only have one dog park (in town?). Worry about dog parks because of the noise. The trees in the park area are big trees Closest option to The Marq for people have weddings. etc. RESPONSE BY COMMITTEE: Not trying to compete with the Hilton Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Meeting #4— May 10, 2016 Case No. ZA16-029 Item #2 — Hotel Indigo Page 4 Attachment D Page 4 Would like a spa somewhere Samples of building materials are always appreciated. Will drill down to how you are going to light it. Might look for more detail. Let us have as much detail on the landscape as you can CAD drawings with vegetation and landscape, superimposed on the site so we can see conceptually RESPONSE BY APPLICANT Very much the first thing that is coming to the site Would like to see more detail of concept in landscape Comments by the Public Trying to understand what the product is trying to deliver. Would like to see the dog park area as more of an extension of the property. Gazebo and dog park don't seem to go hand in hand • QUESTIONS FOR JEFF KENNEMER: Q: Doing away with deck and structure parking Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Meeting #4 — May 10, 2016 Case No. ZA16-029 Item #2 — Hotel Indigo Page 5 Attachment D Page 5 Plans and Support Information Variance Request Letter SUMMIT 11 INVESTMENT GROUP LLC 2201 WEST ROYAL LANE-STE 165 IRVING TX 75063 972 . 807.2560/2562FAX 5/2/2016 Bharat Bhakta Summit QI Properties LLC 2201 W. Royal Lane, Suite 165 Irving, TX 75062 Kenneth M. Baker, AICP Senior Director of Planning and Development Services City of Southlake 1400 Main Street - Suite 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Mr. Baker, Please let this letter serve as a variance request for Driveway Ordinance No. 634, as amended Section 5.2 (d.) for the proposed Indigo Hotel in Carillon. This request is a reduction from the 75' storage to approximately 20' for parking adjacent to the proposed Carillon Court dedicated public street. The purpose of this request is to ensure that the parking stalls provided will allow for the parking needed for the hotel but also allow for a significant reduction in overall paving and impervious ground cover for this site. This reduction in impervious area will help ensure the preservation of many mature Oak trees that exist on the proposed development property immediately adjacent to Carillon Court. Additionally, the public dedicated street, Carillon Court, is defined as a Plaza Street but begins to act more like a driveway transitioning into the Plaza district of Carillon. If this access drive was off of the State Highway 114 frontage road, we would not be requesting this variance. We respectfully request your consideration on this matter as this will help us preserve as many of the existing trees as possible. Sincerely, Bharat D. Bhakta Managing Member Summit QI Properties LLC CHOICE HOTELS hotel rd CANDLEWMID I'll 11 INDIGO Nolldny Jn 9 U I T E 9 Case No. Attachment E ZA16-029 Page 1 Development Plan at May 19, 2016 P & Z Meeting Development Plan with changes since May 19, 2016 P & Z Meeting IT ,*x e • R Y�NNdll�j �� yasu� . �� Yoeuxiemxu moa► Yxlw u� yu�xiNiomx�wi YWWWwNWINN4�y T9�49 j v y 6 , 4y •'y b ax t a �u sY aaa+ ass y C -'—� yea's i1� • � �e a�i` � r Wim. B.. i� »' • � Y Hotellndigo 3 Driveway to office property removed}j, " LEGEND s y [all „F Right -out drive connection to SH 114 frontage road added �. H Case No. ZA16-029 Attachment E Page 2 ft a t .f J.1 a Hotel Indigo i 4 �lAil�l�li I rYnnnln¢4r to �e � - �vll�e ha..lx� Street connection removed Development Plan with changes since May 19, 2016 P & Z Meeting IT ,*x e • R Y�NNdll�j �� yasu� . �� Yoeuxiemxu moa► Yxlw u� yu�xiNiomx�wi YWWWwNWINN4�y T9�49 j v y 6 , 4y •'y b ax t a �u sY aaa+ ass y C -'—� yea's i1� • � �e a�i` � r Wim. B.. i� »' • � Y Hotellndigo 3 Driveway to office property removed}j, " LEGEND s y [all „F Right -out drive connection to SH 114 frontage road added �. H Case No. ZA16-029 Attachment E Page 2 Revised Pages for Zoning Booklet - .pA Corporate Dhsmct Plan Y r REVISED DE\'FLOP\IE\'T ,, A PLAN 0- 1_ _016 Oea B The Corpomre D.... p - d of primarily olfi h UP, ppsonrol, for additional ,,tail or co 1 A's foot landscape toff,, and _ 0 foe, binding 1 k- ,fi—ol to S H 114 In dd' 0 f I d pe boner p posed ikoo, Rirk ood B I d and the p rku'a, , it nosh of,he Cotpomrc District. Ar -aA: --Is 71°0 --10°0 Office Af ed use Retail Hotel Area B'. — 3.63, I8°o -- 10°0 Retail noiseduse Parks. Open --'_.s 11ao _ —n Sa Land U; \lis Table T. 41 Location Map: Corporate District (EC -Core) .Adopted 18.N—robec2008 4 63 Zoning Amendment Outline 1..Anreudo — to allow for a hotel as an allowed ase in the Corporate District of Carillon. Hotel building height maximum of 100' as indicated in the Plaza District restrictions. Hotel archn,choal design to generally coufrror to Hotel -specific Plaza District requirements r s omlined in the oriental EC -Z zowng. -. Redefined standard for parking required for Hotel ase based on 1.2 spaces per hotel room. Reduction based on Eugiueerine Parking Demand Analysis prepared by Steve E. Stoner of Pacheco Koch Engineers on Febmalv'_6, 2016. 3. Zoning Amendment w accormt for revised and updated development plan to incorporate a Hotel rrse along State Highway 113 Honoree road_ 4. Loading zone designation to be allowed at front ennauce. Changes for Zoning submittal July 12, 2016: L Updated Carv7lo, Cu,oln000 Me' to reflect new limits of Plaza C Street. (p. 87) 2. Removed Cm,rrpnml Svrnon: Pln_n Srreer C rsonrltvnt .—.,,). The new limits for Plaza C Stree, eliminate the southern section. therefore making fierce obsolete- (p. 89) 3. Revised development plan to hhcorpora a the new fitnne office layout HE Adopted IS.N—raber2008 Case No. Attachment E ZA16-029 Page 3 AGE EFN'PARK ' VILLA_PARK, FUTURE. CARILLON S COURT' CHILDREN'S ADDED HL. M6bICAL CENTER USE IN J DISTRICT ,' , - CORPORATE PARK - .pA Corporate Dhsmct Plan Y r REVISED DE\'FLOP\IE\'T ,, A PLAN 0- 1_ _016 Oea B The Corpomre D.... p - d of primarily olfi h UP, ppsonrol, for additional ,,tail or co 1 A's foot landscape toff,, and _ 0 foe, binding 1 k- ,fi—ol to S H 114 In dd' 0 f I d pe boner p posed ikoo, Rirk ood B I d and the p rku'a, , it nosh of,he Cotpomrc District. Ar -aA: --Is 71°0 --10°0 Office Af ed use Retail Hotel Area B'. — 3.63, I8°o -- 10°0 Retail noiseduse Parks. Open --'_.s 11ao _ —n Sa Land U; \lis Table T. 41 Location Map: Corporate District (EC -Core) .Adopted 18.N—robec2008 4 63 Zoning Amendment Outline 1..Anreudo — to allow for a hotel as an allowed ase in the Corporate District of Carillon. Hotel building height maximum of 100' as indicated in the Plaza District restrictions. Hotel archn,choal design to generally coufrror to Hotel -specific Plaza District requirements r s omlined in the oriental EC -Z zowng. -. Redefined standard for parking required for Hotel ase based on 1.2 spaces per hotel room. Reduction based on Eugiueerine Parking Demand Analysis prepared by Steve E. Stoner of Pacheco Koch Engineers on Febmalv'_6, 2016. 3. Zoning Amendment w accormt for revised and updated development plan to incorporate a Hotel rrse along State Highway 113 Honoree road_ 4. Loading zone designation to be allowed at front ennauce. Changes for Zoning submittal July 12, 2016: L Updated Carv7lo, Cu,oln000 Me' to reflect new limits of Plaza C Street. (p. 87) 2. Removed Cm,rrpnml Svrnon: Pln_n Srreer C rsonrltvnt .—.,,). The new limits for Plaza C Stree, eliminate the southern section. therefore making fierce obsolete- (p. 89) 3. Revised development plan to hhcorpora a the new fitnne office layout HE Adopted IS.N—raber2008 Case No. Attachment E ZA16-029 Page 3 _ it ��A � •� a n Street C S W a Street D (southern section) a Street B neestern .section) MOBILITY.If-ISTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN St Anne 2025 Pian —rpiulaaas—est wuertwewtnamM+eapn tal�aa ap' n ammo aqv q Mauat Gtr knee t� '--- :a -l'. M As R,. M�. o rt ,.... "o "c "" •.xeij6 Adoptd I8.14ovemb-well REMOVED CONCEPTUAL SECTION: PLAZA STREET C(SOUTHER_N SECTION) 07 11J2016 ✓C<eza �/G��i Street sections are intendedtobe conceptual in nature. Final design will be determined at the site plan submittal. A 6 foot wide pedestrian clear zone will be incorporated into the design of these streets and will be clear to a height of 8 feet from the finished grade of the sidewalk. PLAZA STREET C & D of the project divides the Village District and the Plaza District. A variable width median (nrininrum median width is 14 feet) allows for the incorporation of the Central Park into the design. This 4 lane divided street has on -street parking, 6 -foot wide parkways, and 6 -foot wide pedestrian clear zones. PLAZA STREET C (southern section) is a typical plaza street with 2 drive lanes, on street 1 parking, minimum 6 -foot wide parkways, and minimum 6 -foot wide pedestrian clear zones. PLAZA STREET B (western section) is a 4 lane street divided by a minimtmr 14 foot wide median. On -street parking is not permitted on this street, but these sheets have mn imunt 6-f t wide parkways and murrmtun 6 -foot wide pedestrian clear zones. f afignnteut with the City of SoutW,k,*, 2025 plan. Carillon provides a safe and efficient raaapottatien network that promotes oppotn a hs, for hvk.a to-toing neighborhoods. Kirkwood Boulevard is an important cow tu. identified in the 2025 Plan. It entets the x.It at the aonhwest corner and is proposed to exit along the southern Watal.ry allowing for fnue connection to Highland Drive. Fon, types of,—, encourage unique atk,toatt a perieacex within Carillon. • Boulevards and Parkways Plaza Streets CARILLON CIRCCI_; 110 PI..iN • Vulagesh— aErrsEncla< 't_.. • Ne1g11WflMdSweets All four stteet tW b to m the character ofthe deaeloptue ht poviding alternatives m the automobile through allowing users to meet dx by B' g b' y I' g. C 1-0e secs ! IIIIIIII 7h p. f -1-,k- ChfC ' xlimudto hkh M IIIIIIIIda,—ofa through road would--ly impact ting tree grove or negatively impact the development charac er of Carillon. f addition. paving materials fortxtreets had parking areas will beof a coasting type tho,agbom the developmem and .shall be either + Phah or concrete. Case No. Attachment E ZA16-029 Page 4 CONCLUSIONS FROM ORIGINAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Carillon Development Southlake, Teras IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS vlay 19, 2008 The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the analysis and results presented in the above report. • The proposed development is estimated to generate about 24.000 trips daily with 1.257 trips in the AM peak and 2,375 in the PM peak hour. • The proposed community performing arts center will generate approximately 1,440 trips during a special event. This assumes a sell-out event with all 1.800 seats occupied and a. vehicle occupancy rate of 2.5 persons per vehicle. Trips related to the performing arts center a special event related and were not included in the AM or PM peak hour. • Based on existing conditions, all study intersections operate at a LOS of C or better during the AM and PM peak hours. In the year 2015 with background traffic only. all signalized intersections will operate at a ❑ or better. The intersections of Dove Road at White Chapel Boulevard and Dove Road at Carroll Avenue will operate with a LOS of E and F. respectively. • Possible mitigation measures to improve the operation at Dove Road and Carrol Avenue include the construction of left -turn lanes on the east and west approaches and the addition of a southbound right -turn lane. With these improvement installed_ the average delay for the 2015 background traffic scenario is reduced from almost 150 seconds to about 50 seconds. * The addition of development traffic in 2015 results in minimal impact to the signalized study intersections with operations remaining at a LOS of D or better. The intersections of Dove Road at White Chapel Boulevard and Dove Road at Carroll Avenue continue to operate with poor levels of service. * If mitigation measures for the 2015 volumes are in place at Dove Road and Carroll Avenue. the addition of development traffic results im only a 6 second increase in average delay. No mitigation measures are required at the signalized intersections, with the exception of retiming of the signal to reflect theincrease in traffic volumes. * Based on the anticipated traffic volumes in 2015 (with the development) and NCTCOG capacity estimates. the link LOS on westbound SH 114 frontage road will be a C in the peak hour. * White Chapel Boulevard will have a LOS of C in both the northbound and southbound directions during the peak hour with development traffic. Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. -13- Case No. Attachment E ZA16-029 Page 5 Carillon Development May 19, 2008 Southlake, Texas • By the year 2015, Carroll Avenue will have a LOS of D on the southbound lane and a LOS of E on the northbound lane. In the peak hour. the development related traffic account for about 7.1 percent of the total traffic on Carroll Avenue. • Right -turn deceleration lanes are recommended for Drive C. Drive D and the Main Development Drive on the westbound SH 114 frontage road and at Drive A on White Chapel Boulevard. It is also recommended that right -turn deceleration lanes be constructed the Main Development Drive at White Chapel and Drive F at Carroll Avenue; but these can be done un subsequent phases of the development at the residential component is built out. • For the Carillon development, the absence of the connection to Highland Street does not present a problem to the traffic operations. The presence of the connection would provide some additional circulation and help improve the LOS rankings of some driveways, but it is not required for proper operation of the development, Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc. -14- Case No. Attachment E ZA16-029 Page 6 February 23, 2009 Kevin C. Kessler, P. E_ Jacobs — Carter & Burgess, Inc. 7950 Elmbrook Drive. Dallas, Texas 75247 (220) Review 10 -REV- 39-09 SH 114 Control 353 Section 3 REFERENCE: Carillon Development CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS (2nd Submittal) Northeast Quadrant SH 114 (Westbound Frontage Road) and White Chapel Road Southlake, Texas Dear Mr. Kessler, The Texas Department of Transportation has reviewed the Concept flan (2nd submittal) for the Carillon Development located in the northeast quadrant of SH 114 (westbound frontage road) and White Chapel Road in the City of Southlake, Texas. The North Tarrant County Area Office in conjunction with Traffic Operations approves the revised concept as submitted. Please see the attached revised PDF for the subject access. If there are any questions concerning the above comments, please contact Ali Shafiye in the North Tarrant County Area Office at (817) 399-4309 Case No. Attachment E ZA16-029 Page 7 DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA16-029 Review No.: Three Project Name: Development Plan — Carillon — Hotel Indigo APPLICANT: Kevin Kessler Jacobs Engineering 1999 Bryan St. Suite 1200 Dallas, TX Phone: (214) 920-8106 E-mail: kevin.kessler@jacobs.com Date of Review: 07/22/16 OWNER: Jeff Kennemer Hines Southlake Land LP 2200 Ross Ave. Suite 4200W Dallas, TX Phone: (972) 716-2900 E-mail: jeff.kennemer@hines.com CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 07/19/16 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT RICHARD SCHELL AT (817) 748-8602 OR DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 748- 8072. The proposed Indigo Hotel Site Plan must conform to the underlying `ECZ' Zoning and Development Plan for Carillon. Tree Conservation/Landscape Review E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS: The proposed Tree Conservation Plan shows to preserve existing trees that were previously shown to be removed on the Carillon Tree Conservation Plan. The property contains approximately 52% of existing tree cover and if this was straight zoning 50% of the tree cover would be required to be preserved. A total of 17% of the existing tree cover is proposed to be preserved. Except as provided by subsection 7.2.b. of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a Tree Conservation Analysis or Tree Conservation Plan shall be approved if it will preserve existing tree cover in accordance with the percentage requirements established by Table 2.0. If the property has previously received a tree permit related to development, the percentage of existing tree cover at the time the first such permit was issued shall be used to calculate the minimum existing tree cover that must be preserved under this section. Table 2.0 — Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements Percentage of existing tree cover on I Minimum percentage of the Case No. Attachment F ZA16-029 Page 1 the entire site existing tree cover to be preserved* 70% -0%-20% 20.1 —40% 60% 50% -40.1%-60% 60.1%-80% 40% 80.1%-100% 30% *The minimum percentage of existing tree cover to be preserved shall exclude any area in public rights-of-way as approved by City Council. For property sought to be zoned for the Downtown zoning district or a planned development zoning district, including an S -P-1 Site Plan, S -P-2 Site Plan, Transition, Rural Conservation, Planned Unit Development, or Employment Center zoning district, the City Council shall consider the application for a Conservation Analysis or Plan in conjunction with the corresponding development application (as established in Table 1.0). The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. The City Council shall approve the Plan or Analysis if the Council finds that the Plan or Analysis provides for the: placement of building pads, parking areas, driveways, streets, and utility easements so as to maximize the preservation of environmental features of the property including mature tree stands, natural creeks and ponds, and significant grades; maximizes the preservation of tree cover preservation areas indicated on the Environmental Resource Protection Map; iii. maximizes the preservation of existing tree stands with the potential to buffer residential areas from the noise, glare, and visual effects of nonresidential uses; iv. maximizes the preservation of existing trees, if any, adjoining a natural or man-made drainage creek; V. maximizes the preservation of existing protected trees along rural roadways and other streets as identified and prioritized in the Street Typology designation; and vi. mitigation of altered trees through proposed tree replacement procedures pursuant to this Ordinance. Please be aware that all existing trees shown to be preserved on the City Council approved Tree Conservation Plan must be preserved and protected during all phases and construction of the development. Alteration or removal of any of the existing trees shown to be preserved on the approved Tree Conservation Plan is a violation of the Tree Preservation Ordinance and the zoning as approved by the Southlake City Council. Please ensure that the layout of all structures, easements, utilities, structures grading, and any other structure proposed to be constructed do not conflict with existing trees intended to be preserved. LANDSCAPE COMMENTS: * A color -coded Landscape Plan meeting the requirements of Landscape Ordinance No. 544-A is required for approval of the Site Plan. Public Works/Engineering Review Case No. Attachment F ZA16-029 Page 2 Steve Anderson, P.E. , CFM Civil Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8101 E-mail: sanderson@ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of civil construction plans. 2. New Requirement: Provide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan per TXR150000. The plan must include all required elements in Part III, Section F of the permit. The City of Southlake especially reviews Part III, Section F, (1) (g), Maps. The review is for completeness of a plan to prevent pollution (especially sediment) to the Separate Storm Sewer System. It is highly recommended the project manager provide a series of maps for complex projects, including one map showing controls during mass grading and infrastructure, one map showing controls during vertical construction, and one map showing final stabilization (may be but not always equitable to the landscape plan). Please include timelines in relation to the project activities for installation and removal of controls. SWPPP shall be submitted by second review of the civil construction plans. 3. NEW REQUIREMENT: Submit with Civil Construction Plans a Retaining Wall Layout sheet. 4. Retaining walls greater than 4 -feet including the footing shall require structural plans prepared by a registered engineer in the State of Texas. Retaining walls shall require a permit from the Building Inspections Department prior to construction. 5. Construction within SH 114 right of way shall require a permit from TxDOT. Submit permit application prior to site plan approval. Street intersections shall comply with TDLR/ADA accessibility standards. Sight distances shall comply with AASHTO guidelines on adjacent collectors and arterials. Sidewalk widths shall conform to the Southlake Pathways Plan. Use the City of Southlake GPS monuments whenever possible. Monument locations can be found in the City of Southlake website: http://www.cityofsouthlake.com/index.aspx?NID=266 EASEMENTS: Provide all necessary easements for water, sanitary sewer and drainage. Easements shall be 15' minimum and located on one lot — not centered on the property line. A 20' easement is required if both storm sewer and sanitary sewer will be located within the easement. Water and sanitary sewer cannot cross property lines without being in an easement or right of way. All waterlines, sanitary sewer and storm sewer in easements or right of ways must be constructed to City standards. WATER COMMENTS: Minimum size for water lines is 8". Case No. Attachment F ZA16-029 Page 3 2. All water line stubs must have 2 joints past the valve with a 2" blow -off per the City's details. Water lines cannot cross property lines without being in an easement or right of way. The size of the water service tap must match the size of the meter. There are no reducers allowed before the meter on the public side. A one inch meter must have a one inch tap, etc. Water meters and fire hydrants shall be located in an easement or right of way. Fire lines shall be separate from service lines. SANITARY SEWER COMMENTS: 3. Minimum size for sanitary sewer is 8". Sanitary sewer service lines shall connect to public sanitary sewer system built to City standards. 4. Proposed sanitary sewer shall be located in parkway - not under pavement, except for crossings. 5. Add a note: Private sanitary sewer services need a plumbing permit and must be inspected by building inspections prior to burial. Sanitary sewer in easements or right of way shall be constructed to City standards. DRAINAGE COMMENTS: 1. Clearly label all private and public storm lines. 2. Easements outside of right of way shall be required for proposed storm sewer. Storm sewer must be installed outside the edge of pavement. Ordinance #605 defines easement requirements for storm sewer: 30" RCP and under - 15' easement 42" — 54" RCP - 20' easement 60" — 66" RCP - 25' easement 72" — 102" RCP - 30' easement Over 102" RCP — 3.5 times diameter Calculations will be required to verify capacity of proposed curb inlets. Storm sewers collecting runoff from public streets shall be RCP and constructed to City standards. The proposed flume will not be allowed. Discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties and meet the provisions of Ordinance No. 605. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS: Submit 22"x34" civil construction plans and a completed Construction Plan Checklist directly to the Public Works Administration Department for review. Please allow 15 business days for review. The plans shall conform to the most recent construction plan checklist, standard details and general notes which are located on the City's website: http://www.cityofsouthlake.com/PublicWorks/engineeringdesign.asp Case No. Attachment F ZA16-029 Page 4 * Submit with Civil Construction Plans a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan which outlines pre -construction, construction and post -construction erosion control measures. * A geotechnical report will be required for all private and public roadways. The geotechnical report shall include pavement design parameters for subgrade stabilization. * Access permit is required prior to construction of the driveway on S.H. 114. Permit approval is required before beginning construction. Submit application and plans directly to TxDOT for review. * A right of way permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Operations Department (817) 748-8082 to connect to the City's sewer, water or storm sewer system. * A Developer Agreement may be required for this development and may need to be approved by the City Council prior to any construction of public infrastructure. Construction plans for these improvements must be acceptable to Public Works prior to placing the Developer's Agreement on the City Council agenda for consideration. * Any hazardous waste being discharged must be pretreated per Ordinance No. 836. *=Denotes informational comment. Fire Department Review Kelly Clements Assistant Fire Marshal Phone: (817) 748-8671 E-mail: kclements@ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: The required backflow protection (double check valve) for the sprinkler system can be located on the riser if the riser is within 100 feet of the water main. If the riser is further than 100 feet from the main, the double check valve shall be in a pit. Riser rooms shall be a minimum of 5'X5' if the double check is not located on the riser, or a minimum of 6'X6' if it is on the riser. The Fire Department Connection for the sprinkler system must be within 100 feet of a fire hydrant. (A remote FDC is acceptable to meet the requirement)(FDC not shown on plans) FIRE LANE COMMENTS: Fire lanes require a minimum 30 foot inside turn radius and a minimum 54 foot outside turn radius. (Per 2012 I.F.C. Sec. 503.2.4) Fire apparatus access needs to be an all-weather surface, asphalt or concrete, a minimum of 24 feet wide with 6 inch red striping that contains 4 inch white lettering that states "FIRE LANE NO PARKING" every 25 feet, and able to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus. (A minimum of 85,000 pounds GVW) (Label all fire lanes. General Informational Comments A SPIN meeting was held on March 22, 2016. Case No. Attachment F ZA16-029 Page 5 No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is required prior to construction of any signs. All mechanical equipment must be screened of view from right-of-ways and residential properties in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance No. 480-564A. All lighting must comply with the Lighting Ordinance No. 693, as amended. All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended. It appears that this property lies within the 65 LDN D/FW Regional Airport Overlay Zone and will require construction standards that meet requirements of the Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No. 479. Development must comply with all requirements in Zoning Ordinance No. 480-564A. The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment F ZA16-029 Page 6 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS MAP & RESPONSES Carillon Corporate District SPO# 1. 1 Zoning ECZ � O ,S Acreage 3.62 Response NR d 1119 1 1 ECZ 100 E SH 114 5.06 NR 02 mW pa o�N> w 05 11101 ECZ 200 E SH 114 1.04 NR 4. 1700NC-oll gNpo Ngo -VOA ECZ 190 E SH 114 1.27 NR 5. ➢'g33 ECZ M 0.74 NR S - PP��FD1P U 5 C3 T. 0.40 816 ° 0 r 1621 � C3 .0 � Om G R � D 613 Z 9 1817 00o 1350 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 801 805 809 9. �� og ��oNDR 1613 ECZ O 0.06 NR Igo 1637 i1 A� Np1`�"(QE, f �' O n NR 11. 2 1605 1 Nm^' 301 E SH 114 2.70 808 Jq0 15 311 152 1601 �Q1 33� 152 1533 D ^'z^ � �Za 804 SONE 13. 100 1�5-� - 307 _1 151 1529 11512 1525 a 1621 RIVIERA LN 0.12 o 0 14. X601 �-3_ o,Z10 1617 RIVIERA LN 0.12 N n 15. �Sp 1521 90 1517 ECZ 1613 RIVIERA LN 0.12 w9 91, 16. 15pq ECZ 1609 RIVIERA LN 0.12 °s 17. Tb v 1601 RIVIERA LN 0.21 NR 18. K HOVNANIAN HOMES - DFW LLC ECZ 1605 RIVIERA LN q zqS D� g09 D16 _ 0 g20 gz1 s� 101 2 200 0 CT 250 iz'�1 a °l 141 101 251 121 31& q�0 3 480 4� 0 340 1360 q3j Sp° 1320 1310 qsl 300 212 208 204 200 108 � 9�1 Hi hlan S SS 301 S+y lJ 4 9q7 `�i 6� 44o E HIGHLAND ST ND ST 49 101 181 201 211 221 231 303 411 555 651 SPO# 1. Owner Name HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP Zoning ECZ Physical Address 250 E SH 114 Acreage 3.62 Response NR 2. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 100 E SH 114 5.06 NR 3. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 200 E SH 114 1.04 NR 4. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 190 E SH 114 1.27 NR 5. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 240 E SH 114 0.74 NR 6. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES C3 101 E SH 114 0.40 NR 7. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES C3 201 E SH 114 0.08 NR 8. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES C3 1350 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 6.33 NR 9. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 400 E SH 114 0.06 NR 10. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 430 E SH 114 0.53 NR 11. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES C3 301 E SH 114 2.70 NR 12. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES C3 319 E SH 114 2.86 NR 13. BIEKER, RON ECZ 1621 RIVIERA LN 0.12 NR 14. MCCAW, NEIL ECZ 1617 RIVIERA LN 0.12 NR 15. RUCCI, COREY ECZ 1613 RIVIERA LN 0.12 NR 16. BOISSEVAIN, DAVID ECZ 1609 RIVIERA LN 0.12 NR 17. K HOVNANIAN HOMES - DFW LLC ECZ 1601 RIVIERA LN 0.21 NR 18. K HOVNANIAN HOMES - DFW LLC ECZ 1605 RIVIERA LN 0.12 NR Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 1 F: In Favor O: Opposed To Notices Sent: Twenty (20) Responses Received Within 200': Two (2) Responses Received Outside 200': Three (3) Case No. ZA16-029 U: Undecided NR: No Response Attachment G Page 2 PERRY, RICHARD B ECZ 0.13 dd 20. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 300 CARILLON CT 0.15 NR 21. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 1500 LE MANS LN 0.20 NR 22. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 400 CARILLON CT 1.46 NR 23. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 401 MONTPELIER DR 0.19 NR 24. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 301 MONTPELIER DR 0.19 NR 25. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 303 MONTPELIER DR 0.15 NR 26. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 305 MONTPELIER DR 0.16 NR 27. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 307 MONTPELIER DR 0.14 NR 28. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 1508 LE MANS LN 0.14 NR 29. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 1504 LE MANS LN 0.14 NR 30. K HOVNANIAN HOMES-DFW LLC ECZ 300 MONTPELIER DR 0.24 NR 31. PATEL, TEJAL ECZ 304 MONTPELIER DR 0.15 NR 32. K HOVNANIAN HOMES-DFW LLC ECZ 306 MONTPELIER DR 0.13 NR 33. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 833 ORLEANS DR 0.07 NR 34. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 1700 N CARROLL AVE 20.94 NR 35. DEORA, JITENDRA ECZ 829 ORLEANS DR 0.25 NR 36. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 1513 LE MANS LN 0.14 NR 37. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC ECZ 1509 LE MANS LN 0.18 NR 38. K HOVNANIAN HOMES - DFW LLC ECZ 1505 LE MANS LN 0.24 NR 39. MERITAGE HOMES OF TEXAS LLC ECZ 817 ORLEANS DR 0.19 NR 40. MERITAGE HOMES OF TEXAS LLC ECZ 821 ORLEANS DR 0.19 NR 41. CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER ECZ 470 E SH 114 9.80 NR 42. K HOVNANIAN HOMES DFW LLC (Hythem Omar - Current Owner) ECZ 1501 LE MANS LN 0.33 O 43. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 629 ORLEANS DR 0.54 NR 44. MERITAGE HOMES OF TEXAS LLC ECZ 825 ORLEANS DR 0.18 NR 45. SOUTHLAKE TX MEDICAL BLDG I LP SP2 431 E SH 114 2.70 NR 46. SOUTHLAKE LAND HOLDINGS LP SP2 451 E SH 114 2.73 NR 47. SOUTHLAKE LAND HOLDINGS LP SP2 401 E SH 114 1.88 NR 48. 1 SOUTHLAKE LAND HOLDINGS LP SP2 335 E SH 114 15.09 NR F: In Favor O: Opposed To Notices Sent: Twenty (20) Responses Received Within 200': Two (2) Responses Received Outside 200': Three (3) Case No. ZA16-029 U: Undecided NR: No Response Attachment G Page 2 Case No. ZA16-029 Attachment G Page 3 Responses Received Within 200' Notification Response Form ZA16-029 Meeting Date: May 19, 2016 at 6:30 PM PERRY, RICHARD B 308 MONTPELLIER DR SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 Direct questions and mail responses to: City of Southlake Planning & Development Services Notification Response 1400 Main St; Ste 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: (817)748-8621 Fax: (817)748-8077 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby inf �av7o r ofd opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: LLib LDate: Additional Signature: Date: sl` (//6 Printed Name(s):°�� Must be property owner(s) whose name(s) are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Depa ent. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): 8 (-I - q2-1 `h i o Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 4 Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 5 Case No. ZA16-029 Attachment G Page 6 Responses Received Outside 200' 5/19/2016 Ci.southlake.tx.us Mail - Fwd: Cases ZA16-029, ZA16-030, & ZA16-031 V SOUTHLAKE Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southiake.tx.us> Fwd: Cases ZA16-029, ZA16-030, & ZA16-031 1 message kbaker@ci.southIake.tx.us <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:22 PM To: Richard Schell <rschell@ci.southlake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Sent from my Phone Begin forwarded message: From: MaryLee Alford Date: May 19, 2016 at To: Traci Henderson<thenderson@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us" <kbaker(cDci.southlake.tx. us> Cc: Carl Alford <carl@techtrans.com> Subject: Cases ZA16-029, ZA16-030, & ZA16-031 Reply -To: MaryLee Alford To the City of Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission: We are unable to attend the P&Z meeting tonight. We are 100% in favor of the plans submitted by the Indigo Hotel developer as shown in cases ZA16-029, ZA 16-030, & ZA 16-031. CAUSE AND EFFECT - Every action has a reaction. If Carillon Court is not finished as planned, I wonder how the corporate district would adjust. Perhaps the corporate office buildings would have to be moved more to the north, nearer the homes in the residential district, in order to provide good traffic flow for the corporate district. Without Carillon Court going through, would the effect be more traffic through the residential district? We still have Southmont. Would people who turn on Southmont find that, because they couldn't get through on Carillon Court, to continue their route, they must now drive up Riviera, Le Mans, or Orleans? Look at the other exits from the https://mail.google.com/mail/Li/0/?ui=2&ik=cc737a625d&view= pt&search= i nbox&th=154caOa70991 e26d&si m I=154ca0a70991 e26d 1/3 Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 7 5/19/2016 Ci.southlaketcus Mail - Fwd: Cases ZA16-029, ZA16-030, & ZA16-031 retail district. Without Carillon Court going from Southmont to the retail district, shoppers leaving the retail district to the east will be forced to drive in the residential district. We personally believe, not allowing Carillon Court to flow directly into the retail district will generate MORE traffic into the residential district. We want the hotel and retail because: 1. LIFESTYLE - We didn't pay the exact same price for our tiny villa lot that we paid for 220 acres just north of here for dirt; we bought a LIFESTYLE. Southlake Town Center is very similar, residential is adjacent to retail, which is what we want however, we wanted an individual, detached home. Southlake Town Center has a hotel, retail, restaurants, and residential. It's all beautifully master - planned. In the same way that Central bisects the residential from the retail areas of Southlake Town Center; Carillon Court bisects the Corporate District from the residential district in Carillon. We've not seen a great deal of retail traffic driving through the residential district in Southlake Town Center. Carillon Court does not go through the residential district in Carillon, it skirts the residential district to the south, separating the corporate from the residential, and serves the corporate district. 2. PERFORMING ARTS CENTER— A Performing Arts Center (PAC) has been on the plans since 2009, which was exciting to us when we reviewed the development plans at the City BEFORE we bought in Carillon. It is part of the lifestyle we purchased. Now that I'm more involved in the local arts, I hear that Grapevine wants the PAC, and there is a group in Westlake desiring to put their Arts League back together who would like to see the PAC built in Entrada. After talking to Terri Messing with APEX Arts League, she insists that the PAC must be near a hotel so that the hotel can cater to the PAC. Without the hotel, there is a strong, and likely possibility that we will also not have the PAC. We want to be able to walk to the type of entertainment APEX and a PAC would bring to Southlake. 3. PERSONAL SAVINGS — Our villa is our second "downsize". Since it's just the two of us, it no longer made sense to spend money on a huge home to house overnight or vacationing guests who rarely visit. If we need extra space, it's more cost effective to have visitors practically next door in a hotel. They have greater https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=cc737a625d&view=pt&search=inbox&th=l54caOa7O99le26d&siml=154caOa7O99le26d 23 Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 8 519/2016 CLsouthlake.tx.us Mail - Fwd: Cases ZA16-029, ZA16-030, & ZA16-031 privacy, can be more comfortable about throwing towels on the floor, go to the bar for late night drinks, come and go as they want, etc. They can walk to our home to visit, we can meet at the hotel or other restaurants, and we don't spend the money on construction, maintenance, and taxes, on space we rarely use. 4. BENEFIT TO SOUTHLAKE & RETAIL — The French architecture of this Indigo Hotel is rich and classic, like no other in Southlake. We are firm believers of the "if you build it, they will come" philosophy. For example, after 7 years of not attracting retail, once the hotel was under contract, a new business has already been announced! It's just the beginning of the retail we've been waiting for. Regarding the dog park, it is not something the hotel developers specifically wanted. They included it in the plans as an "option" in case they needed it in the future for clients because this hotel will allow people to bring their dog pets. The developer simply does not want to have to return to P&Z in the future if they find that the dog park would be needed. We have no problem with a dog park. We met most of our neighbors by walking Coco and often knew the names of our dog neighbors long before we actually knew the names of their people parents. We have a lot of dogs in the Villa District. Carl and I personally would love to have a dog park within walking distance so Coco could be off leash and able to play with our other dog neighbors. Since the dog park would be in the Corporate District, I think it would be maintained by the POA (Professional Owners Association) rather than the HOA. Although I believe the developer will not initially build the dog park, and may never if there is not a perceived need, we would love to have a dog park. Thank you for your service to our city and your consideration of these comments. Best regards, Carl and MaryLee Alford P. O. Box 92517 1812 St. Philip Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 (817) 980-5028 https://mail.googl e.com/m ai I/u/0/?ui=2&i k=cc737a625d&view=pt&search=i nbox&th=154ca0a70991 e26d&si m 1= 154ca0a70991e26d 3/3 Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 9 5/19/2016 Ci.southlaketcus Mail - FW: ZA16-029 ZA16-30 Indigo SOUTHLAKE Holly Blake < h blake@ci. south I ake.tx. us> FW: ZA16-029 ZA16-30 Indigo 1 message Traci Henderson <thenderson@ci.southlake.tx.us> To: Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> fyi Traci Henderson, TRMC Deputy City Secretary City of Southlake 1400 Main Street, Suite 270 Southlake, Texas 76092 thenderson@ci.southlake.tx.us 817-748-8015 - Office 817-748-8270 - Fax Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any receipt and/or response to this email may be considered a PUBLIC RECORD. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. ----Original Message ---- From: Debbie Teape [mailto Sent: Thursday, May 19, 20 To: thenderson@ci.southlake.tx.us Cc: kbaker@ci.southIake.tx.us Subject: ZA16-029 ZA16-30 Indigo To whom it may concern, I would like to be on records as 100% for the beautiful Indigo Hotel in Carillon and in full support of how they have designed the entrance and landscaping. Also before we purchased (as did every other resident) we saw and were fully aware that Carillon Court would be extended to Whites Chapel. We are so excited about this addition to our development. Thank you for your support, Chris and Debbie Teape 412 Montpelier Drive Southlake, Sent from my iPhone Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:44 PM https://mai l -googl e.com /m ai I/u/0/4ui =2&i k= cc737a625d&view= pt&search= i nbox&th=154ca556605485b3&si m I=154ca556605485b3 Case No. ZA16-029 IN Attachment G Page 10 5/19/2016 Ci.soulhlake.tx.us Mail - Re: Hotel Indigo -various Carillon Residents Opinions SOUTHLAKE Richard Schell <rschell@ci.southlake.tx.us> Re: Hotel Indigo -Various Carillon Residents Opinions Tom Plimpton Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:38 AM To: rschell@ci.southlaKe.ix.us Here is a late response...a MAYBE YES I apologize for the late reply, and hope this can still be sent to the P&Z committee, as I am unsure of where to send it myself. Thanks for taking the time to put this together. My parents live on LeMans, off Carillon Court, and I live in the estate section of Carillon. We do support the hotel, but I agree with the concerns others have raised about the traffic flow. It is true that when people purchased in the villas section, there was a plan for development off 114; however, those plans indicated an office space there. The traffic flow for an office space is very different from that of a hotel, especially for evenings and weekends. Additionally, we are concerned that future development in the area will further increase traffic, and now is the opportunity to address that. My young children frequently walk or bike in that area, and we are concerned that the increased traffic flow would be a safety risk. We are in favor of the hotel, but strongly support efforts to minimize the traffic flow through the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. That makes 24 responses. Thanks On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Tom Plimpton <tplimptontx@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Richard, Thank you for taking my call this morning. Attached is a document summarizing the feelings of 22 of our Carillon residents regarding the proposed Hotel Indigo that will be discussed tonight. As we discussed, our community has a website for discussion of activities, etc. I posted the question on the board yesterday which you can see on page one of the document. I asked for one of three possible answers. A vote of YES means in favor of the hotel. A vote of MAYBE YES means in favor of the hotel but with reconsideration of traffic flows in and around Carillon. A vote of NO means not in favor of the hotel. As you can see, the vast majority of respondents favor the hotel but with further work/planning on the traffic flows and congestion in and around Carillon. Thank you for your time and effort to get this information to the Commissioners. Tom Plimpton 1817 Riviera Ln 425-891-5467 PS ... please let me know that you received this email. https://mail.google.com/mail/Ld0/?ui=2&i k= 178f934086&view=pt&search=i nbox&m sg=154c9e29ba39bcdd&si m I= 1 54c9e2gba39bcdd 1/1 Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 11 5/19/2016 Ci.southlake.tx.us Mail - Updated Comments on Hotel Indigo rY "F SOUTHLAKE Richard Schell <rschell@ci.southlake.tx.us> Updated Comments on Hotel Indigo 1 message Tom Plimptor Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:14 PM To: rschell@ci.aUuu11ar1"AA.u0 I received a few more comments. Attached is a complete list. Sorry for the stragglers. This is my final list. Thanks Tom Plimpton W P8Z Opinions Updated 1pm.docx 148K https:Hmai l.google.com/mai 1/ul0/?ui=2&i k=178f934086&view=pt&search=i nbox&th=154ca3a5fe5e57el&si m I=154ca3a5fe5e57el Case No. ZA16-029 Attachment G Page 12 Shall we let the P&Z Committee know how we feel? Tom Plimpton from Carillon posted Here is an idea. We all have opinions on this issue. We are using this forum to vent, express our feelings and, to some degree, try to influence each other. Since we have over 300 members/users on this site, why don't we all just post our feelings in one of three ways...:' 41P, 1. Yes. This means you are in favor of the project as being presented to the P&Z committee tomorrow night.11,46', 2. Yes, but with a desire to see more work on traffic flow and congestion. This means the same as above but with reservations about traffic.sEP., P, OR. r�;;�; ..3EP�1- 3. No. This means you are not in favor of a hotel in our neighborhood.;,-Uo, The packet for the meeting can be viewed at....'sedi;mPihttp://weblink.cityofsouthlake.com/WebL.... P SEo! As we saw at last night's HOA meeting, we had about 75 of the 500 homeowners in attendance. So, it is not likely many will make it to tomorrow nights P&Z meeting. Yet, they need to hear our feel ings.sE;,IP, So, IF you want to, reply to this post as YES, MAYBE YES or NO and we can get this to the P&Z along with the definitions of what those short answers mean. Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 13 If you do not want to post publicly (which I can fully understand), send me a private message and I will add in to the results. Or, make up your own short version of your feelings.(10??(Zo,All just an idea .... if you don't like it ... I am OK with that as well. Just trying to help out. Sort of like an online petition so to speak. RESPONSE #1 -MAYBE YES I am a maybe. 1.1P,Traffic is a concern as is the rest of the development. I am curious how the entire retail plan changes as a result of moving the hotel from the middle to the proposed location. Not only how this impacts the layout of future stores/restaurants but more importantly where the various future entrances will be. My concern is that regardless where the hotel is the main points of entrance will always be Carillon Court and Kirkwood."1,,";?I am also a maybe in that I do not believe that building a hotel will attract future retail development and have concerns that the hotel will not be sustainable (given other hotels either being built or being proposed) in Southlake/West Lake/Trophy Club. Response #2 -MAYBE YES I am a #2 Yes with reservations about traffic flow. Response #3 -MAYBE YES Great suggestion! #2 Response #4 -MAYBE YES #2- yes with better traffic flow Response #5 -MAYBE YES Yes, maybe, regarding traffic flow and possible new entrance Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 14 Response #6 -MAYBE YES Yes #2 concerned about traffic need more study. Response #7 -MAYBE YES #2 - yes with better traffic flow Response #8 -YES Yes. Response #9 -MAYBE YES #2, yes in favor of hotel but have concerns about proposed traffic flow re: accessing from Carillon Ct. Would much prefer egress from 114 access road, new road through what might be retail/commercial in the future or White's Chapel. Unfortunately, we'll be unable to attend tomorrow's P&Z. Thanks so much for suggesting this forum so those that can't attend have a voice. Time permitting, I'll try to access the website & submit my concerns. Response #10 -MAYBE YES Tom -42 option I like. Response #11 -YES Yes Response #12 -MAYBE YES XXX and I agree with #2, yes to hotel but would like a different traffic flow option to bypass access to the neighborhood. Thank you! Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 15 Response #13 -MAYBE YES Great idea Tom, Yes for #2 option Response #14 -MAYBE YES #2. I am also unable to attend due to kids' activities. Thank you for suggesting this option to share our opinions. Response #15 -MAYBE YES Agree with #2 --want traffic flow to bypass access to the neighborhood as others have expressed above Response #16 -MAYBE YES Maybe yes Response #17 -MAYBE YES #2, thanks for posting Response #18 -MAYBE YES I'm just concerned about the traffic also. It looks like a beautiful hotel but would hate to have the majority of the traffics for it flowing thru Carillon Court Response #19 -MAYBE YES #2, I will not be able to attend tonight, so thank you for posting this, as it enables my voice to be heard Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 16 Response #20 -NO but could be a MAYBE YES Tom, thanks for the "summary". Not sure I can attend the meeting but I did want to let you know My wife & I oppose the hotel or at a minimum there shouldn't be direct access to our neighborhood. Access from the 114 access road only makes the most sense. Hopefully we can work out an advantageous option assuming the city hasn't already rubber stamped this Thanks again, Response #21 -NO #3 No Response #22 -YES or MAYBE YES Either 1 or 2. If the second entrance off the 114 service road is built in conjunction with the hotel (Attachment E, page 3), then that will likely be the most used access to & from the hotel. The traffic flow onto Carillon Ct, then into the hotel would not flow by existing homes. Users entering the hotel on Southmont to Carillon Ct. from 114 would have to take the Carroll exit and sit through a stoplight. If that second entrance is not built in conjunction with the hotel, then traffic flows should be assessed. Response #23 -MAYBE YES My vote is #2, so up to my vote, there are the following votes: 1. 2 Votes 2. 14 Votes 3. 0 Votes Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 17 there were 2 Maybes Of those who voted, there is an overwhelming majority who want to limit access to the development. However, in the P&Z process, a majority vote (such as occurred) does not necessarily equate to the P&Z accepting our views automatically. So attendance tonight is important to make sure our voices are heard. I was also trying to think of a comparison and if you look at the "Central Market" development, it is very successful and even smaller in size than our proposed area. If you have ever tried to weave your way through and out of that area, there is a lot of traffic. So it's not just the hotel ... it's everything that comes after. If it is a successful retail endeavor this is the potential amount of traffic that could be coming in and out of the retail space. Contrast that to the new retail across the street (by Michaels etc.) where no traffic can exit directly to the adjoining residential development without having to go down a separate road. Response #24 -MAYBE YES #2. Thanks for posting the options. Response #25 -YES #1 - because of cause and effect - see my reasoning in a separate post. Response #26 -MAYBE YES 2 for me please Response #27 -MAYBE YES I apologize for the late reply, and hope this can still be sent to the P&Z committee, as I am unsure of where to send it myself. Thanks for taking the time to put this together. Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 18 My parents live on LeMans, off Carillon Court, and I live in the estate section of Carillon. We do support the hotel, but I agree with the concerns others have raised about the traffic flow. It is true that when people purchased in the villas section, there was a plan for development off 114; however, those plans indicated an office space there. The traffic flow for an office space is very different from that of a hotel, especially for evenings and weekends. Additionally, we are concerned that future development in the area will further increase traffic, and now is the opportunity to address that. My young children frequently walk or bike in that area, and we are concerned that the increased traffic flow would be a safety risk. We are in favor of the hotel, but strongly support efforts to minimize the traffic flow through the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Case No. Attachment G ZA16-029 Page 19 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-564b AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING DESCRIBED AS TRACTS 3132 AND 3B AND A PORTION OF TRACT 3A1, LARKIN H. CHIVERS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 300, SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, BEING APPROXIMATELY 15.355 ACRES AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "ECZ" EMPLOYMENT CENTER ZONING DISTRICT TO "ECZ" EMPLOYMENT CENTER ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE CARILLON CORPORATE DISTRICT, AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B", SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and, Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 1 WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health and the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the over -crowding of the land; effect on the concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among other things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that there is a public necessity for the zoning changes, that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly requires the amendments, and that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 2 those who bought or improved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that the changes in zoning lessen the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers, promotes the health and the general welfare, provides adequate light and air, prevents the over- crowding of land, avoids undue concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has determined that there is a necessity and need for the changes in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a change since the tract or tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land are needed, are called for, and are in the best interest of the public at large, the citizens of the city of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed on the 19th day of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: Being described as Tracts 3132 and 313 and a portion of Tract 3A1, Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being approximately 15.355 acres, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A" from "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District, to "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District for the Carillon Corporate District as depicted on the approved Development Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 3 Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B," and subject to the following conditions: SECTION 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake, Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning. SECTION 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas. All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. SECTION 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over -crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 4 SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. SECTION 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 5 SECTION 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance in its entirety on the City website together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and it this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten (10) days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1St reading the day of , 2016. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 6 PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2"d reading the day of , 2016. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 7 EXHIBIT "A" Being described as Tracts 3132 and 313 and a portion of Tract 3A1, Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being approximately 15.355 acres, and more fully and completely described below: Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 15.355 ACRES BEING A 15.355 ACRE TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE LARKIN H. CHIVERS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 300, IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, AND BEING PART OF A 280.866 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, CONVEYED TO HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AS RECORDED IN COUNTY CLERK'S FILE NO. D-207372094, OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING ALL OF CARILLON COURT (A 63 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY). SAIL) 15.355 ACRE TRACT, WITH REFERENCE BEARING BASIS BEING GRID NORTH, TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATES, NORTH CENTRAL ZONE, NAD8 3 (CORS96, EPOCH DATE 2002), DETERMINED BY GPS OBSERVATIONS BETWEEN JULIAN DAY 253, 2004 AND JULIAN DAY 259, 2004, CALCULATED FROM DALLAS CORS ARP (PID-DF8984) AND DENTON CORS ARP (PID-DF8986), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR A SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CARILLON OFFSITE INFRASTRUCTURE & CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, AS RECORDED IN COUNTY CLERK'S FILE NO. D211101072, PLAT RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, SAID POINT BEING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 114, (A VARIABLE WIDTH RIGHT-OF-WAY) AND THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SOUTHMONT DRIVE, (A VARIABLE WIDTH RIGHT-OF-WAY), SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID 280.866 ACRE TRACT AND THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 22 SECONDS, A RADIUS OF 7659.44 FEET, AND A LONG CHORD THAT BEARS NORTH 64 DEGREES 07 MINUTES 59 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 515.40 FEET; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID 280.866 ACRE TRACT AND THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID STATE HIGHWAY NO. 114, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 515.50 FEET TO A TXDOT MONUMENT FOUND FOR CORNER; NORTH 66 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 21 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 776.13 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER; THENCE, OVER AND ACROSS SAID 280.866 ACRE TRACT, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 9 NORTH 23 DEGREES 56 MINUTES 39 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 423.00 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER; SOUTH 66 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 08 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 7.43 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER AND THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 03 SECONDS, A RADIUS OF 468.50 FEET, AND A LONG CHORD THAT BEARS SOUTH 77 DEGREES 23 MINtTTES 39 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 184.28 FEET; ALONG SAID TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 185.49 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLONN, PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER; SOUTH 88 DEGREES 44 MINUTES 10 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 39.33 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER AND THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23 DEGREES 17 MINUTES 51 SECONDS, A RADIUS OF 531.50 FEET, AND A LONG CHORD THAT BEARS SOUTH 77 DEGREES 05 MINUTES 14 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 214.63 FEET; ALONG SAID TANGENT CtTRVE TO THE RIGHT, PASSING AT AN ARC DISTANCE OF 83.52 FEET THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF A CORNER CLIP LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE RIVIERA LANE (A 51 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY) AND THE NORTH LINE OF AFORESAID CARILLON COURT (A 63 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY) AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF CARILLON PHASE 2A-2, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTH LAKE ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN COUNTY CLERK'S FILE NO. D213015133, PLAT RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF CARILLON COURT, A TOTAL ARC DISTANCE OF 216.12 FEET A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER; THENCE, ALONG THE SAID NORTH LINE OF SAID CARILLON COURT AS SHOWN ON SAID CARILLON PHASE 2A-2 AND CARILLON PHASE 3A-2, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTH LAKE ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN COUNTY CLERK'S FILE NO. D213189966, PLAT RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: SOUTH 65 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 18 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 723.08 FEET TO A 5 8 NCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER AND THE BEGINNING OF A Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 10 TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26 DEGREES 56 MINUTES 51 SECONDS, A RADIUS OF 531.50 FEET, AND A LONG CHORD THAT BEARS SOUTH 51 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 52 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 247.68 FEET; ALONG SAID TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT, CONTINUING ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID CARILLON COURT PASSING AT AN ARC DISTANCE OF 134.58 FEET A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID CARILLON, PHASE 3A-2 AND THE NORTHWEST LINE OF CARILLON, PHASE 3A-1, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, AS RECORDED IN COUNTY CLERK'S FILE NO. D213215889, PLAT RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, CONTINUING ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID CARILLON COURT, IN ALL A TOTAL ARC DISTANCE OF 249.99 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER AT THE WEST END OF A CORNER CLIP AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID CARILLON COURT AND THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF AFORESAID SOUTHMONT DRIVE; THENCE, SOUTH 80 DEGREES 40 MINUTES 52 SECONDS EAST, CONTINUING ALONG THE SAID NORTH LINE AND SAID CORNER CLIP, A DISTANCE OF 14.73 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR AT THE EASTW END OF SAID CORNER CLIP AND THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28 DEGREES 56 MINUTES 53 SECONDS, A RADIUS OF 53) 1.50 FEET, AND A LONG CHORD THAT BEARS SOUTH 42 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 16 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 265.69 FEET; THENCE, ALONG THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID SOUTHMONT DRIVE, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: ALONG SAID NON -TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 268.54 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER; SOUTH 28 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 49 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 198.69 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "JACOBS" SET FOR CORNER; SOUTH 73 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 28.36 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AND CONTAINING 15.355 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 11 EXHIBIT "B" Reserved for Approved Development Plan Case No. Attachment H ZA16-029 Page 12