The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 6F - SPIN ReportUSOUTHLAKE SPIN MEETING REPORT SPIN Item Number: SPIN2024-07 City Case Number: ZA24-0030 Project Name: Dakota's Steakhouse SPIN Neighborhood: 4 Meeting Date: April 9, 2024 Meeting Location: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX City Council Chambers Total Attendance: 7 Hosts: Muhammad Igbal Applicant Presenting: Tim McEneny City Staff Present: Madeline Prater, Business Manager FORUM SUMMARY: Property Situation: 479 N. Kimball Ave. Development Details: • Proposed 15,000 sq. ft. restaurant pad site • Proposed Event Space — 250 seats • Current Zoning: AG • Proposed Rezone: C-2 Retail Commercial District • Parking — Restaurants: 1 space per each 3 seats under max seating arrangement or 1 space per 100sf • Option 1: "Underground" Restaurant — Exterior Seating — Separate Events Building • Option 2: "Underground" Restaurant — Separate Events Building `Lifted Horizon' • Option 3: Above -Ground Restaurant — Separate Events Building Presentation: DM DMAG DAKOTA'S STEAKHOUSE Architecture INITIAL DESIGN PRESENTATION AC & Interiors 02.15.2024 7akc. a's=:eakhou /rit aID=s?n Pr—rta.io, TEKTURES AND IMPRESSIONS FROM NATURE / LANDSCAPE. AAA DMAC A rchitect pre AC & Interiors gala` TEXTUFZES AND IMPRESSIONS FROM NATURE/ LANDSCAPE. 3 oMAC �ak�o[a's 5:e�kh,-- ri[al:� nerta:o� iArchitecture ..... s e ..-- �. E IiHeriers Program Dakota's Steakhouse • 15000sf pad site Restaurant • Event Space: 250 seats Prefunction BOH Catering Kitchen (1500sf) Outdoor Event Space? Program �akota5 Steakhouse � In iGal 'Je si Nn Pre=_entz:ion :)M DMAC Architecture AC AJ trri— Zoning Info Dakota's Steakhouse • Current Zone: AG • Rezone to: C-2 Local Retail Commercial District • Allowed uses: "Restaurants, tea rooms, cafeterias, fast food and "take-out" food restaurants." • Height: 2.5 stories max / 35' • Setback: • Front: 30 ft • Side: 15 ft (abutting lots zoned: AG (S) and AG (N) • Rear: 10 ft (unless residential abutting: 25 ft) (adjacent lots are zoned SF-1A) • Lot Coverage: max 50% • Floor Area: 40,000 sf max • Max Impervious Coverage: 70% • Trash must be screened • Section 43: Residential Adjacency Standards Parking • Restaurants: 1 space per each 3 seats under max seating arrangement or 1 space per 100sf (whichever is greater) Program Dakota's Gc.5-tsena::khouw-lael-n.itll Design Preetation 5 :)M DMAc Architecture rchltect ure AC a IiHerinrs sTEAKwoUA 1 (O ENT BUILDING) 1 E%TERIOR SEATING f PARKING EV T ILDING ENTRY [OR Tom. iGUSEt__� i Option 1 k" Restaurant "Underground" o .-'�E%S. CAS STATION Exterior seating Separate Events Building _%S.OFFICE PARK �+ l�rt• � SITEOPTIONI- OVERVIEW Dakotas steakno�se�lnieal xs:9n Preseat�io� 5 RC Architecture .��:i':- - --°R-- ..=ra9�I!��"y�r,r:�_�:�•_ .y Zu �.r+�'..�•.;._,�-.'fi�wu - 'die:? �.�--car -. f _ �y s Option 1 • Bird's Eye • Residential Side 13 ]M DMAC ]kC [25 5:4khOu=_ e / r iC a s g n Prc<_ erta:io Architecture %f h NJ Option 1 - Exterior Seating is oMAC Ar Ch.a u ❑ako-ta's •e .ae r...c•. Sxeakhousef'nitlal Oe s:gn Presentation sr•ai.n.-s..rx...n ..xs n.an. �� & IiHeriersre 1w� � " Ir FqML-- . E.— � &-RAAC 0 ENTRY ` E%5. CAS STATION • ?.""E PARK Rit , SITE OPTION 2 - OVERVIEW Liakata's Steakhouse � In i¢al Oesig c Presentation STEAKHOUA ExTElzioez EVENTS EVENT iL Q1NG t-! PARKING 9m 7ETRV --- Option 2 "Underground" Restaurant Separate Events Building 'Lifted Horizon' 17 :)M DMAC Architecture A a interi— B OT Option 2 • Exterior View at Entry I Street i9 ]M 'MAC Dakota's S--akhouse/ rit31 �s nPre=_erta-io Architectu e _,Ll-1 J.1 L J.j son" Option 2 - Exterior View at Entry I Street 20 ]M DMAC Dakota's Steakhouse ini¢al Design Preserte:io� Architecture a.,m..,.w�-.�r.�akhor.�.w�u,�:.�.a.� IIC ainterior: ` XS. OFFICE PA RK SITE OPTION 3 - OVERVIEW 7ak-ta's--khouH / r.al Des n.=re<_ nrta_io, Comments, Questions, and Concerns: Concern: Commercial creep and traffic pattern. STEAKHOUA I I E]Cl"E7iIdR EVENTS EVENT UILI)ING M 4 PARKING • 6llIL7 Option 3 Above -Ground Restaurant Separate Events Building 23 CMAC Architecture Question: Does anyone in your group own any land adjacent to this property? Answer: No — There are now investors or other individuals who own property here. Question: Have any of the surrounding property owners met with you about this development? Answer: No, but we were told by one of the property owners that the houses along the back and east side are all his and no one is living there. But I hear you — you want to know how this will impact your neighborhood. I'm not familiar with how the District 114 development came together, but since that area built up commercially, we were looking at this site. If this was all residential property, I wouldn't even be here doing this. Concern: We are worried you might need more parking or space and this development creeps more east or north into our neighborhood. And with traffic, we're worried about big events with lots of cars accessing cut-throughs by our neighborhood. It is very dense trying to leave our neighborhood. Answer: We had a meeting about traffic issues and will get a study done. Question: How is this piece of property zoned today? Answer: AG — Agricultural. Question: Possibility of putting an access driveway off the 114-access road — would that be on the gas station drive? Or further east? Answer: We don't know yet — the Council and I spoke about that, and multiple people would need to be involved with this. From my understanding, this piece of property has tried to be rezoned multiple times and for the protection of residents that has not happened. Question: At the east edge of the property, there are residential lots between that line and Shady Ln. — is this planning to take any of those? Answer: No. The 4-acres we have right now will be more than enough. Comment: Appreciate the presentation, and I think a steakhouse would do amazing here. What sets this apart in my mind from other steakhouse restaurants is the idea of the event space. I would like some more clarity about the proposed event space. Answer: We would make it that operations cease before midnight — no late -night permit. We can put restrictions on it. We can front load this property and place parking in the back to create a buffer for noise and light. We'll also place landscaping and an entry wall around this property. Comment: I advise you to ask the city for all the traffic information. The Kimball intersection is the worst. Comment: We do not want more traffic on Shady Lane or using it as a cut -through. Answer: My thought is that traffic should not be going that way anyways — stay off Shady Lane. SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council. Southlake Connect Results for the April 9, 2024 SPIN Town Hall Forum Everbridge Suite .,e Dashboard Universe Notifications Incidents Contacts Reports Settings Acceas Reports > Detailed Notification Analysis > SPIN Town Hall Forum -April 9th 0 Detailed Notification Analysis SPIN Town Hall Forum - April 9th DETAILS Call Results 8 259 (220%)Atbempted- Notification lD 1569039063193907 Confirmed 008- C4rb9�)dAltempted Madeeti00 Live Modembw— N8o t ■ 264 (2.16%)Atbempted- Notficetion Standard Not Connected Type .2354 (20.01%) Not Start Date Apr Z 2D24 Attempted StartTime 14:37:50 CDT ■ 111 (0.94%) Other Confirmation Yea Hide Details Requested Cell Throttling Yes Call Reaults(per Delivery Path) Total %of Total Duration 6 hr(a) Message VaIce/Text Format Voicemail Message Only Preference Confirmed 259 2.20% Delivery Order Organization Default Attempted - Not Confirnr:. Delivery Methods Organization Contacts '.PrimarySMS Delivered 71 0.60% 2.SeoondarySMS 3.Prim ary Email 4.Primary Mobile Delivered - To Voicemail 1800 15.30% 5.SecendaryEmail 6.Seoondary Mobile 7.Home Phone Not Delivered- No Answer 132 1.12% B.Home Phone *2 9.Business Phone 10.TTY / TTD Device Delivered - To Handset 2936 24.96% 11.Everbridge Mobile Ap Resident Connection 1.VOIP Not Delivered - Voicemail Hung 129 1 10% 2.1-andline Up Not Delivered- Recipient Hung Up 370 3.14% Sent 3349 28.47% Attempted - Not Connect,• Not Delivered- Invalid Number 63 0.54% Not Delivered - Out of Service 98 0.83% Not Delivered- Carrier Expired 11 D.09% Not Delivered- Downstream 69 0.59% Communication Error Not Delivered- Carrier Rejected 2 0.D2% Not Delivered- Line Buay 11 0.D9% 1/2 Call Results(per Delivery Path) Total of Total Not Attempted - Inactive Path 257 2.18% Not Attempted - Unsubscribed 1269 10.79% Not Delivered- Contact Path Not 8 0.07% Defined Not Delivered- Duplicate Path 820 6,97% Not Delivered - Bounced Email 98 0,83% Not Delivered - Contact 13 0.11 % Unavailable Attempts Over Time 7.5k 51, 2.5k Ok ,AA \pA0 ,MS ,MS ,y0' Shaw Detslls ' WEirbridgEr Pry PgHM I Terms of Us . 02024 Everbridge, Inc. 24.3.0.32-6d5Ob53-2024-07-0&07:55 FE-VERSION ® ebamanager-portal-6455b65875-m7c81 212