2008-09-16CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE
lug TEXAS
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
LOCATION: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, Texas
Council Chambers in Town Hall
CITY COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Andy Wambsganss, Mayor Pro Tern John Terrell,
Deputy Mayor Pro Tern Gregory Jones and Councilmembers Laura K. Hill, Pamela
Muller, Virginia M. Muzyka, and Vernon Stansell.
CITY COUNCIL ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager / Director of
Public Safety Jim Blagg, Assistant City Manager Ben Thatcher, Assistant to the City
Manager Alison Orlowski, Community Relations Officer Pilar Schank, Information
Systems Technician Slaven Manning, Interim Director of Community Services Chris
Tribble, Deputy Director of Community Services Kerry McGeath, Director of Economic
Development Greg Last, Director of Finance Sharen Jackson, Assistant Director of
Finance Sean Leonard, Director of Human Resources Kevin Hugman, Fire Chief
Michael Starr, Police Chief Robert Finn, Director of Planning and Development Services
Ken Baker, Planner II Clayton Comstock, Chief Building Official Paul Ward, Director of
Public Works Robert H. Price, Deputy Director of Public Works Gordon Mayer,
Operations Manager Chuck Kendrick, Environmental Coordinator Christi Upton, City
Attorney E. Allen Taylor and City Secretary Lori Payne.
WORK SESSION:
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to order. The work session was called to order by Mayor
Wambsganss at 5:15 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 2. Invocation. Chaplain of the Month, Scott Berry, gave the invocation.
Mayor Wambsganss led the pledge of allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Discuss all items on tonight's meeting agenda. City Council
reviewed the agenda items with city staff. The following items were added to the
consent agenda: to table Item 6G to the October 2008 City Council meeting and to
approve Items 713, 8A, 8B and 9A.
Mayor Wambsganss closed the work session at 5:49 p.m.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 1 of 14
REGULAR SESSION:
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to order. The regular session was called to order by Mayor
Wambsganss at 5:49 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 2A. Executive Session. Mayor Wambsganss announced City Council
would be going into Executive Session pursuant to the Texas Government Code
Section 551.074, deliberation regarding personnel matters and Section 551.087,
deliberation regarding economic development negotiations. City Council adjourned for
Executive Session at 5:49 p.m. An Executive Session was not held.
Mayor Pro Tern Terrell and Councilmember Hill had to leave the meeting at 6:00 p.m.
but returned later in the evening.
Agenda Item No. 213. Reconvene. Mayor Wambsganss reconvened the regular meeting
at 6:53 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 3A. Mayor's Report. Mayor Wambsganss announced upcoming
meetings and events.
Agenda Item No. 313. City Manager's Report. City Manager Yelverton presented details
on the City's hurricane assistance information located on the website for those residents
who want to help those recently affected by Hurricane Ike.
Agenda Item No. 3131. Introduction of the new Police Chief and Fire Chief. City Manager
Yelverton introduced newly appointed Police Chief Robert Finn and Fire Chief Michael
Starr.
Agenda Item No. 3C. Financial Report. A written report was provided to Council.
Agenda Item No. 3D. Chamber of Commerce Report - Oktoberfest. Giovanna Phillips
with the Southlake Chamber of Commerce presented information on the upcoming 7th
Annual Oktoberfest.
CONSENT AGENDA: Consent agenda items are considered to be routine by the City
Council and are enacted with one motion. The Mayor read the items into the record.
Agenda Item No. 4A. Approve the minutes from the September 2, 2008, regular City
Council meeting. The minutes were approved as presented.
Agenda Item No. 413. Resolution No. 08-041A, Approve joint election agreements with
Tarrant County Elections Administration and Denton County Elections Administration
and amend election procedures for the November 4, 2008 special Local Option Election
to legalize the sale of beer and wine for off-premise consumption only. A presentation
was not made on this item. In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the
caption for this item is listed as follows:
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 2 of 14
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 08-041 WHICH CALLED FOR A SPECIAL LOCAL OPTION ELECTION
PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 4,
2008 BY APPROVING AGREEMENTS FOR ELECTION SERVICES WITH TARRANT
AND DENTON COUNTIES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Aqenda Item No 4C Resolution No. 08-049 Request the Texas State Legislature to
allow for greater local regulatory oversight of intra-state gas utilities. A presentation was
not made on this item. In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption
for this item is listed as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS OPPOSING THE
CONTINUED PREEMPTION OF MUNICIPAL REGULATION OF CERTAIN INTRA-
STATE GAS UTILITIES; URGING LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO PERMIT GREATER
LOCAL REGULATORY OVERSIGHT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Agenda Item No. 4D. Ordinance No. 946, 1St Reading, An ordinance adding Chapter 9.5,
Article VIII to the Code of Ordinances; providing for the regulation of erosion and
sediment control at construction sites within the city of Southlake and establishing an
effective date. A presentation was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No 4E. Ordinance No 483-0 1St Reading Amendment to the Subdivision
Ordinance No. 483, as amended as it pertains to the requirements for the installation of
underground franchise utilities within the City of Southlake. A presentation was not
made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4F. Approve a Southlake Parks Development Corporation (SPDC)
matching funds request from the Southlake Historical Society in the amount of $1,000
for the restoration of a historic wagon. A presentation was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4G. Approve a Southlake Parks Development Corporation (SPDC)
matching funds request from the Bob Jones Nature Center organization in the amount
of $1,900 for the purchase of picnic tables for the Bob Jones Nature Center & Preserve.
A presentation was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4H. Approve a Southlake Parks Development Corporation (SPDC)
matching funds request from the Bob Jones Nature Center organization in the amount
of $1,500 for the purchase of classroom furniture for Bob Jones Nature Center &
Preserve. A presentation was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 6G. Resolution No. 08-045, Amendments to the City's Mobility and
Master Thoroughfare Plan, an element of the Southlake 2025 Plan, the Cites
Comprehensive Master Plan, to include the future alignment of Kirkwood Boulevard,
north of State Highway 114, and North Carroll Avenue. A presentation was not made on
this item. This item was tabled to the October 2008, City Council meeting.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 3 of 14
Agenda Item No. 7B. Ordinance No. 480-440a, 1St Reading (ZA08-076), Zoning Change
and Site Plan for Farpointe Wine Cellar on property located at 721 East Southlake
Boulevard and described as Lot 1, Block 1, Pecan Creek. Current Zoning: S-P-1
Detailed Site Plan District. Requested Zoning: S-P-1 Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN
Neighborhood #9E. Planner Comstock presented this item during the work session.
Applicant John Fresine, 17715 Garden Grove Lane, Dallas, Texas answered Council's
questions. Council approved this item subject to the incorporation of the renderings
presented during staff's presentation.
Agenda Item No. 8A. Resolution No. 08-047, Appoint members to the Senior Advisory
Committee. A presentation was not made on this item. Council appointed Dan
McCauley to Place 6 and Craig Hayes to Place 9, Alternate 2. In accordance with
Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS,
APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE SENIOR ADVISORY COMMISSION AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Agenda Item No. 8B. Resolution No. 08-048, Appoint a member to the Zoning Board of
Adjustment. A presentation was not made on this item. Council appointed Laird
Fairchild to Place 3. In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for
this item is listed as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS,
APPOINTING A MEMBER TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Agenda Item No. 9A. Consider SP08-208, Variance to Sign Ordinance 704-C for
Anderson's Furniture located at 1600 East Southlake Boulevard. Planner Comstock
presented this item during the work session. Applicant Rick Sutton of Starlight Sign at
1110 Squires Lane, Aubrey, Texas with store owner, Jill Anderson, answered Council's
questions. After discussion, Council approved this item as follows: approving two signs
- one being on the south side and one being on the east side - with back-lit, channel
letters, eliminating the west sign as presented, and eliminating all gooseneck light
fixtures.
Motion was made to approve consent agenda items 4A; 413; 4C; 4D; 4E; 4F; 4G; 4H; to
table item 6G to the October 2008 City Council meeting; 7B subject to the
incorporation of the renderings presented during staff's presentation during the work
session; 8A to appoint Dan McCauley to Place 6 and Craig Hayes to Place 9, Alternate
2 with terms expiring May 2010; 8B to appoint Laird Fairchild to Place 3 with a term
expiring May 2009; and 9A as follows: approving two signs - one being on the south
side and one being on the east side - with back-lit, channel letters, eliminating the west
sign as presented, and eliminating all gooseneck light fixtures.
Motion: Muzyka
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 4 of 14
Second: Muller
Ayes: Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 5-0
REGULAR AGENDA:
Aqenda Item No. 5. Public Forum.
Al Penedo, 1318 Oakhurst Drive, Southlake, Texas discussed drainage and flooding
problems in his neighborhood.
Tim Wood, 1205 Timber Court, Southlake, Texas spoke about the drainage problems at
property owned by his mother, Hsiang-Lan (Sunshine) Wood.
Mayor Wambsganss closed the public forum.
Agenda Item No 6A ZA08-061 Revised Site Plan for Watermere at Southlake
Clubhouse on property being Lot 4 Block 1 Watermere Addition located at 301
Watermere Drive Current Zoning; S-P-2 Generalized Site Plan District. SPIN
Neighborhood #15. Director Baker presented this item to Council. Applicant Scott
Simmons from Watermere made a presentation and answered Council's questions.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve ZA08-061, Revised Site Plan for Watermere at Southlake
Clubhouse as presented by the applicant.
Motion: Jones
Second: Muzyka
Ayes: Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 5-0
Agenda Item No. 6B. Ordinance No. 480-509A, 2nd Reading (ZA08-072), Zoninq
Change and Development Plan for Cotswold Valley (formerly known as Estancia) on
property located at 579 North Kimball Avenue. Current Zoning: R-PUD - Residential
Planned Unit Development. Requested Zoning: R-PUD - Residential Planned Unit
Development. SPIN Neighborhood #6. Planner Comstock presented this item to
Council. In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is
listed as follows:
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 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS
TRACT 5A4, SITUATED IN THE SAMUEL FREEMAN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 525,
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 5 of 14
BEING APPROXIMATELY 7.97 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "R-PUD" RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT TO "R-PUD" RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT, AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, INCLUDING
"PUD" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, 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.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480-509A, 2nd Reading (ZA08-072), Zoning
Change and Development Plan for Cotswold Valley.
Motion: Jones
Second: Muller
Ayes: Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 5-0
Agenda Item No. 6C. Ordinance No. 480-565, 2nd Reading (ZA08-050), Zoning Change
and Site Plan for CySolutions Office Complex located at 165 South Kimball Avenue.
Current Zoning: SF-1A Single Family Residential District. Requested Zoning: S-P-1
Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood Director Baker presented this item
to Council. Applicant Aaron Hunsacker with The Sage Group, 1130 North Carroll
Avenue, Southlake, Texas answered Council's questions. In accordance with Section
4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as follows:
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 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS
TRACT 2, GEORGE W. MAIN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1098, BEING
APPROXIMATELY 1.68 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "SF-1A" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT TO "S-P-1" DETAILED SITE PLAN DISTRICT, AS DEPICTED ON THE
APPROVED SITE 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
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 6 of 14
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.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480-565, 2nd Reading (ZA08-050), Zoning
Change and Site Plan for CySolutions Office Complex specifically granting the
requested variances, noting the applicant's agreement that the fence will have columns
at 30 feet on center, and subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated September
9, 2008.
Motion: Jones
Second: Muzyka
Ayes: Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 5-0
Agenda Item No. 6D. Ordinance No. 480-568, 2"d Reading (ZA08-046), Zoning Change
and Concept Plan for Lots 22 and 23, T.M. Hood No. 706 Addition on property located
at 1340 and 1340B Shady Oaks Drive and described as Tracts 2C, 2C2, 2C2A and
2C2B, T.M. Hood Survey, Abstract No. 706. Current Zoning: AG Agricultural District.
Requested Zoning: SF-1A Single Family Residential District. SPIN Neighborhood #11.
Director Baker presented this item in conjunction with item 6E. The applicant was
present but did not speak. In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the
caption for this item is listed as follows:
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 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS
TRACTS 2C, 2C2, 2C2A, & 2C2B, T.M. HOOD SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 706, BEING
APPROXIMATELY 2.45 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO "SF-1A"
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, 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.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 7 of 14
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480-568, 2nd Reading (ZA08-046), Zoning
Change and Concept Plan for Lots 22 and 23, T.M. Hood No. 706 Addition granting the
requested variance for the frontage requirement; denying the sidewalk variance request;
expanding the easement as previously approved from 10 feet to 15 feet; and further
stipulating that the applicant has agreed to connect to sewer once it is reasonably
available.
Motion: Stansell
Second: Jones
Ayes: Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 5-0
Agenda Item No. 6E. ZA08-047, Plat Showing for Lots 22 and 23, T.M. Hood No. 706
Addition on property located at 1340 and 1340B Shady Oaks Drive and described as
Tracts 2C 2C2 2C2A and 2C2B T.M. Hood Survey, Abstract No. 706. Current Zoning:
AG Agricultural District. SPIN Neighborhood #11. Director Baker presented this item in
conjunction with item 6D. The applicant was present but did not speak.
Motion was made to approve ZA08-047, Plat Showing for Lots 22 and 23, T.M. Hood
No. 706 Addition subject to Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated August 15, 2008.
Motion: Stansell
Second: Muller
Ayes: Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 5-0
Mayor Pro Tern Terrell rejoined the meeting.
Aaenda Item No. 6F. ZA08-064, Site Plan for Lot 5, Block 22- Southlake Town Square
on property located at 125 Central Avenue and described as Lot 5, Block 22, Southlake
Town Sauare. Current Zoninq: DT Downtown District. SPIN _Neighborhood #8. Planner
Comstock presented this item to Council. Applicant Brian Stebbins answered Council's
questions.
Councilmember Hill rejoined the meeting.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve ZA08-064, Site Plan for Lot 5, Block 22, Southlake Town
Square as presented and subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 1, dated August 29,
2008.
Motion: Jones
Second: Terrell
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 8 of 14
Ayes: Hill, Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Terrell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 7-0
Agenda Item No. 6H. Ordinance No. 942, 2nd Reading, Approve and adopt the annual
budget for Fiscal Year 2009 and approve the revised budget figures for Fiscal Year
2008 and multi-year Capital Improvement Plan. Director Jackson presented this item in
conjunction with items 61 and 6J. In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter,
the caption for this item is listed as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS,
APPROVING REVISED BUDGET FIGURES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008; APPROVING
AND ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1,
2008, AND TERMINATING SEPTEMBER 30, 2009, AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS
FOR EACH DEPARTMENT, PROJECT AND ACCOUNT; REPEALING CONFLICTING
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SAVINGS AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
The Council discussed this item.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 942, 2nd Reading, Approve and adopt the
annual budget for Fiscal Year 2009 and approve the revised budget figures for Fiscal
Year 2008 and multi-year Capital Improvement Plan as presented.
Motion: Terrell
Second: Jones
Ayes: Hill, Jones, Muzyka, Stansell, Terrell, Wambsganss
Nays: Muller
Approved: 6-1
Agenda Item No. 61. Ordinance No. 943, 2nd Reading, Tax Levy Ordinance. Director
Jackson presented this item in conjunction with items 6H and 6J. In accordance with
Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS,
FIXING AND LEVYING MUNICIPAL AD VALOREM TAXES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2008 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2009, AND FOR
EACH YEAR THEREAFTER UNTIL OTHERWISE PROVIDED, AT THE RATE OF
$0.462 PER ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100.00) ASSESSED VALUE ON ALL
TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, AS OF JANUARY 1, 2008, TO PROVIDE REVENUES FOR
THE PAYMENT OF CURRENT EXPENSES AND TO PROVIDE AN INTEREST AND
SINKING FUND ON ALL OUTSTANDING DEBTS OF THE CITY; DIRECTING THE
ASSESSMENT THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR DUE AND DELINQUENT DATES
TOGETHER WITH PENALTIES AND INTEREST THEREON; PROVIDING FOR
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 9 of 14
PLACE OF PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF THE TAX ROLLS
PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF
INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Wambsganss opened the public hearing.
Greg Standerfer asked Council to not cut taxes in these uncertain economic times and
leave the property tax exemption as it is proposed.
Mayor Wambsganss closed the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 943, 2nd Reading, Tax Levy Ordinance and
move that the property taxes be increased by the adoption of a tax rate of $0.462.
Motion: Terrell
Second: Muzyka
Ayes: Hill, Jones, Muzyka, Stansell, Terrell, Wambsganss
Nays: Muller
Approved: 6-1
A_.genda Item No. 6J. Ordinance No. 944, 2nd Reading, Approve an ordinance of the City
of Southlake, Texas, providing for a residential homestead property tax exemption;
providing that this ordinance shall be cumulative of all ordinances; providing a
severability clause; providing a publication clause; and providing an effective date.
Director Jackson presented this item in conjunction with items 6H and 61. In accordance
with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A
RESIDENTIAL HOMESTEAD PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION; PROVIDING THAT THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PUBLICATION CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 944, 2nd Reading, Approve an ordinance of
the City of Southlake, Texas, providing for a residential homestead property tax
exemption; providing that this ordinance shall be cumulative of all ordinances; providing
a severability clause; providing a publication clause; and providing an effective date as
presented.
Motion: Terrell
Second: Jones
Ayes: Hill, Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Terrell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 7-0
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 10 of 14
Agenda Item No. 6K. Ordinance No. 945, 2nd Reading, Approve a negotiated resolution
between the Atmos Cities Steering Committee and Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex
Division ("Atmos Mid-Tex or "The Company") regarding the company's rate review
mechanism filing in all cities exercising original jurisdiction; declaring existing rates to be
unreasonable; adopting tariffs that reflect rate adjustments consistent with the
negotiated settlement and finding the rates to be set by the attached tariffs to be Oust
and reasonable; approving Atmos' proof of revenues; adopting a savings clause;
determining that this ordinance was passed in accordance with the requirements of the
Texas Open Meetings Act; declaring an effective date; and requiring delivery of this
ordinance to the company and legal counsel. Mayor Wambsganss presented this item
to Council. In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item
is listed as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS,
("CITY") APPROVING A NEGOTIATED RESOLUTION BETWEEN THE ATMOS
CITIES STEERING COMMITTEE AND ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION
("ATMOS MID-TEX" OR "THE COMPANY") REGARDING THE COMPANY'S RATE
REVIEW MECHANISM FILING IN ALL CITIES EXERCISING ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION; DECLARING EXISTING RATES TO BE UNREASONABLE;
ADOPTING TARIFFS THAT REFLECT RATE ADJUSTMENTS CONSISTENT WITH
THE NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT AND FINDING THE RATES TO BE SET BY THE
ATTACHED TARIFFS TO BE JUST AND REASONABLE; APPROVING ATMOS'
PROOF OF REVENUES; ADOPTING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; DETERMINING THAT
THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS
OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT; DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND
REQUIRING DELIVERY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE COMPANY AND LEGAL
COUNSEL.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 945, 2nd Reading, Approve a negotiated
resolution between the Atmos Cities Steering Committee and Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-
Tex Division ("Atmos Mid-Tex or "The Company") regarding the company's rate review
mechanism filing in all cities exercising original jurisdiction; declaring existing rates to be
unreasonable; adopting tariffs that reflect rate adjustments consistent with the
negotiated settlement and finding the rates to be set by the attached tariffs to be just
and reasonable; approving Atmos' proof of revenues; adopting a savings clause;
determining that this ordinance was passed in accordance with the requirements of the
Texas Open Meetings Act; declaring an effective date; and requiring delivery of this
ordinance to the company and legal counsel.
Motion: Terrell
Second: Hill
Ayes: Hill, Jones, Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Terrell, Wambsganss
Nays: None
Approved: 7-0
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 11 of 14
Mayor Wambsganss called for a break at 8:08 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:26
p.m.
Agenda Item No. 7A. Ordinance No. 480-564, 1St Reading (ZA08-031) Zoning Change
and Development Plan for Carillon Southlake on property located at the northeast
corner of East State Highway 114 and North White Chapel Boulevard and described as
Tracts 1, 2, 3A, 3A1, 3A3, 3A4, 3A4A, 3A5, 313, 3131, and 3132, Larkin H. Chivers
Survey, Abstract No. 300 and Tracts 3 and 4A1, Absolom H. Chivers Survey Abstract
No. 299. Said property also being currently addressed 1500 and 1900 North Carroll
Avenue, 1801 North White Chapel Boulevard, and 100, 202, 250, 300, 320, and 350
East State Highway 114. Current Zoning: NR-PUD Non-Residential Planned Unit
Development District and C-2 Local Retail Commercial District. Requested Zoning: ECZ
Employment Center Zoning District. SPIN Neighborhood #5. Director Baker presented
this item to Council. Applicant Jeff Kennemer of Hines Development, 5215 North
O'Connor Boulevard, Irving, Texas made a presentation and answered Council's
questions. Paul McCracken and Emily Drake with Jacobs Carter and Burgess answered
Council's questions. Steve Chilton with Opus West answered Council's questions.
Council discussed this item and asked questions of the presenters
Mayor Wambsganss allowed the public to speak.
The following people spoke in opposition to this item:
Kathleen V. Simpson, 104 Brentwood Circle, Southlake, Texas;
Jason Whitmire, 2012 Woodbine, Southlake, Texas;
Douglas Harsy, 2804 Tyler Street, Southlake, Texas;
D. Todd Parrish, 1313 Bay Meadows, Southlake, Texas;
David Alexander, 904 Quail Creek Court, Southlake, Texas;
Kenneth Horne, 1215 Ashmoore Court, Southlake, Texas;
Joe Garcia, 809 Silverton, Southlake, Texas;
Jin Liu, 1106 Del Mar Drive, Southlake, Texas; and,
Scott Nguyen, 1100 Bay Meadows Drive, Southlake, Texas.
The following people spoke in support of this item:
Kevin Archer, 808 Longford Drive, Southlake, Texas;
Randall McCauley, 2805 Carrick, Southlake, Texas; and,
Anthony Erickson, 301 Clariden Ranch Road, Southlake, Texas.
The following people filled out comment cards in opposition but did not wish to speak:
Jim Boudreaux, 1510 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas;
Donna and Eric Bradle, 451 Marshall Road, Southlake, Texas;
Christi and Jeffrey Paul Brennan, 431 Marshall Road, Southlake, Texas;
Liz and Tom Carroll, 2020 Vail Road, Southlake, Texas;
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 12 of 14
Jimmy Death, 901 Aspen Ridge Drive, Southlake, Texas;
Annie and John Dumbleton, 2804 Linden Lane, Southlake, Texas;
Chris and Elaine Ensenberger, 1505 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas;
David and Karen Flexer, 917 Silverton Street, Southlake, Texas;
Chet and Marie Foraker, 2802 Tyler Street, Southlake, Texas;
Lisa and Stan Fore, 1101 Bay Meadows Drive, Southlake, Texas;
Mark J. Fragia, 526 Round Hollow Lane, Southlake, Texas;
Jan and Jere Francis, 1211 Ashmoore Court, Southlake, Texas;
Richard and Tonia Harshaw, 541 Round Hollow Lane, Southlake, Texas;
Boyd Herndon, 1201 Ashmoore Court, Southlake, Texas;
George and Lou Ann Heath, 1100 Primrose, Southlake, Texas;
Jennie Hocking, 1515 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas;
John Jay, 540 Round Hollow Lane, Southlake, Texas;
Barbara and Barry Johnson, 1408 Whispering Dell Court, Southlake, Texas;
Jeffrey Johnson, 2606 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas;
Kim Lee, 775 Black Forest Court, Southlake, Texas;
Gloria Lorio, 1212 Ashmoore Court, Southlake, Texas;
Mick and Peggy Martin, 630 Castle Rock Drive, Southlake, Texas;
Suzy Matin, Idlewood, Southlake, Texas;
Janelle and Neil McNabnay, 419 Marshall Road, Southlake, Texas;
Paul and Rhonda Moorefield, 2004 Vail Road, Southlake, Texas;
Cami Moseley, 445 Marshall Road, Southlake, Texas;
Ken Phillips, 774 Castle Rock, Southlake, Texas;
Brian Pierret, 845 East Dove Road, Southlake, Texas;
Michelle and Shane Platt, 2104 Woodbine Circle, Southlake, Texas;
Tim Raley, 440 West Highland Street, Southlake, Texas;
Ben and Dona Robinson, 454 Marshall Road, Southlake, Texas;
Linda and Tim Rooney, 904 Silverton Street, Southlake, Texas;
Cary Rosenberg, 504 Round Hollow Lane, Southlake, Texas;
Patricia Sharkey, 404 Marshall Road, Southlake, Texas;
Tim Shen, 2105 Woodbine Circle, Southlake, Texas;
John Thomas, 2113 Vail Road, Southlake, Texas;
Beckie and John Underwood, 1407 Whispering Dell Court, Southlake, Texas;
Jennifer Welday, 530 Round Hollow Lane, Southlake, Texas;
Karen Whitaker, 505 San Jaun Drive, Southlake, Texas;
Marvin Williams, 1525 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas;
Jamie and Jolene Wooldridge, 404 Stockton Drive, Southlake, Texas; and,
Alex and Karen Zaal, 1203 Ashmoore Court, Southlake, Texas.
The following people filled out comment cards in support but did not wish to speak:
Susan Ansley, 607 Loving Court, Southlake, Texas;
Andrea Becicka, 423 Marshall Road, Southlake, Texas;
Sandy Boyd, 140 East Southlake Boulevard, Southlake, Texas;
Brad Cavnar, 1501 Corporate Circle, Suite 100, Southlake, Texas;
Kristina Hayes, 1208 Golden Gate Drive, Southlake, Texas;
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 13 of 14
Carolyn Hobbs, 1404 Chimney Works Drive, Southlake, Texas;
Merlene Ingraham, 5902 Crescent Lane, Colleyville, Texas;
Don Johnson, 817 Pearl, Southlake, Texas;
Jim Patterson, 2708 Miles City Court, Southlake, Texas;
Tommy Pennington;
Giovanna Phillips, 1501 Corporate Circle, Southlake, Texas;
Michael L. Waldman, 713 Longford Drive, Southlake, Texas;
Ray Tremain, 1410 Kensington Court, Southlake, Texas; and,
Brian Zvonecek, 513 Fox Glen, Southlake, Texas.
Sid Lorio, 1212 Ashmoore Court, Southlake, Texas filled out a comment card but did not
state a position.
Motion was made to table Ordinance No. 480-564, 1St Reading (ZA08-031), Zoning
Change and Development Plan for Carillon Southlake to the October 2008 City
Council meeting.
Motion:
Terrell
Second:
Muzyka
Ayes:
Hill, Jones,
Nays:
None
Tabled:
7-0
Muller, Muzyka, Stansell, Terrell, Wambsganss
Agenda Item No. 11. Meeting adjourned. Mayor Wambsganss adjourned the meeting at
10:25 p.m.
*An audio recording of this meeting will be permanently retained in the City
Secretary's Office.
Andy Wam-ftganss
Mayor
ATTEST:
Jct`
Lori Payne, TRN
City Secretary
•```oUTHt•~r~a~
0111 •
s AS
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
Page 14 of 14
City Council Carillon Discussion - September 16, 2008
(notes requested by Mayor Pro Tern John Terrell)
Director Ken Baker - Presented item
Applicant, Jeff Kennemer - Presented item
City Councilmember Vernon Stansell - Quick question.
Kennemer - Yes, sir.
Stansell - There can be no more than 3 owners per structure?
Kennemer - That is correct. There is a limitation. You cannot have more than
one resident per floor. We do not have any availability to take these lots and
break them into multiple units. It would be a max of one resident, one dwelling
unit per floor. Now you could have a resident that wanted to buy two floors for a
single loft, but not the other way around. We cannot take a single floor and break
it into multiple units.
Stansell - Okay.
Kennemer - Continued his presentation.
City Councilmember Pamela Muller - On the lofts, what prohibits somebody from
putting an office on the top floor and the lower ones being residential? Is that left
up to whoever purchases?
Kennemer - We don't have a restriction for that currently.
Muller - Will there be any restriction that the lofts be owner occupied?
Kennemer - We'd be happy to place that restriction. I don't know that's possible
to prevent someone who buys a unit from being able to rent. But we have no
intention whatsoever for these being rented, so I don't have a problem with that.
Muller - If there's an office in the development how would the signage work?
Because from what I'm understanding this is supposed to look residential like
townhomes and such.
Kennemer - It does. It would be similar to something you've seen in the
Northeast <inaudible> it would be part of, it would be very nonintrusive, it would
be, I could bring you in our next reading, I'll bring you some examples of what
those look like. I don't have those with me tonight, but it would be sort of like a
very short lamp post with a sign that hangs over <inaudible>.
Muller - And you would regulate that in your...
Kennemer - Yes, it would be part of our regulations.
Muller - Explain what is high-end finish. What materials are those?
Kennemer - Those would be masonry products. It'd be stone, brick, glass,
stucco, I mean it would be similar to...
Muller - Because some of the renditions and pictures you showed actually
showed marble, in some of the pictures in the booklet we received and I don't
think that is what you are referring to.
Kennemer - I'd have to see which picture you're referring to that's marble.
Muller - Well, there's some in the, they looked like they were building renditions
you'd see in France, Paris. They looked like they were about five stories instead
of three in one of the booklets here that you handed us.
Kennemer - We didn't envision any of these to be marble. These would be
stone, brick, masonry, wrought iron work, and then a certain amount of glass.
Mayor Andy Wambsganss - Any EFIS? I know we've had a real issue with
EFIS.
Kennemer - We've agreed not to use EFIS anywhere on our project.
Wambsganss - Okay, and stucco. Which portion, if we're looking at this, would
be stucco versus cast stone or brick?
Kennemer - I'd have to refer to my architect. Anybody want to help me from
Carter and Burgess... <inaudible>
Deputy Mayor Pro Tern Gregory Jones - At the very least, you're either going to
have masonry or your going to have true stucco. Correct?
Kennemer - That is correct.
Jones - Alright. There's no EFIS. Which to me is probably the most important
thing in terms of the quality.
Wambsganss - That is. I just think for, I know, if this moves forward tonight,
there'll be another reading, but if you can kind of identify that, because I think
expansive walls of stucco would kind of take away from that rich look. And then,
one of the real criticisms of a lot of the brownstones has been the siding that was
used on the back, and I'm assuming there's no siding or hardy board.
Kennemer - No siding.
Wambsganss - Okay. Sorry to interrupt you Pam.
Muller - The parking garage, are you planning to dedicate that to the City in the
future? In the commercial area?
Kennemer - The city? Not really. I sense the City probably did not want us to do,
to dedicate the parking garage to the City. We can have those discussions if
that's something the City would like.
Muller - No, the City wouldn't like that. I just wanted to be sure. You brought it
up and that has been an issue here in Town Square.
Kennemer - Sure and let me clarify one other point, too. In terms of the parks
that we show, we've agreed to maintain those through the property owner's
association even if the City chooses to accept dedication.
Muller - And the fountain? Would that be part of the park dedication?
Kennemer - Yes.
Wambsganss - Relating to the maisons, talk about the square footage, the price
points, so forth.
Kennemer - Certainly, the building pads are 32 feet by 89 feet. So these will
handle large, large units. We're envisioning most of the units to be in the 2,800
s.f. to 3,800 s.f. range, although, we have the ability to build them bigger. Same
with the lofts. That is really the range we are anticipating the market to want, but
we could certainly build them bigger.
Councilmember Vernon Stansell - Are you willing to stipulate a minimum?
Kennemer - Certainly.
Stansell - 2,800?
Kennemer - 2,800.
Wambsganss - What is your anticipated price?
Kennemer - The sales price for the maisons and the lofts are anticipated, again
this would be just a one-floor loft. It would obviously be more if someone bought
two. But would be in the $600,000 to $950,000 range.
Stansell - So about $200 a foot?
Kennemer - Yes.
Stansell - While we're on that topic, not to take the Mayor off his stride there, but
what would be the minimum size for the structures on the 45 by 110s?
Kennemer - 2,700 square feet.
Stansell - Want to stipulate 2,800?
Kennemer - Yes, we would be willing to stipulate 2,800 s.f..
Jones - That's on the 45 by 110?
Kennemer - That's correct.
Jones - One of the things, in visiting with some of the neighbors that surround,
and I'm happy to report in my business with them they've indicated, at least the
folks that I met with, indicated they really do support the overall project. Their
concerns were addressing some specific concerns that they had in different
areas. But to me the good news was that they felt like the project overall was
good and your company is a fine company. So I think those are positive things.
One of the things that's been raised is a question and I've visited with you about
it a little bit, is the issue of construction entrances. And one of the things I was
going to ask you was if we could basically set for Carroll Avenue, in particular,
because Carroll Avenue has our elementary school on it, if we could basically set
aside Carroll Avenue and agree that there will not be any construction traffic on
Carroll Avenue? And then, in a like manner, from, as we look at this drawing
that's up here now, the plan that's here now, over on White's Chapel if we could
also have an agreement that there will be no construction traffic that will circulate
up north on White's Chapel past your, past the Kirkwood entrance right there? So
that trucks aren't going to be going up White's Chapel and over on Dove and that
type of thing. And try to focus construction entrance activity on 114 and on the
lower part of White's Chapel. Have you had a chance to look at that and see if
that's a possibility?
Kennemer - We would agree to that. We would agree to prohibit construction
traffic to come in on Carroll and I certainly understand why residents in Estes
Park would not want any traffic through their neighborhood. We would certainly
do that.
Jones - Thank you. Another point in sort of addressing the schools here a little
bit is over on Carroll Avenue you have a trail that comes down from the north
along Carroll Avenue and it comes down to your entrance there, and then it
winds its way through the woods, and I noticed, intended to be part of the trail
system and I think the part that winds through the woods you definitely want to
keep that. What I would ask is if you would continue a sidewalk coming down
along Carroll Avenue so that school children could use it if necessary. Bring it
down Carroll Avenue to the point, and Ken, maybe you can help me with this.
That's Whispering Lane over there, is it?
Baker - The sidewalk on Johnson extends north on the Johnson side of the east
side of Carroll there's a sidewalk that extends north to Whispering Lane.
Jones - Okay, so if we can bring that sidewalk down at least as far as your
property runs down there, I think in talking with Ken Baker a little bit, that we
would have a good chance of being able to finish up whatever sidewalk is
necessary so that there is good access to Johnson Elementary coming down that
road. Would you be willing to do that?
Kennemer - We would.
Jones - Another issue that has been raised is the drainage and I know I've had a
chance to visit with you about that a little bit, but actually we talked on many
occasions. And I might point out to people who are here that we have been
engaged in this now for probably going on eight months now of a lot of
discussion a lot of visitation here. One of the things I spoke to our Public Works
Director a little while ago about this, but I wondered if, Bob, in terms of some of
the concerns that have been raised regarding drainage. One of the things I was
pleased to hear was that, first of all, you've been engaged with Hines and have
talked to them for quite a while, have you not?
Director Bob Price - Yes, sir.
Jones - How long you have you been discussing this stuff with them?
Price - We have been meeting with the Hines Group and their engineers, Jacobs
Carter Burgess, for six to eight months.
Jones - Okay, in terms of your working with them, I mean, are there any
outstanding issues right now that are concerned relating to drainage?
Price - None at this point. We are in the entitlement phase and generally a
preliminary amount of engineering goes in at this point. When we move into,
once the entitlements are granted, should they be granted, then we move into a
final engineering design phase and that's the time at which we start looking very
closely at the computer models. Generally speaking, I do have to say that the
Hines Group has done more preliminary engineering at this point than is usually
done at the entitlement phase. They have run several hydraulic models and have
done the more work at this point than is usually done. Usually that work takes
place during the final engineering.
Jones - And I think, actually, this got raised sometime ago by Councilman Terrell
and I know that Councilman Terrell had made a real point of wanting to see some
what we call regional detention and regional drainage issues being addressed by
the Hines Group and did they do that?
Price - Yes, sir they did and just to give you a little background. Several years
ago the City employed the firm of KSA to put together a Master Drainage Plan
and in that plan it called for 43 acre feet of regional detention in this area. At that
time that report refers to it as the Aventerra tract, which was the previous owner.
That 43 acre feet actually is indicated in and is inclusive of the development that
we're looking at here this evening.
Jones - Okay, what type of drainage are they anticipating here?
Price - As I said the KSA report indicates 43 acre feet being required of regional
detention. The Jacobs Carter Burgess Hines development that we are looking at
today is proposing 60 acre feet that is in excess of that 43 acre feet that is
required.
Mayor Pro Tern John Terrell - Councilmember Jones, I think at our last meeting
too, the applicant has agreed they won't do anything less than 60 acre feet, and I
think that should be part of any kind of motion that, if we get to that point.
Jones - I think, so that was already agreed to last meeting then? You're going to
stick with that?
Kennemer - We were. We agreed to stick to 60 acre feet if we could keep the
plan reasonably in tact.
Stansell - So are you qualifying your answer then?
Kennemer - No, I'm not qualifying my answer. There hasn't been any decision
made on number of residential units, so what I said in the last meeting is that we
would certainly be willing to keep it at 60 acre feet as long as the number of
residential units was something we could still bear. There is some point at which
the units will become so few that we will have to utilize some of the other land.
Jones - At this point, though, with what we're dealing with now you're committed
to it?
Kennemer - This plan we're committed to 60 acre feet, yes sir.
Jones - And you'll let us know if that changes?
Kennemer - Yes, sir.
Jones -Okay, good. Alright.
Terrell - Let me back up to the, there's so many different things to talk about.
What are your plans, if for instance, I know all of your plans show a performing
arts center in this area with fountains, and there was some discussion that you
would donate land for that performing arts center?
Kennemer - That is correct.
Terrell - What if that performing arts doesn't happen here? What is your plan and
two, are the fountains and things you've shown in front of that center still going to
happen with some other development of that particular building? Would it be
moved? What I don't want to do is necessarily base a plan on something we
haven't even talked to citizens about and that's a fairly sizable cost. I don't know
if we're going to be able to move as fast as you or if that would even occur at that
location. We just can't say that is going to happen at this point, so what is the
plan? What's the alternative?
Kennemer - Okay, if this is the performing arts center right here, you can see the
retail here in front of the hotel. The hotel was designed to be in close proximity.
If the performing art, this is about a 2 'h acre site here, including some parking for
the performing arts center. If the performing arts center, and we would want there
to be some type of time stipulation. That would be critical to the success of our
development. We're willing to have discussions with Apex and the City to
determine the exact duration of that time frame, but at some point if it looked as if
though the City was not going to be able to, or Apex or some partnership of both
develop the performing arts center we would use this particular site as additional
retail, that would be... we might reconfigure this pad site, but it would add to our
retail configuration.
In terms of the fountain, if there is not going to be a performing arts center there
we would like the flexibility, we would like flexibility to look at potentially an
alternate location for where that would be best located.
Terrell - This is a very small issue to maybe many, but I think a big issue for al
least one of the residents, Mr. Boudreaux who lives over on Carroll Avenue.
There's evidently a bridge that I walked with him. That is an old, dilapidated
bridge on the south side of his house that goes back to Carroll Avenue. What is
your plan on that bridge? It can't support a vehicle, it is pretty much falling down.
The water is eroding away underneath it and it has also eroded away into the
bank of his area. What is your plan, too, for the outfall of the water in that lake?
Is that going to go down into that creek that is right behind his house or is it going
to outfall to that north end?
Kennemer - This lake?
Terrell - Uh-huh.
Kennemer - I would like to ask my engineering firm to answer that question.
Paul McCracken - Paul McCracken with Jacobs, 7950 Elmbrook in Dallas. We
are in our preliminary designs. We are intending to have the outlet structure for
that lake further north. There's a draw that occurs further north and that is the
location for it.
Terrell - From what you know of the outlet flow the water goes through that
creek. Is that going to alleviate some of the erosion issues along the backside of
Mr. Boudreaux's property based on that creek?
McCracken - Yeah, the area that is draining into that lake is a whole lot more
than what is showing up on that screen. It goes a considerable distance up 114
and that area will be routed into these lakes, so the fact that it will be routing into
lakes and release essentially upstream, or downstream of this property, I don't
know the amounts that it would have to reduce what he's seeing right there
adjacent to his property essentially taking it around.
Terrell - Okay.
McCracken - Does that answer your question?
Terrell - I think that helps me at least on the drainage side of it, but I've still got
the question on the bridge structure itself, because that's...
McCracken - Is it on your land <inaudible>
Terrell - It looks like it's on your land.
McCracken - We don't have a use for it.
Kennemer - We don't have a use for it.
Terrell - Will you take that down?
Kennemer - We would.
Jones - While he's writing that one thing, I did want to make clear also, Bob, if
you would just reiterate that any final, before there can be any construction, the
City of Southlake engineering department has to give it's final approval on all
these issues. Correct?
Price - Yes, sir. Generally speaking in most developments we go through a
series of reviews. The design engineer will submit plans. We will review those.
We will also probably use a third party consultant to subsidize our review to make
sure we vet all issues. And then once we come to a conclusion, agreement upon
those we will release them for construction.
Jones - And that will include the drainage issues?
Price - Yes, definitely it will include the drainage issues.
Jones - Do you know at this time who you will plan to use for your...
Price - We have been using third party consultant firm of Teague, Nall and
Perkins for approximately the last year and a half.
Jones - Alright.
Terrell - I've got a few more questions, especially on the commercial side too,
before we get into some of the other areas of the residential. This plans changed
considerably, especially over on the White's Chapel side. It appears there's a lot
more pads, individual pads, instead of longer buildings. I want to make sure of a
couple things. You're agreeable to no fast food restaurants. Right?
Kennemer - Yes.
Terrell - There will be no drive-thru restaurants?
Kennemer - That is correct.
Terrell - How do you envision these, it's kind of a unique alignment of buildings
up the east side of White's Chapel. How do you..
Kennemer - These?
Terrell - All the way up, yeah, along there. Right.
Kennemer - We had a discussion with City staff about this. They were concerned
about the appearance of massing, really wanted it to appear there was continuity
and massing along White Chapel. As you can see, we came back after our
meeting with City staff, and we, we would be willing to put some type of wall
structure, to give that continuity of appearance between the various units.
Stansell - So while he's making his notes there. Just to confirm, we're sitting up
here with two different plans, but you're referring now to the one that's labeled
"Alternative Plaza District Layout Plan."
Kennemer - Yes, sir. That's correct.
Stansell - And that is what you're asking us to consider?
Kennemer - Yes, sir.
Councilmember Laura Hill - I just had an amenity question. Obviously this plan
has gone through a lot of changes and one of the disappointments I've heard
comment about is the corner of White Chapel and 114. That area that started
out to be a welcoming point to your development has shrunk and shrunk and
shrunk. Now that I see the separation of the pad sites it even has the appearance
that corner...
Kennemer - Are you talking about this corner right here?
Hill - Yeah. It started out as an amenity corner and it's really, it doesn't look the
same as it started out, that's for sure. So, do you have anything to show us as to
what that will actually look like, because all the information you've given us, it's
quite a focal point but it doesn't look like it will be anymore?
Kennemer - In the development book there's a rendering of how this particular
area is envisioned to look. We will have a little amenity feature. It's going to sort
of welcome people in to Carillon. I might ask Emily Drake, are you here, do you
want to make a comment? What is envisioned for the entry feature?
Emily Drake - If you take a look at the previous plan, I think you guys have both
in front of you, you'll see that the building layout between the two, as far as there
locations on the plan are fairly similar at that corner. The actual monument that's
located at the corner here, hasn't changed in size in what you see in the two
plans. The monument itself is the exact same size, and we're still incorporating a
25 foot buffer along State Highway 114 with berming and a meandering trail, as
well. What we had initially envisioned and what's in the booklet is a masonry
type wall with that has the entry signage on it "Carillon." And I can find the exact
page in the book in which that's located, if you guys need that page number to
refer to. It also incorporates some trees and some accent planting into the
design as well, and the possibility, in the center of that piece is a focal point,
some public art.
Councilmember Virginia Muzyka - I know you've got a lot of parking that will be
seen.
Drake - There is, there has been a parking field, a small two-bay parking field
that's been added for that piece of retail there, I'm sorry, I keep pointing, I should
use the cursor. This little piece of retail here does have parking in this location.
Previously, there was one bay of parking. And so there is a double bay of parking
now. But this piece here does have some green space intact with it as well as the
buffer along 114 and the buffer along White Chapel that continues north.
Muzyka - Do you anticipate the parking will be behind vegetation, berming, or
something?
Drake - Yes. Yes. Everything along 114 in the corporation district and the plaza
district contains a 25 foot landscape buffer that has berming and planting to
buffer that parking from 114.
Kennemer - You can see too, really, that this particular area here has really been
expanded upon to really be a beautiful entry feature as well.
Stansell - And I, 1 hear what you're saying and I appreciate the 25 foot buffer and
the berming and all that. I want to make sure we're real clear, we have been from
day one. We don't want to see any parking from 114.
Drake - That's correct. We understand that.
Stansell - Why did, so you reconfigured the retail because staff suggested that?
Why did you reconfigure?
Kennemer - We reconfigured the retail, and I let, if it's ok I'll have Steve Chilton
come up with Opus. I'll allow him explain in greater detail some of the thought
behind breaking up the parking garage and reconfiguring some of the retail.
Stansell - That'd be helpful. Thanks.
Steve Chilton - Steve Chilton with Opus West, 15455 North Dallas Parkway,
Addison, Texas. We've done a number of these lifestyle type projects across the
U.S. and have studied them and Europe and looked at the most successful
projects. Looked at some projects that worked. And what we really, with our
architects and our design staff, have felt that the original plan with the big central
garage was just really too disjointed. There was no sense of pedestrian access,
community feel, avenues, boulevards. It was just basically a big box which you
would have to circumvent around it and not very pedestrian friendly. By breaking
up the parking structure into two parking structures, you can see right here and
right here. It allowed us to bring in this major entrance plaza area up in here and
then have continuous pedestrian access all the way up through the project along
with the east west corridor that was originally planned and saved. So, we think
our retail here and these buildings here will thrive with the pedestrian access all
through this area, and likewise because of the proximity of the garages spread
out we will better to service these other buildings on the peripheral as well.
Stansell - So basically for flow.
Chilton - Flow, yeah.
Terrell - Let me comment on that because and again, I'm going to have to ask
staff to also help me out because I have one plan that is called "Revised
Development Plan" and it's not the same thing. And I have one plan called the
"Alternative Plaza District Layout Plan."
Baker - The plan that the applicant is asking us to consider is the one that was
handed out, it's dated September 15.
Terrell - The one that is stamped?
Baker - Yes.
Wambsganss - It's "Revised Development Plan" but it's got the Alternative Plaza
District on it.
Terrell - Ok.
Baker - Just for clarification, when the two plans submitted in your packet, one
was called the Existing Plan and one was called the Alternative Plan it came in
the Monday before we had to send out the packet. When we saw that we made
some comments regarding the commercial along White Chapel and our
comments were basically the retail is now looked like individual pad sites and
there was quite a bit of space between the buildings. The intent of the EC, and
that would be in the "Alternative Plan", the intent of the EC district is to create a
pedestrian environment to frame that pedestrian area and to make it more
inviting. In the interim between the initial two plans that are submitted, the
applicant has gone back and made some revisions based on some of our
comments on the alternative development plan which was presented to you this
evening. Staff has not reviewed this plan but the applicant is asking to consider
the plan that is on the slide.
Terrell - Okay, that is what I wanted to make sure of. Staff has not reviewed the
one that is stamped September 15?
Baker - That is correct. We received that late yesterday afternoon.
Terrell - Let me ask the applicant then, the applicant's idea to, and I understand
your thoughts about the plaza in there and separating from one garage to two for
flow, but what was the thought process for separating into individual pad sites all
along the White's Chapel and let me continue with this thought. The way you
have the earlier plan is totally on this hard corner in what now has been created
appears to be probably a restaurant pad that seems to be kind of pulled out and
separated. Part of this whole kind of PUD concept is to make this into a
development that's very cohesive. What that restaurant does is it now pulls out
parking on this hard corner pad and it looks like it is going to be kind of a
separate stand alone building on the hard corner, not really incorporated into the
rest and creating a feel for that corner. Now what we're getting is something
considerably different from just the look and feel as you come up there. I will tell
you I don't like it in terms of that restaurant pad on that hard corner. I much prefer
the way you had, whether you go with two parking garages or one for flow, that
needs to feel like it's all together and I don't get that feel on the hard corner at the
moment.
Hill - Right. And that's where my comments came from on that corner, because
that corner was really highlighted and now you surrounded it by smaller pad sites
it really takes away. And added parking on top of that to that corner.
Terrell - And before you respond, let me just say another thing. I also realize this
is to 285 acres. Normally, this would come in small sections and we would be
looking at each one of these buildings very closely. We've got one shot to make
sure this entire thing is right, so while we may appear to be..
Hill - nitpicking
Terrell - on these things. We would be nitpicking each one of these with separate
developers. We're really, once we kind of, if we end up getting you something out
here, that's pretty much it. Then you're going to be able to go in and do what we
have given you the ok to do. It's now that we've got to put on whatever criteria we
need in terms looks, feels and everything else and so take it for what it is. We
are having to look at this in considerable detail. This is a big project.
Muzyka - One more question in that particular corridor. The last building on the
north side looks like you've added a drive-thru or something onto the building.
The last pink building as you go up to Kirkwood Boulevard. It wasn't on there
before.
Hill - Is that a bank? Imagine that.
Muzyka - Is it for a bank? It wasn't there on this one.
Kennemer - I would let the designer address that. We really could see a financial
institution or two intermingled in the project. The comment to drive-thrus I've
agreed we wouldn't do that. That just might be an error design there.
Terrell - Do you have a picture of the old retail that we can look at? Because I
think when you look at the just prior plan, while you may be able to do a few
things to make it flow better. It had a sense of everything was together. It was
part of one retail, restaurant, commercial type development. What you've just
now proposed is a bunch of individual pad sites up all along White's Chapel and
along frontage on 114 Service Road, which is an entirely different feel than those
buildings all being together. Everybody else jump in if you disagree, but I just get
a different feel from this new plan.
Chilton - Let me back up and give you the 1,000 foot aerial shot of how we view
the retail, the users and the come in and answer some of these questions. When
Hines developed this project they really did a very good job in the massing and
the amount of office and retail in the commercial district. We came in and wanted
to massage it and tweak it to make it more pedestrian feeling and create a sense
of place. We did market studies. We think there's probably close to 300,000
square feet of retail that's being developed here. In that 300,000 square feet we
could conceivably see as much as 40-50% of that retail in being restaurants. I
mean large, nice, exclusive, high end sit down restaurants. In talking to these
folks, they all have individual building identities that they like to maintain. They
like to have outdoor seating areas. Putting some breaks in those buildings
allowing for the outdoor seating areas versus having them on the sidewalk street
sides. Having space between the buildings as well, allowing us to enhance that
through hardscape and landscape. We also, are from this plan, if you look at the
hard corner there, we've got a single row of parking next to the retail, so you're
seeing the buildings there. That's nice, but you don't see anything beyond, if
your on that hard corner, you don't see anything beyond that first building. With
the way we have the pads there we have u-corridors into the projects that you
can look in and see several different layers of retail in here for us to go and
experience.
Stansell - In candor, there's lots of developments that have continuous form,
including the one you're standing in and are still pedestrian friendly. My concern,
and I think some of the other members concern is, I agree with John completely,
this is just a bunch of pad sites. It is in no way related to what we were originally
shown.
Chilton - We can certainly stack all of the buildings together, maybe get a couple
of breaks in there for patio seating areas.
Jones - I don't mean to interrupt, but if you take a minute and go over to Central
Market and so on, and you see the way they have done their buildings. They
have areas that they have built in where you can have outdoor seating or you
can have that, but they still maintain sort of a continuous look. I don't really
understand how breaking this into individual pads, and I don't see sidewalks
there, but maybe they are in the front I suppose, but I don't understand how that
makes it more pedestrian friendly to separate things as opposed to having them
together. I think you get the sense of what we all want to avoid and what we all
want to not see happen is have a bunch of individual pad sites where you're
selling them off one after another. Not that you can't sell off individual pad sites,
but at least your bringing it together in a way that is more cohesive and it has a
look to it that is less of what you see as the standard sort of commercial look as
you drive down the street to Grapevine and you see one restaurant pad after
another, whether it's Chili's, Macaroni Grill, or whatever.
Chilton - I see yall's comments and your points, and we can certainly pull several
of those buildings together, do some massing of several of those buildings
together, but at the same time still having some space in between a few of them,
if for nothing else for view corridors and a sense of place.
Stansell - You can accommodate that and get where we want to be, too.
Wambsganss - And Town Square for the most part has been that continuous,
you can have a couple of premium stand alones also. Just go down Grand
Avenue and you got a Truluck's stand alone, but I think just a row of potential
restaurants isn't the vision.
Chilton - We want to be sensitive to the restaurateurs' sense of identity at the
same time creating a sense of place for the entire development and it's very...
When we look at a plan like this and we show a bunch of buildings, it's almost
like an unanchored strip center from a retailer's perspective. Ok, this guy gets an
end cap and this guy gets an end cap and I'm in the middle of a basically a strip
retail thing here...
Terrell - Let me tell you one thing ends up like a strip retail, we're going to have
some problems. For you to even say that...
Chilton - We understand. I'm just taking about an aerial site plan looking down
on it and selling off the site plan. The guys that end up in the middle of that
space, if we got a Three Forks, we've got a space right here between these two
retailers there going to get lost in the sense of identity.
Terrell - Let me say, too...l know when we review these on smaller projects.
Right now we are just focused on the retail and commercial corner. In order for
us to get a good feel for what's it going to look like. We need some visuals. And
right now it's very difficult for us to see what your thinking about this looks like
with an overhead shot of some brown squares on paper. We're going to have to
have a lot more information to move this forward and make motions that say this
is going to look like "x". And we just now get this one separated and to be quite
honest with you it's a little surprising at the last minute to get these separate pad
sites, which is not something I've been looking at, and have these discussion and
to not get something at the minimum a rendering of what your concept of these
individual sites would like to from down the street. From overhead, that just looks
like, you've got a bank, you got an individual restaurant, one or two little
individual retail sites, and then to the Mayor's comment about Truluck's. Yes,
Truluck's is a stand alone separate pad, but it is integrated into the project. The
street that runs from the hotel to the theater runs right in front of it and its pushed
up to the street just like the rest of them. The restaurant you have out here on the
hard corner, is separate stand alone and is not part of the rest of the
development. You haven't incorporated it into the rest of the development. It's
basically a pad site for a big restaurant. You can have some of those look good,
but that is not what we were, at least not what I was expecting to see on the
corner. I was looking for something that has been previously submitted which
was an overall development concept that brings all of it together, not individual
sites in a commercial pad.
Jones - Part of the concern, I'm agreeing with John here, part of the concern is
when you came in and presented this as part of the Carillon development, it
would have this French flavor to it and so on. Now if Three Forks comes into it
and they want to have their own brand on it, there going to want to have their
own building look to it, I'm guessing it is not going to have a whole of French
flavor to it. Not that that is necessarily horrible, but you are going to start loosing
that character and identity that you were trying to create initially. Your having
these streetscapes that you were showing us in these initial photographs that
flavor and look to it. I agree with John, I need to have some sense of what your
talking about doing with some of these other sites. If they are separated, give us
some sense of how they are connected and what the connectedness is and what
the architectural standards are going to be for those buildings so we know what
we're getting.
Chilton - From an elevations standpoint and materials were not varying in any
way from what was presented to you initially. We are wholly buying into that
concept and we will set our store front standards and architectural standards and
sign standards to reflect all of that.
Terrell - Even from what was originally presented, there's not a whole lot of
detail. There is one page that shows some renderings, but usually when you
come in with a plan, and I took that as your initial idea give us a general idea of
what it's going to look like.
Chilton - Concept Plan
Terrell - Right, but we're going to need something more than that if we're going
to approve this long term and you go out and build it we've got to have a lot more
details. I realize it's early, but we can have some significant more information and
renderings that will help us get comfortable with it. I think your going to do a
great project and I know Hines is very qualified, but we've got to have it on paper
so later on, three years from now when all of us have forgotten what has
happened in the meetings we can point back at a piece of paper and say this is
what we all agreed on, and that's what I'm look for just so we don't have
discussions later that we had confusion, that we had misunderstandings, we got
something on paper that says this is what it was supposed to look like.
Muzyka - And on that same vein, on the corner of White Chapel and 114 you
made a significant difference to me in changing that up with the pad sites, but yet
the one we got today, not the one from yesterday, you've got all the open spaces
taken care of that you've done a little bit of difference to shown them and
everything, but nothing is done on that one, and I think it should have been
considering the changes that were made. It may look the same on that little
corner, but it's not really the same. Giving us one of these on that corner would
be good too.
Chilton - Sure.
Jones - Along those same lines, and Mr. Kennemer you and I have spoken
about this, but one of the things we have done in the past, and were looking
forward to hopefully doing in this situation, maybe would address some of these
other issues having to detail with details, you are in the process of creating
CCR's, Covenants and Restrictions, things of that nature, and architectural
guidelines that would relate to the various districts. Correct? And I assume would
relate to the commercial districts as well, would they not?
Kennemer - We have CC&R's that relate to the residential and design guidelines
that <inaudible>
Jones - Okay, I understand. And one of the things that I had asked of you was
that I would like to go over and see those. What we've done in the past is take
those guidelines and as we look at those we then incorporate them into the
zoning ordinance for the site so it becomes a part of the zoning. With regards to
that, obviously we don't have those tonight, but is there some way you can give
us a sense of what those guidelines are, for example, so that people who are
sitting here want to understand the quality you guys are going to put into,
especially these residential units. Is there some way we can see that so we can
take a look at it and see what it is?
Kennemer - We can create the CC&Rs for<inaudible>
Jones - Okay.
Wambsganss - Let me give my impressions. I know we been two three weeks
now focusing on drainage, impact on schools, impact on roads all that and ya'll
have made good progress in that direction and I know there are those in the
community who think you've done well in that regard, others who don't think
you've done enough, but I would say 95% of the focus has been on that. Kind of
for us to get yesterday, a substantial change in the retail and there are still details
to come, but I really don't know that we're in a good position tonight to be able to
evaluate the overall plan with that big of a change in the plaza district coming in
right now. Obviously, throw that out to Council, but that's kind of where we are at
tonight. I don't know that we're really in a position to move the ball forward giving
kind of where we're at.
Terrell - I would tend to agree. I do think we ought to talk about some of the
residential side while we've got everybody here. So that everyone has an
opportunity to speak. I know there has been a lot of planning and discussions, I
think we ought to at least, I think you got pretty clear indication on the
commercial retail side, but we're going to have some more discussion there and
maybe look at some more pictures, but I think we ought to at least address some
of the residential.
Wambsganss - I don't disagree. Only thing I only do want to do in deference to
everyone's time. Where we are going tonight, I think this item is going to be
tabled regardless of what the residential issues are but in order to get a clearer
view of the plaza district and get a feel for where this has evolved and is still
evolving in a sense. Anyway, with that being said, any other questions of the
developer's right now? I'd like to get to the citizen's comments. This isn't a public
hearing because we have to get through a couple of readings, so I would like to
keep the process moving fairly quickly tonight. Mr. Stansell?
Stansell - I just had a couple of quick follow-ons here. For the maisons, just
confirm through your presentation floors two and three cannot be accessed from
the garage, directly from the owner's garage, they have to go out into a common
entry.
Ken nemer - That is correct.
Stansell - Giving the economic times we are in, what part of the development
and I know you talked about this months ago, just out of curiosity, what part of
the overall development has firm commitments in place? If you can say.
Kennemer - Certainly, we have the...Opus West has committed to the retail
piece of this project. Hines has committed to, this is all under contract, Hines
Office Group will build the office part of the project. We are in the process of
gathering together our builders for the residential. We are still pulling all that
together to get it under contract, but all aspects of the project are going well at
this point.
Stansell - That's all.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Wambsganss - allowed the public to speak
Wambsganss - read through the comment cards from people who did not wish to
speak
Terrell - I would personally like a copy of the Power point presentations that
made by the folks this evening because I didn't have time to take down all the
notes and I want to make sure I didn't miss anything so if I could get a copy of
that I would appreciate it.
Wambsganss - Any other questions or comments?
Muller - I just have a comment to make. Again, what I'm hearing is that
everybody is in support of Hines and of this development. The biggest concern is
the density. For myself personally, though, and I think some people agree that I
have a lot of problems with these maisons. They call them lofts or offices. The
bottom line and it's been stated here, we don't have control that they are just
owner occupied. That they are basically just a type of apartment and I personally
cannot support those at all. I will look at other mixtures but as far as the town
homes and these lofts...
Terrell - Just one more comment, too, I know that the residents have indicated
an interest in getting with Hines and I certainly encourage that. I think there has
been some meetings. I think there has been some concern that the meetings
may have occurred a little late. I think everyone going forward needs to have
good intentions in mind. The developer is not going to want to meet with
residents if basically you are going in with a demand list and everything you are
wanting and there is no bend and/or no discussion. Why meet if all you are going
to do get harassed and banged about the head with a bat. But I would also
encourage the Hine folks to sit down and really have open dialogue and
discussion about this development. If I'm available, I am happy to meet as well
as I have offered in the past. But I would encourage it to be real discussion and
not something where you just go in and beat up on the developer where you
have him 50 to 1. So, those are all my comments.
Wambsganss - Okay, anything further? If not, do I have a motion?
Terrell - Mayor, I'd like to move we table Ordinance No. 480-564 until the next
regularly scheduled Council meeting.
Muzyka - Second - tabled 7-0
Carillon Southlake
Parks & Open Space Calculation
previous
revised
dev. plan
dev. plan
# of acres
# of acres
(08.11.08)
(09.08.08)
difference
Parks
Village Green
2.75
2.74
0.01
Corporate Park
10.50
10.53
0.03
Lake Park
24 50
24.37
0.13
Neighborhood Park
3.04
3.46
0.42
Tree Preserve
4.69
3 09
1.60
Northwest Enclave Park
0.54
0.54
0 00
Villa Park i
0 60
1 02
0.42
Villa Park ii
0.37
0.22
0.15
Pocket Parks (2)
0.15
0.28
013
Amenity Center
0.58
0.76
0.18
Open Space
Open Space (publicly accessible)
18.28
14 55
3.73
Total
66.00
61.56
4.44
23%
22%
ZA~~'
J f:.l J, 9 0 Or U
cu
2 r : o 00 y A C
3 O _ O j .4 V cq ,:,.0 g
bn 8 c . . � = e• b E "' '2 a; M -
0 0 .+ - O y on c vi o ON o p,
• 'Q to = S~ bn a) c� 2 > - 3 y
O O O O to E s ' s... O
tin "—' = mt a) 'O +� '—'
'- V, .� U . >, O v)
Z a) bn r i.. M U s. .�
00
O r O U
. o v o ai 'O 8
43 a) ^ 0 y c;: = • 0 O Q
a) '-5' 42 a) •
� U o 3 .0 - ❑ 3 0„ O a ,
O O N C cci g A . o c'S Y aj
E— o = - c o y > 6 W «� '.
3 ° o > \ '
' ('' \
ii__. I
1
is J 1 1
4
CO I
C
in w
( __ o
(T) o g' /
o
. w w
n
1}
87 — N a O # 1
,, _ e,„,i . N.
_ w �i
o o b ct
.) a
a
l
r1
gill v
r ; t t 1 t
ejj
•
•
Sidewalk r
J Front Facade Zone
I
b I = O
�-+
6 Ii b Porch i �, I y
r,
• C ° o I b d .. an • -.
� � y 1 0 P `� w I , q v Q
3 t ° ww po cii
v
a > a, a O
v cc n v) • O 1-1 0 ...
o
°�' I q � a o ° ' O
w q, v J, w = F �, O > ai
di i 1 O Q
-- . a , CD'
1 1 I, te Q
�. , Q O
_._ -._.- a .-ti
t i —
OM Alley r 4 I v
t d
41) r) — 3/4)
... ... ... ... .e. — — — — ir.....2 =1 1 1 . 1 , 2 7' '2
DOZ d
L
1 R
r�g r ' , . f -
t.. 1 v) , .E c
-eit-PC ,
r 3 � 3
a
a)
/ ..—,.
a)
0 0
1 y 0 0 a) v .v)
.
^ J > 4. a)
r. a N
a cu
'' .� >
c-A b "d
- cn .
f-' 0 c �V N � ...0 i i .-ti
W ° r o
+-, p er L______ • �' O
\ (, ' g E
>, >, co
3 3
a) a,
> >
1. > >,
d ,,e)
itiCil '
N
II r', I I r y
Y
Q]
ct
3 °3
1
0
0
■i■J 4...I /, . a ''..- -4—)
O f 3
�r N
la cn N n �I . vl O
, a7 a>i b O M > O
a ` " ' ~ - w
E . C7 N �I u v M
, �I
a) O • Ili O 0
›, \ ›,
ct co
y. >
Q Q
i
r � r N
� 1� d "`
N
p Y
a) L1, �, cd V V] s. i.,
U 0 CL O M ' O . o C= p .L". [C
O O v O G> - - = c � = 0 ^ _,
• C s., a) c� aJ E 0 o > M �
'� a) a) 0 0 O cn 0 — ° c �\ ,\
10 ,
O o c . `\
.�
3 ° = — o 3 -o v )
ct
> 0 o -o Ti > a) > 0 fl.
al CD 0 U
° O .-6 O °
v O p O `� 'O O ° O
, R,.,.r, ,k � =:�,u.._ �,s, . .., ...- _.., , . , � � r:., ...• � _. �_...... INE