Loading...
Item 6A CC Transcript (2)City Council Carillon Discussion Between Applicant and City Council October 7, 2008 (notes requested by Mayor Pro Tem John Terrell) Director Ken Baker – Presented item Applicant, Jeff Kennemer – Good evening Honorable Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Jeff Kennemer. I’m with Hines Interest. Our business resides at 5215 North O’Connor Boulevard in Las Colinas. What I’d like to do this evening instead of going to and spend a lot of time talking about what we’ve talked about before, I’d like to go back to the 9-16 Council meeting and rehash what was agreed to. Ken already touched on that. We agreed to extend the sidewalk along Carroll through the lake park. We agreed to restrict the construction traffic from entering Carillon except from 114 or except from White Chapel up to Kirkwood. We agreed to restrict the size of the villas and the maisons to 2800 sf minimum. We agreed to expand the area for the Carillon entry feature at State Highway 114 and White Chapel. We agreed to provide continuous massing for the retail along White Chapel and provide renderings of what that would look like and we’ll do that in just a moment. We agreed to provide architectural controls as part of the development plan and we’ll also be going over that this evening. Since our meeting, I met with Mr. Boudreaux and talked about his concern with regard to the parking area that was in the lake park south of his property. After that discussion, we agreed to move that parking lot, as Ken showed you, to the north end of the lake park. Real quickly, we already went over this, but, before the parking lot was here and we moved it up to here. Since the last City Council meeting, we were encouraged to meet with the neighborhood groups that had concerns regarding our project. We’ve done that. We met with them at length one evening and have had follow up conversations as well. I wanted to point out really several areas that came about as a result of some of those conversations. Areas that we would like to talk about this evening. One of the dialogues dealt with looking at alternatives to increasing the lot sizes of some of the lots in the chateaux district. As we’ve talked about before, we’ve really got three lot types in the chateaux district. All of these lots are estate lots as well as this row along the northern boundary. The estate lots range in size from .37 acres to the largest which is right here, it is .71 acres. A lot of the lots are .36 acres about 25% are oversized and run in that range from .36 to .71. The second lot type is the lake lots which border the lake right here. These lots, again, some of them are oversized but the smaller ones along here are 120 X 140. Finally, the third lot product are the chateaux district lots in this area right here, these lots – the smallest are .27 acres which are 90 X 130 and there are some that go as large as .33 acres. So, in having conversations with the neighborhood groups, their concern was “How can we reduce the number of these chateaux district lots that are in this center area?” One of the ideas we had was to take one of these two parks, I chose the northern park, and by removing this park and taking that acreage and spreading it over this group of chateaux lots here, you can in essence convert those to lots that are .36 of an acre or higher, some of them were over .4 and some as high as .5. What that essentially did was it got rid of one of the two parks, but in essence converted all of these lots in the northern end to the larger estate lots. It basically converted – where before there were 146 chateaux lots, this reduced the chateaux lots down, it reduced 51 of those chateaux lots and it increased 47 of the estate lots. So that was one of the things we looked at was how can we take possibly some of the park land and convert that into lot sizes instead as a trade off. The second thing we looked at was how can we increase the size of the lake lots that front the lake park right here. One of the ideas that Hines looked into was right now our right- of-ways in the Chateaux District are 56 feet. They are 56 foot right-of-ways from here to here. That includes 32 foot from the back of the curb on one side of the street to the back of the curb on the other side of the street. It includes a 6 foot parkway right here for trees to be planted in. It includes a five foot sidewalk and then one foot up to the property line. The property line will start right here. We could, in each one of these right-of-ways, decrease the right-of-ways from 56 feet to 51 feet by reducing the back of curb to back of curb to 31 feet rather than 32 feet, by reducing the parkway from six feet to five feet, and by reducing the sidewalk from five feet to four feet. If you’ll notice, from each of the property lines out to the curb, there is another 12 feet in each of the lots. The net affect of doing all of that is by the time you do all that across four or five streets, we could pick up 20 to 25 feet that we could add to the depth of the lake lots that face the lake park. Another thing we looked at was the chateaux lots that back up to Kirkwood Boulevard that runs through here. We’ve got a significant green belt that runs in between Kirkwood Boulevard and these lots and we could cut in to some of the open space and add another 20 feet onto the lots that back up to Kirkwood Boulevard. So those are three areas that we looked at in terms of. Although it doesn’t affect the overall number of lots, it does have an impact on the lot sizes. We evaluated those three approaches. Last time we visited with City Council, we submitted this plan. As you can see, there was a break in the retail along White Chapel. We were asked to go back and relook at this plan and add massing along White Chapel as well as expand the feature area here and make it more of a dramatic entrance into our development. This is our new concept plan as Ken mentioned you can see we’ve added back the massing along White Chapel. We’ve shielded the garage and added massing back along 114. We’ve expanded the area where are entry feature is going to go right here and we were asked by Council, based on this new massing, show us what its going to look like. This is a rendering, an aerial, from the west side of White Chapel, looking across White Chapel, you can see we’ve got the continuous façade as it faces White Chapel and I’ll show you an interior picture as well. It gives the look of a continuous façade on the inside although there will be access to come into the service areas. You can see we’ve greatly expanded the entry feature. You can see the Carillon chapel tower here in the background. If you’ll look here, this is a picture coming up a little closer. The arrow kind of gives you orientation where you’re at looking at this rendering. This would be on the inside of the project looking back to the retail that is along White Chapel. This gives you a sense of the restaurants that would be along in this area, and you can see the areas out front for patio dining. This is the second picture that you can see from the air over here, this is from the west and a little bit south looking back to what the retail will look like along White Chapel and you can see the corner right here of their entry feature and I’ll show this in more detail in a moment. See this rendering before – I just want to show you some other shots of our retail to refresh your memory. This is on the north end of the village green looking back towards the retail area. You can see the performing arts to the right and the hotel in the background. This is another rendering of the retail at the street level. You’ve seen this one as well before. We tried to capture the quant European village feel – the narrow pedestrian walkways, the outdoor cafes and so forth. Here is another look at the retail, street level. One other shot of the retail looking back towards the entry of the performing arts center. And finally, this is from the vantage point of the village green looking back towards the two areas of retail, the entrance of the performing arts center, the fountain and the hotel in the background. That gives you a sense how we envision the retail to look. This is our entry feature. We are proud how this came out. As you can see, the scale you can see the couple here on the end gives you an indication the size of the entry feature. We’d like to create some berming. This right at the corner of White Chapel and 114 by the way. And we’d like to build up some little berming behind it and plant some Leland cypress trees to give it some verticality behind the wall here and they would be surrounded by more of the oaks behind the Leland cypress trees. What I’d like to do at this point is you guys had mentioned in our last Council meeting that you’d like to see how we are going to control the architecture and the quality in Carillon. What I am going to do is step through a little bit of the architectural vision and then I’m going to ask Danny Opitz, our senior construction manager, to come up and talk about the architectural controls that will be put in place. One of the things you’ll notice in your handouts is that we had two handouts that we provided in our submittal, one will be section 7.0 which is going to be the architectural controls for the residential and one will be section 7.1 which will be the architectural controls for the commercial area. Both of these will be added to our development plan, the Appendix, we are going to add sections 7.0 and 7.1 and those will become a part of the zoning. This will give you an idea of the type of architecture that we use that is the basis for Carillon. It is rooted in the French Renaissance tradition. We wanted to accomplish a timeless and ageless beauty. Several things characterize that type of architecture as you can see on this slide, the decorative cornices, the balustrades, the decorative iron work, the decorative scrolls, the decorative accents, coins at the corners of the buildings, arched impediment windows, string cores in the stone banding, and the accented doors and stoops. French Renaissance architecture is rooted in classic Greek and Roman architecture. There is emphasis on symmetrical facades, continuous first floor heights, doors and windows and repetitive bays. We wanted to have common architectural materials utilized throughout the community. This again is just another example of some of these features. This gives you an idea of the exterior finish color palette. We want to use warm, soft tones. Want our stone colors to be natural whites, greys and light tans. The brick - earth tones – warm reds and natural colors. And finally the stucco - warm whites, buffs, beiges, and creams. As far as primary roof styles, you can see here the parapet, the mansard, and the hipped. And I don’t have a picture here but I’ll have a picture later of the pitched roofs. This gives you an idea of some of the added architectural features that create a visual interest. You can see the wrought iron features and scrolls and so forth and additional accents. And then we want to use thoughtful consideration to the doors and windows that brings additional accent into the architecture. Finally, the gutters and downspouts are used not only to control runoff but also are incorporated into the building design elements. This time, I’m going to ask…One more item also is the awnings. We want to use awnings to give color, to give additional articulation, and to add to the architecture in Carillon. At this point, I am going to ask Danny Optiz to come up and go over the architectural controls and then I’ll come back up for questions. Applicant, Danny Opitz – Good evening, I’m Danny Optiz. Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers and staff members. I’m very pleased to be here to present this to you tonight. We have been working very diligently with our consultants to establish deed restrictions for each of the development districts. In your packets, as Jeff just informed you of, you have two groups of standards, one being 7.0 for the residential and one being 7.1 for the commercial. Within each of these standards, they are divided into parking, screening, landscaping, lights, signage, landscape furniture, paving, architectural variety, architectural form and architectural materials. The architectural control process will be governed by the development review committee that I will refer to as the DRC. The DRC will be appointed and controlled by Hines. The DRC’s role is to review and approve plans prior to the construction of or improvements to any home, retail or office building or any other structure built on deed restricted property. At this time I will go through each of the standards. First of all, I kind of want to explain to you the process itself. As you can see, we have set up to have a pre-application meeting with the applicant if required or if requested. At the time, they will make a submittal to the DRC, and the DRC will review it. There are three conditions that can result out of that. One being approval which it will be a subsequent submittal will include revisions, if necessary, to any of the preliminary conditions and it will get final DRC approval. It can be approved with conditions. If it is approved with conditions, there are two steps that can be followed. One being they can appeal the conditions that have been set and go back through the review process again hoping for full approval. Or number two, they can accept the conditions as requested and at that time, it will be sent on to reflect the changes and on to DRC for final approval. Same process follows if denied. They have a review process which can be followed with a resubmittal, and we go through the same review process again finally reaching final approval. Starting in the architectural standards for the residential area, what I am going to do, you all have this to read so I am going to summarize this in most of the categories and then as we get into the more specific ones, I will get into a little more detail and feel free to ask questions at any time. In the parking section, this is very standard for all of them, there is going to be on-street parking for the maisons in a designated area in all three of the areas we have designated there will be on-street parking allowed for a period not longer than 72 hours for any given car. This is primarily for weekend guests who may come and stay through the weekend. It is not intended really for the residents to spend and set up their cars out in their front yards or out on the front curb at any time. Recreational vehicles, at all times, recreational vehicles will have to be housed within an enclosed structure on your property or will have to be housed off-site - not in the street, not in the side yard or not in the open. In the case of garages, we have established for each of the groups, whether it is maisons, villas or châteaux’s, there will be a minimum two car garages. The villas and the châteaux’s will have the ability to park in the driveway that will be acceptable. One thing I’d like to point out here is that the intent is that the garages cannot be converted into livable space unless you have the ability on your lot within the code restrictions of the City of Southlake to construct a replacement garage. No carports or anything like that allowed. Driveway materials – we will be looking at brick pavers, interlocking pavers, stone, stamped and stained concrete, scored concrete, or concrete with stone and brick borders. We will allow asphalt…<inaudible>…asphalt and other bituminous materials are not acceptable in Carillon. This gives you a picture kind of showing you some of the materials that would be acceptable. We have brick pavers, we have a concrete broom finish with a stained border around it, and interlocking pavers. Next category, screening. Air conditioning units, your telecom pedestals, each of these must be screened from the adjacent property owner and from public view. This is especially important in the château area, in which most of the appurtenances will be out in the front in the villa area and in the maison area in the allies. Most of the appurtenances will be in the ally sections and it will be easier to screen them there, but in the front of the units its very critical we get the proper screening and this will have to be shown on the landscape plan which will be submitted by each applicant. Roof mechanical equipment, which is consistent with what you all do here in Southlake, must be screened from public right-of-way view, pedestrian view. Trash enclosures. The intent here is that all trash enclosures will meet the City of Southlake standards, whatever the appropriate receptacle for these, regardless of the category, we will be looking to follow your guidelines. And the only days the trash is allowed to be visible is on the days of pick-up. Councilmember Pamela Muller – I have a question on that one. On the maisons, you talk about the trash containers. Where are they going to be when people put out their trash? Are they going to be the curb in front of the maisons? Or is there… Opitz – In the maisons, the intent would be to, more than likely, and again this depends on if Southlake allows alley pick-ups. Since we have alleys, the trash could be contained in the rear out of one of the garages. Muller – Okay. Opitz – And again I would have to defer to ya’ll on whether that is acceptable. That would be the preferred way, would be to have alley pick-up. Mayor Pro Tem John Terrell – Along those same lines, you were talking a minute ago about the AC on some of the units might be out front. Can you tell me, do you have an idea of how many of those are going to have some type of unit out front rather than? Opitz – The AC units would be in the side yards. The only units that you are probably going to see out front are is either going to be a transformer or a telecom pad for one of the communication companies. And in each of those cases we have guidelines that we have to follow as far as the setback off of them as far as keeping shrubbery and things, but as you can see from the diagram they let you get pretty close and pretty much fill that area up as long as you’ve provided an access point for them. But AC units would go into the side yard units or into the rear of the house. If they are in the side yard they would have to be screened with a row of shrubs from the front street view. Residential landscaping requirements. Our intent here is really to set up a plan. There needs to be a landscape plan, which is prepared by a landscape architect. The minimum elements that will be included in this plan are a planting plan, materials, species, and sizes, lighting, retaining walls and fencing, and a full yard programmable irrigation system. One of the key items up there is sizes. What we’d like to do is have a minimum height rather than minimum gallons. I’ve been in this business long enough to know that a lot of people bring you three to five gallon plants that are really are two by two containers, so what we’d like to do to ensure that we get the proper screening, especially of air conditioners and even the telecom pads and transformers out front is to specify, in most cases, like a minimum 18-inch at the time of planting with it growing up to the 42, 45-inch range over time. Here’s an example of what we would expect from our applicants, and as you can see in this plan, we’ve shown tree locations, the shrubbery locations with a color coded key, which specifies the species of the plant, the height of such plant. In the case of irrigation, we’re not expecting a fully detailed irrigation plan, this is something that calling out “fully irrigated with a programmable controller” is adequate, because that can be taken care of at the time of installation. The one thing we do ask is that the yard be fully irrigated within 60 days of occupancy, weather permitting. Street lighting. In each of these categories we have established that street lighting shall be spaced at no greater than 250 feet. That’s kind of a residential standard. What we would expect in the maison area is that spacing would become smaller, so we are working with our consultants to look at the candlelight production, but I would anticipate that that spacing in the maisons will be reduced to something shorter, but in the villas and château areas what we found is that most people prefer to have the street lights spread out a little bit farther making sure that you have concentrated light at the street intersections where you have signs to be identified and then people supplement this in their own yard with house lighting, tree lighting of the such. Here’s an example of the street light we are working with one of the local suppliers on. Architectural accent lighting, this is what I was referring to as supplementing the street lighting. This has to do with lights on the front of the house. It can be tree lighting. It can be up lighting in front of your house splashing on to the front of your home. The only thing that we ask here and we will be very careful to watch out for this is making sure you don’t splash the light in such a way that you cause a nuisance to one of your neighbors. In that case, with a protest or whatever, we do have the right to go back in and ask that it be shielded if its going to be left in place. This shows some lighting on the front of the houses as can be, that can be used for accent lighting. Roof signage. Not permissible in any category. This is attached, painted on your house, anything like that. No roof signage. For sale signage. Of course, this will conform to the City of Southlake standards. What we have anticipated with the smaller front yard on the maisons that a sign of the order magnitude of 2 by 3 is appropriate and in the villas and the châteaux, because of the slightly larger yards that a larger sign could be accommodated for the purposes of the home seller and the representative. Councilmember Virginia M. Muzyka – And I have a comment on that. First of all, the 2 by 3 size is not correct, but I would request you put a master sign package together and present that at one time. Instead of having it under here because these do not conform really to our ordinances at this point and time. So if you put it all together at one time we can look at them all at one time. Please. Opitz – That can be done. Muzyka – Thank you. Terrell – And just take the signage out of this all together. Councilmember Laura K. Hill – All the signs, window signs, everything. Opitz – Talk about commercial signage, but we’ll remove this also. What we are looking at the commercial signage is, of course, no commercial signage in the villas or château. Commercial signage allowed in the maisons where you have offices in either the first, second or third floor depending on what it is. Keeping in mind, an office cannot be second or third floor unless it has an office underneath it. The intent here is that any signage that is to be used in these areas would be no more than 25% of the front glass area. We also have the ability to do a carriage sign. This is an example of an office carriage sign that can be attached to the front leaving a seven foot five inch minimum clearance. On these next items. These are landscape furniture. The intent here is that landscape furniture would be placed throughout the open space areas and would be placed in conjunction with each other in such a manner that it would not be offensive to anyone sitting in the park, but it would be there for the use of the residents and other people coming to the community. Crosswalks. The intent is to have crosswalks at key intersections. We are looking at doing pavestone in these areas which would be on a sleeper slab for durability. Sidewalk paving. In each of these cases, with the exception of what Jeff was referring to in the Chateaux area that were to be an acceptable alternative. The intent was to have a six foot parkway area with a six foot sidewalk area with the Chateaux area being changed to accommodate the street widths and setbacks if ya’ll so elect to follow that direction. Just as an example, coming off the back of curb you will have a six foot parkway area with your sidewalk section and then there’s normally one foot to the right-of-way line in most of our sections. Architectural variety. This is a key item in making sure we don’t have duplication of homes. The intent here is a 360 rule. Essentially, if you stand in the middle of the street and turn 360, you will not see in the villa section and in the chateaux section, you will not see the same model or front elevation in making that turn. This has to do with colors and all is taking consideration that we are duplicating anything. This, of course, does not apply to the maisons since there will be duplication of features in those. Architectural variety continued – the primary exterior material on the street on the maisons will be consistent within the maisons and as I go into this a little bit further I will be able to tell you what the materials and everything are. In the villas and the chateaux, no more than 25 % of the homes in the subdivision may be constructed of stucco as the primary cladding material, and no more than two consecutive homes by constructed of stucco as the primary cladding material. This is one of the stipulations ya’ll asked us to consider. This is our proposal to limit the amount of stucco. The use of stucco also will have to be appropriate as to the architectural style of the home as its designed. The roof form is mansard, hipped or gabled. A key element again is going to the architectural style especially as you get into the chateaux. We are going to have a mix in the maisons and in the villas, we are looking at French Renaissance as the primary design. However in the chateaux, you do have the flexibility to have several other types of designs and there it will be very critical that the slopes of those roofs and the materials match. If you have a Mediterranean or Spanish style or Spanish eclectic home, it will be very important in this area to have the flatter sloped roof rather than a steep roof that you will see in many of the other styles. Again, some examples. Fencing. In the maisons, we are looking at providing wrought iron metal fencing or a masonry fencing as kind of a buffer in these areas. The fence shall be six foot unless other wise approved by the DRC. Chain link, wood fencing is not permitted. In the villas and the chateaux, we do have the ability to bring cedar fencing into these two districts, in this case, we are looking a the fence to be six foot unless otherwise approved by the DRC. Again, chain link fencing is not permitted. Masonry fencing is permitted. On the wooden fences, we’ll set this up so that they will have metal posts and the intent would be that if the fence is seen from the street or from an open space that the posts would be clad in wood. Here’s some examples. Retaining walls and other walls within the subdivision. Ashlar masonry, rustic or refined coins, belt or string course. This is for all three types of homes. Windows. Full length, and this primarily pertains to French Renaissance but can be applied to any type of architecture. Full length, first story, with arches or pediments above, casement windows recessed at a minimum of four inches. This applies to all three types. This is an example of what we are talking about on the first floor. The architectural forms of the front doors will be classic door surrounds with a covered formal entry recessed a minimum of twelve inches. An example. And again, the detailed elements. The reason we say “not applicable” on the chateauxs of course is that there is many types available in that area since that is a more custom area. In the maisons and villas with the French Renaissance, we’ll be looking for balustrades at the roof line or porches consistent with Renaissance style. An example. Colors. Subtle, body colors with contrasting trim and accent colors. Must be approved by the DRC and eventually by the architectural control committee at such time the review process is expanded. Prohibited items. No window or wall type air conditioners. No radio or television aerial wires or antennas shall be maintained on the outside of any building. Satellite dishes shall be limited to twenty inches in diameter. No temporary structure of any kind. No removal of any dirt from a lot or drilling or mining operations. Animals are permitted up to three adult animals provided they are not kept for breeding or commercial purposes. Muzyka – Comment there? Are you going to allow pools somewhere? In backyards? Opitz – By pools… Muzyka – Swimming pools. Opitz – Yes. Muzyka – Then you’re going to have to get dirt out of the yard. And what about adding dirt? If they add a substantial amount of dirt for something, if you’re controlling the removal of dirt are you going to control the adding of dirt? Opitz – We just need to clarify that. Muzyka – Yes. Opitz – We will clean that up. I see what you’re talking about. I think the intent here was that someone doesn’t come in and create a large void, or whatever, by over excavating in order to put in retaining walls and various things like that. Muzyka – I agree with that, but I think it needs to be clarified. Opitz– There does need to be some clarification. Opitz – The façade on each of these. There is a minimum of 85% of the building façade must be covered in masonry materials excluding the windows, door, roof and glass. On the maisons, in fact on all three of them, no more than two primary cladding materials shall be used as the primary cladding. On the maisons, no more than twenty percent of the overall façade shall be stucco. On the villas and chateauxs we have shown there again the statement that no more than 25% of the homes can use stucco as their primary cladding material and no more than two consecutive homes can be constructed of stucco. The masonry materials that are acceptable: brick, brick veneer, stone, cast stone, glass fiber reinforced concrete, glass fiber reinforced gypsum, textured concrete panels, stucco, split faced concrete masonry units on the villas, chateauxs and the maisons. No EIFS allowed in the residential standards. Roof materials. Slates and synthetic slate, limited to slate grey colors on the maisons. On the villas and the chateaux we have added a minimum thirty year composite shingle which is an architectural style shingle. This would be the minimum that would be acceptable and in a lot of cases they go up to fifty year shingles now. Tile is acceptable and synthetic tile and the shingle colors will be approved by the DRC or the ACC. Muzyka – Why don’t you want the minimum thirty year composite shingle on the maisons? Optiz – On the maisons, again I think, it’s a quality issue and a style we are looking for. And with the style of roof, it goes to the architectural form and blending everything together to give you the highest quality which we felt like ya’ll wanted with the maisons. Muzyka – Well, I agree, but I just wondered why you put a minimum on two and not on another one. Optiz – I think in a conventional single family, detached home, again, the composition single is an acceptable form in most communities and in the style of roof you see on the maisons would not be acceptable. Muzyka – Okay. Opitz – Prohibited materials. Unfinished or untextured concrete masonry. Wood siding. Plastic, vinyl or metal sidings or EIFS on all three categories. Windows. On the maisons and on the villas and chateauxs, we’re stating that the windows shall be made from wood, vinyl or aluminum clad with divided light on the fronts or side yards facing streets. Reflective window coverings are not permitted. Garages. All garages viewed from the streets or common areas will have a wood door. Port-a-cacheres must be approved in writing by the ACC. Again, an example. On your front doors, fiber glass and plastic are not permitted. All doors must be approved by the DRC and the ACC. Chimneys. Chimneys shall be 100% brick, brick veneer, stone, stone masonry veneer, or stucco. With the exception of an exterior wall chimney which has to be 100% brick or stone. Mailboxes. On the maisons, the mailboxes shall be on the office fronts individually or in groups not to exceed ten at a time and shall be either metal or masonry. On the villas and chateaux, all single family homes shall have a cast iron mailbox approved by the ACC. Gutters and downspouts. The maisons, villas, and chateaux shall be aluminum and painted to accent the building facades or be copper and remain unpainted. I think Jeff showed you an example or a couple of examples of what the guttering could look like. Here they are again. Architectural controls for the commercial. 7.1. On street parking in this category is allowed with angled, parallel parking similar to what you have here in the Southlake Town Square. An example. Structured parking. If parking structure is not enclosed by architecture, the structure shall compliment the surrounding architecture and shall comply with the 50% open space requirement for parking structures. This has to do with the ventilation. Again here you can see this open air is for the ventilation required by standards. Structured parking landscaping. If it is exposed to the public view, it must have an eight foot landscape buffer along White Chapel Boulevard side or the State Highway 114 side. On other sides, a three foot landscape buffer is acceptable. The buffer shall be used to screen the parking structure from public view. When the top floor of the parking structure is not covered, a minimum of four foot parapet is required. Surface parking. Again, shall be buffered from street frontage by landscape. If painted all parking stalls shall be marked with a line not less than four inches wide. Surface lots will include a minimum buffer of five foot between the parking and the buildings they serve and should include landscaping. Muzyka – I have a comment on that one please? Opitz – Yes. Muzyka - We have no footage of buffer zone mentioned there or should we say, “as required by Southlake City ordinances” or what? Optiz – What we are working on right now with our consultants is establishing some percentages that we will recommend for front yard or landscaping as it relates to parking structures, fronts of homes, sides of homes, and there will be percentages that will be applied to each of those. Muzyka – So this will change at some point? Optiz – Yes. Muzyka – Thank you. Optiz – Surface parking landscaping shall meet City of Southlake Landscape Ordinance 544-A. Ground mounted utility units must be screened from public view in accordance with the City of Southlake’s ordinances. Roof mounted utility units, again, must be screened from public right-of-ways, pedestrian walkways or from neighboring properties by parapet walls or continuous roofs to match the roof color. Trash enclosures must be screened from public view and public right- of-way. The free standing screening enclosures shall be at least one foot taller than the trash enclosure. Again here is an example of the type of enclosure we would envision. Garbage collection location. Where possible such services shall be located at the rear of buildings. In all cases, the location will have to be approved by the DRC or the ACC. General landscape requirements, again, for all commercial operations shall meet City of Southlake landscaping ordinance. Street trees. Street trees shall be planted at a maximum of 40 foot on center and centered in the parkway. Street trees shall be planted at maximum of 35 foot on center in the Plaza District and centered in the parkway. Irrigation systems must be installed within 60 days of occupancy. Street lights. In the corporate district, we are looking at a 75 foot on center spacing staggered on each side of the street. Dependent on the light type for a three foot candle minimum with a down shield to prevent light pollution. In addition, one light will be again positioned at each corner to illuminate street signs and street sign locations and stop lights and the like. Plaza District, that spacing will be changed to 50 feet with the same foot candle minimum. Again the same example. This is for parking lot lights. Parking lot lights shall be staggered for overlapping dependent light type for a two foot candle minimum with a down shield to prevent light pollution into adjacent properties. Architectural accent lighting on the buildings will provide one up light along each building exterior wall at a minimum. In addition provide security lighting for all walkways not illuminated by street lights at 20 foot on center, staggered with overlapping lighting patterns. This is primarily referring to their low lights, probably ten – twelve foot poles or bollards. On roof signage is not permissible. This is attached on top of the roof or painted, a la Fellowship Church. That is not allowed. Muzyka – So this signage area will also be pulled? Optiz – Yes. Yes, ma’am. Muzyka – Thank you. Opitz - Same thing, we’ll pull the window façade signage also. Dog way stations, trash receptacles and benches. Very similar to the residential, again, spaced so that their not offensive. Crosswalks. We will have a minimum of eight foot wide crosswalk. Pavestone. Located in key intersections with ADA accessible sidewalk ramps. Sidewalk paving, again. There is a six foot wide clear zone beginning six foot back of the curb. The clear zone shall remain clear to a height of eight foot above finish grade and sidewalk. Here’s an example in here in Southlake Town Square of how mechanically the tree has been trimmed to provide you that clear space, vertical clear space. Again architectural forms are roof, parapet, mansard or hip. Fencing. No fences are allowed in the front or side of the buildings. If there is a fence intended for a mixed use facility in the Plaza District for say an outdoor seating area for a restaurant or whatever, it shall be limited to a fence no taller than 3.5 feet and shall be wrought iron and shall be approved by the DRC. Colors, again, will follow the same color pattern as we had in the residential. Building articulation. Building must incorporate jogs, offsets or other architecture features to reduce the visual length. The intent here is to avoid having any building 200 feet long without having some articulations, some deviation in that front appearance. On these two examples here, on the one on the left, the front entrance is indented in order to break up that front face, and then on the corner lot, again, you have the angular entry, which again provides variety in the appearance along that front streetscape. Façade. Minimum eighty percent of the building façade must be covered in masonry material excluding the windows, door, roof and glass. No more than two primary cladding materials shall be used as primary cladding. A third material is allowable for a special architectural feature. No more than forty percent of any building exterior may be expressed in glass in the form of a glass curtain wall. This does not include glass storefronts, doors or typical windows. Masonry materials. Brick, brick veneers, stone, cast stone, manufactured stone, glass fiber reinforced concrete, glass fiber reinforced gypsum, stucco, painted, textured concrete panels, architectural finished pre-cast panels, and split faced concrete masonry units. No EIFS will be allowed except for detailed architectural trim, cornice, banding or pediment. Again, this is a typical architectural feature. We don’t want the primary walls in EIFS, but it is used as an architectural feature around windows and doors to accent said building, especially on the retail side. Terrell – Let me ask, going back to that one. On the, I’ve seen number of different architectural finished pre-cast panels, can give you kind of a wide range of stuff, some of which I don’t think we would want to see in there. Do you have pictures? I think on a couple of these there’s panel type things that are pre-cast that just, I don’t think fit in there, to leave a general description like that in there. There’s a couple of those that might need to be pulled out. Optiz – I think we can get more specific on that for you. Terrell – Okay. Optiz – We will work with our commercial… I think that’s especially relevant to our office people and we can work with them to be more detailed in that or to eliminate some of the objectionable things to you. Terrell – Okay. Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Gregory Jones – I want to reiterate <inaudible> I agree with John 100% we need to make sure we got this very clear on what we are dealing with. I was very happy when we initially talked to you guys and we talked about masonry and true masonry and brick and stucco and things of that nature. Now we’re kind of throwing in, okay, we’ve got EIFS details, which I know is fairly common, but I want to get a good understanding of what you are talking about with EFIS details. It sounds like you are talking about surround and a lot of other things. And also these are <inaudible> that were mentioned as well, please. Optiz – Okay. Muller – I actually have a question for John. You brought up in Town Square about some of the materials crumbling. Is this one of the materials you’re concerned about? Terrell – No, that was a spray on EIFS over some other materials. Muller – Okay, so this is different. Terrell – This is different, but it is more of a, it can be, I mean I don’t know exactly what they’re talking about here, but some of these pre-cast panels can be the kind slide into, you know two bars on the side of it and they stack on top of each other. It’s just not a look that you’re wanting here. I think we just need more information as to what these things are and not just in this Corporate and Plaza district, but you had some of these same glass fiber reinforced gypsum and so forth in the other. I think we just need to be more clear as to what those are. Optiz – Okay. Opitz - Roof materials. Slates and synthetic slate, factory finish standing seam, architectural metal panels or similar quality architectural materials will be required on visible roofs and limited to darker slate gray colors. Prohibited materials. Unfinished or untextured concrete masonry, wood siding, plastic or vinyl sidings, highly reflective glass, metal siding without architectural finish, unfired clay, brick or other masonry products, and EFIS except fore the architectural trim elements. Windows. Highly reflective glass windows are not permitted. In the plaza district, windows on the front elevation or visible from street will be aluminum, baked enamel or anodized wood or vinyl clad. Reflective window coverings are not permitted. Awnings. Awnings shall have a minimum height clearance of eight foot and a depth between three and five foot from the building. The top of the awning shall not extend above the first floor height and should not extend across multiple store fronts. Awning color and any signage related to the awnings shall be approved by the DRC. Terrell – Actually, we probably… Optiz – Signage is not part of it, but we’ll have it in there. Terrell – We need to back that out, too, I think, in terms of those awnings. We take a look at awnings as they come up later and you’ll have the signage out. There won’t be any kind of printed anything on it. Optiz – Right, okay. Terrell – Then we can talk about those later. Opitz – And all colors must be approved by the DRC. Gutters and downspouts… Jones – If I may, back on the awning real quick if you could. If you could also address the materials for the awning. Awnings can be all kinds of things. It would be really good, I think, if you could address the materials. Opitz – Yes, okay. Jones – Thank you. Opitz – Gutters and downspouts again, this is material wise with what we are doing in the residential areas. Handled a little different as far as how the downspouts tie into an existing system or are discharged into the street. And then the last item down there is the final note which, “All architectural controls are subject to DRC approval prior to the final site plan and/or final plat approvals.” And with that I would be pleased to answer any questions or turn the floor back to Mr. Kennemer. Mayor Wambsganss – Okay, thank you. Muller – I have one quick question. On, did you review our city ordinances when you were putting this together? I know some things have been brought up about the signs and awnings. So is, are your standards… Opitz – We did. It’s an ongoing process. We’re working with our consultants at Jacobs to go through each of those and we’ll have to look at a couple more of these in a little more detail, but we have been looking at your ordinances. Muller – Which ones are you looking at in more detail? Opitz – Well, obviously we’re going to be looking at your signage and then we’ll be looking also at some of the materials related to especially the office in particular, and we’re also looking at the landscaping to make sure we conform to all of your landscaping ordinances for each of the different districts. Muller – Okay. Thank you. Wambsganss – Well the way we did it in Town Square relating to signage was that the zoning was one thing and your buildings and as you come in with site plans, with the details conforming to your underlying approval. But you’ll need to go with, I imagine on something like this, you’ll want to go with a conditional sign permit for the whole property. And I think that’s the time when we focus on signage, because if we kind of approve things here and there along the way, we kind of find ourselves that a developer thought this was approved because it was part of a picture. We try to be real clear at the zoning stage that you can talk about signage and show pictures with signs on them but we don’t take those signs until one time. Opitz – You’re looking for a master signage plan? Wambsganss – Exactly. Opitz – Okay. Jones – I have another question, too. With respect to the street lights you are talking about. Opitz – Yes, sir. Jones – One of the things that we’ve dealt with before is if you notice the different colors of street lighting. We have the street lighting here in Town Square. Then across the street in Central Market, some of the street lighting is similar, but then there’s also the much brighter sort of commercial street lighting, which frankly gives a whole different look and different feel. Do you have a sense at this point as to which street lighting you’re looking at? Opitz – I have not talked specifically with the consultants whether we’re going metal halide or the sodium, but that’s something we can, we’re pleased to work with you on, whichever you prefer on that. Jones – I would, at least from my stand point, I would really encourage you toward the softer lighting. I think it’s going to give a much better look. It’s a lot less garish. It’ll look a lot nicer. Opitz – We can specify that. Wambsganss – And I think the ordinance defaults to that, our current ordinance so, I think really to get outside that will require a variance. I know Gateway requested a variance for that and we didn’t approve it. I mean, I think we’ve also seen that a couple of times when we did approve it, it doesn’t give a real good blend. Jones – I just wanted to make sure of what you guys were planning so you didn’t get off on the wrong track. Opitz – No, we’ll be glad to do that. Wambsganss – Thank you for the detail you have. Opitz – Thank you very much. Terrell – I’ve actually got another thing as well. You know, again, appreciate the detail, but even with this detail there’s a number of things that we’re not even going to think about at this stage. I mean you’ve got some nice products and you seem to catch a lot of different amenities and architectural features. One of the things that we want to make sure we do to is, as we discussed at the last meeting, talking about how Town Square was done and there was something similar to this put in place, but then there was also in motions made a general statement about what the Council and the City was looking for in respect to style and consistency, continuity with main street front facades, talking now too about all sides of the building meeting certain standards, so that when we go back to look at your particulars, then we have something more general that says how its going to be applied. So I mean we will probably include some statement in any motion at whatever point we get to that has a kind of a general statement about all of these facades so later on when you start applying all this we can say, “This is how it was supposed to look,” not just one piece of this on one gigantic wall so we will include something along those lines. Opitz – Okay. Jones – I do have another quick recommendation. We can nitpick these things. I’m not going to do much more of this tonight, because I can talk with you later and do that and not take everybody’s time, but I can guarantee you nobody is going to be putting in copper facades or downspouts these days. My understanding is that there are some other options. I believe nickel is one of the options. There are some other metals that look real nice with that same sort of look. They’re not painted, but they have that same sort of old world look. I’d ask you to maybe look at some of those and consider some of those and not lock yourself down on this copper. Opitz – I think what we can do Jones – If they do put them in they’ll be stolen the next day anyway. Opitz – I think what we can do to accommodate that is this kind of sets a standard. We can put a phrase in there “Or equal, as approved by the architectural control committee or the design review committee.” Wambsganss – Okay, thank you. Kennemer - We can open it up for really any questions on the presentation. Terrell – If you don’t mind, I will get started. First, again, let me just say thank you. You’ve done a lot of what we asked especially on the retail side. I really like the way you’ve got the buildings now, kind of grouped. You get a sense now of a place more than just a strip center. I also thank you for meeting with a lot of the neighbors. I met with you and the neighbors and Councilman Jones, I know, I don’t know how many of the other Councilmembers have but, spent a lot of time working through a lot of these issues. You’ve brought to us this evening some alternatives in terms of how to make some of these other lots a little larger. From my perspective, I’m not so as concerned, personally, with the individual sizes of some of the lots as I am with overall density with the open space and so forth but through some of our conversations, you’ve had with me, Councilman Jones, and some of the residents, there has been some concern as you are very well aware with the maison product and through our discussions, I would like you to elaborate on some thoughts on what you might be able to do there. Kennemer – In terms of if we don’t have the maisons? Terrell – Yes. Kennemer - One of the things we’ve looked at, actually, after we had our conversations with some of the homeowner’s groups is that we went back and looked at what are other ways that we can still accomplish this barrier, transition, is a better word, that is taking you from the commercial district to the residential district. We really wanted to provide you with a continuous line here along the boulevard that was very dramatic and had a very European feel to it. We were saying if we don’t have the attached maisons, what else could we do? One thing that we looked at was these are the maisons and these are the…we could line the same front with our villa product. We would want to study whether or not the detached separation in the villas is ten feet between units. We would want to take a hard look at whether or not is ten feet the right separation or for the group that lines the boulevard should we reduce that to maybe eight feet because we are trying to create a sense that there is a continuous wall along the boulevard. We can still make the boulevard rather dramatic by doing perhaps a knee wall with stone and wrought iron above it and landscaping to give the continuous line feel so although it wouldn’t be quite as dramatic as being in line with the maisons, we feel like we can get a similar feel. Jones – As far as some of the maisons are concerned, would it make any sense to – I agree with you that you need to create a buffer – what you are describing may be a good alternative. There was a mention made of having some of the maison-looking product into an office-type product. Now is that something you could consider along a portion of this? That it could be an office-type product rather than residential. Kennemer – Well, actually what we proposed in the last City Council meeting, all of the maisons that faced the village green, this area here being the village green, we really wanted the flexibility for all of these to be either office use or residential use and so but we weren’t certain of how the market would react to the office use. It would be difficult for us to quantify until we actually start trying to make sales what portion of this would there be enough demand for all of this to be office or would only some percentage be office? We did look at that and we are open to that. Jones – But what if you looked at it….I’m sorry, but you are the marketing guys. You know your business and I don’t but what if you looked at it from the stand point of sort of having one or the other. In other words you did maisons that were office or if you couldn’t put maisons that were office then you’d go with the other product you described that would be the… Kennemer – Villas? Jones – The villas. In other words, you’d start doing the project and if it looks like there is a serious demand for the office, then you’d make a go at the office to create a nice long façade line and keep density down and that type of thing but if it doesn’t look like it is working then you’d go the other plan. Does that sound like something to be considered? Kennemer – It sounds like something we could consider but the challenge is going to be – you’ve almost got to have some minimum number of units to build a program from. And if you are going to restrict the maisons to just the units that face the village green and not have these units you are getting to the point where you’ve only got 33 units, it is difficult to find a builder that is willing to commit the up front cost and development cost to come up with a program for only 33 units. That would be the challenge we would have. Jones – Understand. That would clearly be an economic decision for you guys to make. I’m just posing that as a potential alternative <inaudible> Muller – When we talked, I asked you if it was possible to re-look at this with using the Kirkwood extension as the buffer between the commercial and the residential with removing the maisons. Have you looked at that? Kennemer – We looked at that quite some time ago. If you bring Kirkwood , you cut it down like this and extend out this chateaux district, we’re not able to get, by doing that, it would lower our residential units to the point where we couldn’t make the plan work economically. We looked at that. Muller – Explain that a little clearer to me why you need so many residential lots to make this work when <inaudible>. Kennemer – Sure, it is really just based upon our land price. You know, there’s a necessity to build a certain number of residential units in tandem with the commercial district. If you cut the road in, you’ve got some larger lots, the price per front foot is not linear. In other words, you don’t sell the same price per front foot for a smaller lot that you do a larger lot. There is not a linear relationship there. You get a, there’s more revenue related per square foot on the smaller lots. And so if you cut too many of the village district lots away and just replace those with chateaux lots, you can’t make your numbers work anymore and you have to look at other alternatives. Muller – Is this true for the retail also? Kennemer – No, if you could expand the retail and have a larger portion of retail you could solve part of that problem. That’s a legitimate point. We just feel like given the amount of retail in Town Square, we’re in the 300,000 to 330,000 range here in our plan, we believe feel we’ve kind of maxed out what we think we can do with that square footage. We feel like we’ve kind of pushed… Muller – I am getting an economic lesson here. If that’s true, would that be also impacting the rest of our community that the other tracts that we had planned to be commercial now wouldn’t be able to be marketable. Because we still have land along 114 that’s ideal. Kennemer – There is just a time frame that the absorption of, you know, there’s a limited demand for retail and office space and there’s only a certain amount that can be absorbed each year. That’s not to say there aren’t other areas that won’t be good at some point in time for office. But there is a lot, a sizeable amount of available land and based on our study of the market, we felt like…we would have liked to have done more office if we thought we’d be able to fill that in a reasonable amount of time. We just felt as though the portion that we’ve outlined here was reasonable in the time frame that we’d like to get built out in this project. We didn’t want to designate a large commercial area and then sit on it for ten years. Mayor – Let me go back to one of the things we talked about right in the beginning. In your discussions with some of the neighbors and some of the attempts to make a few these, or some, of these chateaux lots a little bit bigger, you kind of came up with three suggestions and one of them I think might be workable. Two of them, you know I think were from my perspective is not a step forward and I know you’re doing that just to accommodate concerns out there. The first one was your, the option of possibly doing away with the tree preserve area, maybe to add a thousand, two thousand square feet to a grouping of lots. I couldn’t tell you the difference between an 18,000 square foot lot and a 20,000 square foot lot. But to loose a tree preserve that everybody can enjoy, would recognize, to me would be a major loss. So I don’t see the benefit in taking out that open space for adding a little square footage to the same number of lots. Likewise, you said that maybe on Kirkwood, kind of trimming back the right-of- way there. I don’t think, again, I think that has a potential for being such a an attractive boulevard through there just to free up a little more square foot divided up over a bunch of lots, I don’t think that’s a big benefit. Now I do think the second one you offered, which was maybe on some of these other interior roads, trimming it from like a 56 foot to something maybe a little smaller and adding those back that might work as long as it doesn’t feel too tight, but I think the way you explained it you probably wouldn’t even notice that. Kennemer – I think we can do that in a careful manner and get another twenty feet in the lake lots. Wambsganss – Okay, so I mean, I really appreciate you all going the extra mile to try to find ways to make lots a little bigger, but you know, my perspective generally has been on development is what are the total lots, what is the total acreage. You know if you have 500 acres and you’re going to put in 500 hundred homes, I just assume you put in 500 homes on three quarter acre lots, and have a hundred acres that everybody can enjoy. So I think taking away those large open spaces and just dividing it up among the others is kind of more akin to when we give straight zoning like SF-20 versus a PUD where you get some added amenities so I think, I appreciate you really trying to work with the neighbors on that, but I don’t know that that probably is a step forward. I think on the maisons, I think that’s a step forward, especially on first reading, I think being able to make that adjustment, I’m sure that, I don’t know the numbers, but that’s got to drop the number of lots substantially, at least, you know to some degree, I don’t know what the numbers would exactly be there, but you know, I mean that’s definitely a step in the right direction. There’s something done right maisons could really be a nice feature, a good buffer, but I think your other product has some real potential too. So I think that’s a real positive and I appreciate your work with John and Greg and the neighbors in moving that way. Jones – I want to echo what he’s saying. I agree with the Mayor’s comments on each of those items, by the way, but you did sit down with a number of people and some of the folks that are here tonight and spent quit a bit of time listening to their concerns and I really appreciate that and I know they appreciated it. You know, while I want to echo again what the Mayor said and maybe expand just a bit in the sense that I think in certain situations the maisons could be an excellent product. I know there have been real concerns about the density issues but I think from an architectural stand point and buffer standpoint they could do a very good job and pose and actually being quit a nice feature, but in terms of the density and in terms of what you’re proposing, I think its, I agree with the Mayor. I appreciate your looking at that especially on first reading looking at that and moving forward with that. One other thing I did want to mention is I really don’t want to see the, I think the way you’ve designed it with the commercial space is good. I appreciate the fact that you’re not trying to pack too much commercial in to this. We’ve got neighborhoods around this area and I think trying to put too much commercial in there would be a mistake. I think we’d have way too much traffic and that type of thing and I think the balance you’ve given which is really a large majority for residential is preferable to me. I do have a question for you. I’m not just going to sit up here and talk. Down the Whites Chapel side, which has sort of been referred to as the massing, and you’ve gone back in and brought those buildings back together instead of treating them as separate pad sites and we’ve talked about some of the concerns last time. And now I’m going to sort of pivot on you, now I want to talk to you about some of the concerns that I would have about doing it this way. And I think you’re probably going to address these, but I want to make sure of it. One is the handling of deliveries and trash pick-up and that type of thing. Can you give us a sense of what you’re proposing there because obviously creating this kind of massing, while it looks nice in certain circumstances can pose real challenges. One glaring example I’ll point out to you is over here on where Central Market is we have a very nice restaurant called Coal Vine’s. Unfortunately, the kitchen door opens back up onto Southlake Boulevard and the guys like to come out there and smoke and they leave the door open and then the dishwasher comes out there it’s not exactly the kind of thing we’re looking for. So give me a sense of what you’re talking about doing with these. Kennemer – Alright this example shows three restaurants side by side and you see the continuous massing along White Chapel and you see the facade of massing on this side along the interior facing the interior of the project. This area here there will be gates here you can se them. There will be one here and one here. There will be material that will connect in with the building on either side but there will be a gate that will swing open and the gate will be designed with wrought iron on the outside and will have wood or some other type of feature so that it will blend well with the exterior façade. This gate will swing in and trucks will be able to come in under here, this height will be about 16 feet to where it will be higher than whatever the truck needs to get clearance and then it will come into this area for deliveries and trash pickup and then exit back out. Jones – Great. Let me ask you then, along the White Chapel side there what do we expect to see there. I’m hoping that what you are going to be showing us are open store fronts, open doors, somebody can go in that way. Kennemer – Absolutely. Let me ask….is someone from Opus here? Jones – Let me put it another way. One thing I’m hoping we won’t see are fake windows and fake doors and things that don’t look real. Speaker from Opus <did not say his name> - I think it would be our intent to be able to have entrances on that side and will encourage that in all cases. The challenges we will have to overcome is there are no parking on that side. Jones – I understand. I’m not telling you, you necessarily have to have entrances on that side. You guys need to create the design. I see you’ve created sort of a promenade walkway with trees at least in this design, this concept plan and I think that it will hopefully get people to walk down there, but I understand it may not be the main entrance and that type of thing. Now that you’ve got all your service in those areas, I think it takes care of the problem of service doors on the back side and things of that nature. Is that correct? Speaker from Opus – Uh-huh. Mayor – Yeah, I think you’re exactly right. Usually, when we run into this, we have a stand alone or one that may not have a court yard. Here they could probably move their service back up to those areas so at least you have windows. What we end up having is a bunch of fake windows along the road because that is where they have to have their kitchens and their other storage areas and so it looks like the way you have it laid out you can probably have some real windows there and if you want entrances, great, so it’s not just a fake… Speaker from Opus – Yeah, the design with the courtyard there kind of gives them a blank wall that’s not visible to the public that can be use as a back wall to the kitchen and their receiving areas. Mayor – Very good. Jones – Do you have a sense of what those gates are going to be made out of? Are they going to be opaque? Are you going to be able to see through them? Do you have any sense of that at this point? Speaker from Opus – The intent is that they would be opaque. They would have to be pretty sturdy, you know. Jones – Right. Terrell – I think along those lines in some of the questioning that is going on here. It kind of goes back to one of the comments we were talking about earlier when I was kind of making that general statement, at some point even though you will get this sort of general move forward you are going to come back with individual site plans on each one of these and we are going to see these buildings in greater detail and we are going to have another shot so long as we make sure we have the right language up front and the terms to make sure that what they are doing is in line with what we are looking for so we are going to get another shot to look at later as well. Mayor – I will say it is a very attractive look and a big step forward from where ya’ll have been. Terrell – Can you flip back to the one that is kind of showing the front facades more at a street level. And again, I understand, too, that you had kind of a limited amount of time to come up with some of these drawings and so I commend you with being able to come up with it. I like the drawings, though, of the buildings styles and architectural features that are in your brochure Kennemer – We’ll put some more of those kinds of features in, I mean, we were putting this together at lightening fast speed. That’s one of those details… Terrell – Right. I commend you for getting it done that quickly. I just want to make sure there is a comment made that we really like your other book of pictures and what these buildings will look like. This gives us at least an idea of the massing and how it will lay out for a pedestrian. Kennemer – Understood. Jones – I’m assuming that obviously you want to maintain the same architectural standards throughout so what you’ve shown us in terms of those other pictures in the pretty picture book that those pictures are representative of what we are going to see throughout the development. And the other photographs that you’ve taken of other locations to give us a sense of the identity. Kennemer – Sure. Jones – And those will carry over as John has pointed out into those other areas as well. Kennemer - That is correct. Mayor – <allowed public comment> Mayor – <discussed super majority requirement and City Council meeting dates> Muller – I had a comment because it has been a concern about the schools. Earlier it was mentioned that the school is working on their plans for the future. They’ve got a committee together if I heard that correctly. I would look into what the school district is doing and when those meetings are. Apparently, there was one mentioned going on this evening. I think it would be helpful to get more information on the impact of these developments on the schools. Also, one of the things I am getting a feel for and correct me if I am wrong but what I am hearing is that because of the market, that there is not the demand for retail yet and it sounded to me that is one of the reasons that we are looking at an increase in smaller lots on this development. Are you picking up on that or any body else have a feel for that? Mayor – That is not my perception. Just from a history perspective, at one time, it was the grand plan by all of us 15 years ago that 114 would be the next Los Colinas. That we’d have a quarter mile deep of big offices lining 114 and you know, you just can’t, it would take 100 years to do 1,500 acres of offices. The plan started changing. Then we had the Aventerra plan for here and nice looking plan but I guess the market said that wasn’t really practical either. Then Newland came in and they were a national company. They couldn’t do anything. So I’m not saying this is the density it needs to be. I think we’ve come a long way. We had plans out there that were over 500. It has come down considerably and hopefully it will keep coming down. But you know, as some point, you do kind of get to a point, where this is what the market…you know, that is the beauty of the system we have is the market kind of dictates what this property should be. We should have a vision and require certain quality in all of that and kind of hold our guns on not wanting something that destroys the fabric of what we have worked on for 20 or 30 years, but it also is going to have to be a transition back from a commercial or office back to the existing residential. I just don’t know if we sat around whether it was 2025 or something else and came up with our grand plan that those are visions, but we can’t foresee the future and the market ultimately dictates that. Muller – Well I read through the Aventerra plan that we all worked hard on and then I read through the new zoning category here and when I go through the uses and things, and I don’t blame Hines for this and the good news is that everybody seems to be very positive for this product and its just some tweaking that needs to be done we’re very concerned about the density and impact on schools and drainage and all. But if I was Hines I would’ve done just what they’ve done and presented here. I would look through all of the categories to maximize my profit. As a Councilmember, is there some tweaking that can be done that… You’re doing well with your product but I’m also still very protective of my community as well. I’m not saying, my other Councilmembers and Mayor do care as deeply as I do for this city. I have no doubt about that. That’s what I’m working with in my mind. I still think it needs some work. I think the density can be reduced. I have a lot of concerns about the maisons. Not because of the quality of them in this product or how they all blend. I think this is an excellent, excellent plan. I’m just concerned it will have a bigger long term impact on our community. Terrell – I have a few comments. I talk to most of the school board members pretty regularly and for various reasons most of them don’t want to take a position on this particular project but I will tell you that they are waiting on us for this study they are doing. Not the other way around. They need what we are doing to figure out what they want to do so they can accommodate whatever happens here. Jones – If I may I might point out just so people know the chair of the committee you are talking about is Robert Williams. He is a neighbor of Councilmember Hill and a very well respected member of the community and somebody who has a great financial background and is a very good solid leader in the community and I know he has been working on this committee now I think it has been in existence for over a year now and they have been working very hard to look at the future needs for the school so I think your suggestion that folks who have that interest make a pilgrimage over there to see what their plans and thoughts are is a good idea but they are definitely looking at this as John said. Hill – And know, too, that Councilmember Terrell may speak to this but Councilmember Muzyka and myself and Councilmember Terrell have met with that group and have met with the school board and one large room so there are a lot of meetings going on that are open to the public that are posted. The school is very well aware of what we are doing. Mr. Kennemer was at the one meeting and Dr. Faltys was there so I think everyone is on-board with where we are headed with this development. Terrell – The school has also indicated, it is no secret that Johnson Elementary is the most crowded school that we have in the city and its only getting more and more crowded. You know, I’m not going to speak for the school board but I personally think it is going to be very difficult not to do another school regardless of what happens here to accommodate the elementary students that are coming into the area. That’s for their facility people to talk about. In terms of I will have to say some of the comments made by the Mayor tonight and Councilmember Jones I will have to echo on the maisons, personally, I do not have a problem with them. I think they are a great architectural look. I don’t think they are anything like apartments. I think that the developer has stepped up seeing that it has created an issue and actually come and said – hey, we’ve got another solution. If the maisons just aren’t something the community is willing to accept, we can do another product. It still needs to be product, though, that provides that buffer and has a feel and a front so that it is that transition from the commercial into the single family so that you’ve got that feel and a separation. I very much like the general plan. I’m not saying that we’re not going to continue to work on some of the density. In terms of, we’re hearing from a lot of different people about, how there is too much retail in town. And - We don’t want to build any more here because that is going to put Southlake Town Square out of business. Well, Southlake Town Square is going to do just fine. These folks aren’t going to go in – they’ve got a lot of experts as well. It is all going to be what the market will bear. I don’t pretend to claim I understand what the market is going to bear but I think they’ve probably done some significant studies and it will probably bear just what they’ve done, otherwise, they make a lot more money on the retail side. If they could do more retail and it would support it, I think they would do more retail and office but at the same time, we’ve only got a population of you know, max low-30s long term at build out and will certainly continue to attract from surrounding communities but we also don’t want to over build the retail and then people start going out of business. Muller – Nor do you want to overbuild the residential considering what the market is today and our economy. I hate to see a plan that looks absolutely excellent today and right for our community but because the market takes a different direction ends up turning out to be something else because the zoning as you know we can’t regulate what type of commercial or housing goes in there if something changed and Hines went away and this property was then zoned. Terrell – I’m not following you why that would change anything about what we are approving. We will be approving and have standards that whoever came in – if Hines went away and went bankrupt – nobody steps in and does anything other than what we approve. Jones – I would also point out that, I mean, just the nature of the way of how our country as a whole, I mean, landowners have a right to develop their property and then they have a right to do that. In this case, you’ve got the Hines group this is experts in dealing with these kinds of things, I’m not. I’m not going to sit here and try to say and second guess the marketing of a company like Hines. We can’t really do that when we have people coming in and want to build a certain thing. If somebody wants to build another shoe store, it is not our place to say, “Sorry, you can’t build a shoe store there.” As long as its meets, you know, the basic standards we want it to meet. One thing I did have some questions about and I did want to ask the developer about real quickly is we were looking at some pictures along White Chapel of – the massed products as we’re calling it – and I’m noticed, I assumed that what we were looking at was you were showing us some pictures. Was that this area here that you were showing us? Is that correct? Kennemer – That’s correct. Jones – Okay, what I’m concerned about is what I was looking at is this area up here. I mean, this down here I’ve noticed you’ve got the driveways coming in and what you’ve described to us and that looks great. What I’m seeing up here looks a little different. Kennemer – It’s the same way, you know, the massing on this plan but if we were to detail it out but the bay depths are not quite as deep but it would be the same kind of concept as this. Although there may be, it could be some sections where if it were leased to a non-restaurant you might not have this service area. Everything would be solid but then where you had a restaurant you have to have a little carve out like this and then have it covered over on the end. Jones – If that is the case then what I would ask you to do is to consider how you are going to deal if you have that store front without having that area how are you going to deal with trash or service entrance for a store or that type of thing so we don’t run into the other problem I was talking about. Do you understand what I am saying? Kennemer – I do. Do you want to address that? Speaker from Opus – I’ll do the best I can at the stage we’re at right now. That is our intent is to consolidate it as much as we can into a central or maybe a couple of central locations so that you don’t have each tenant dealing with it on their own in a lot of different... The intent would be to consolidate it. Jones – Okay, and do something similar to what has been described in the other portion there? Speaker from Opus – Yeah, again if we are not dealing with restaurants it’s a little bit different situation, but to the extent that we can consolidate it in an area like that that is enclosed and kind of out of site, out of mind, yeah, that would be our desire. Hill – Jeff, I’m sorry, before you sit down. Some of the residents asked in particular about being able to look on line at some of your product that I know you’ve shown Council, gosh, six or seven months ago when we started working with you on this. Maybe it would be helpful for people if they could go to your website and give them some examples of places. Kennemer – hines.com. We have examples of properties from all over the world. Hill – That’s great. I think that will give people a comfort level, too, of what you’ve actually put on the ground. Terrell – Something else I think should just be re-emphasized because it was mentioned a few times, but we’ve talked about it a lot in prior meetings. This particular project - I don’t know of any other development or developer who would come in and figure out how to handle drainage for 30 to 33 percent over capacity or over what their requirement would be that would really significantly help the entire, or a significant portion of, the north side of 114. While we’ve kind of somewhat moved off that I don’t want to lose site of the fact that’s a big deal going from what was it – a 43 acre feet up to 60 – and what that does for the surrounding homeowners and everybody down those creek areas. That’s a big impact on the north side. Mayor – Okay, other comments, questions? As I noted before, this is just first reading. There will be a public hearing and a second reading if it passes tonight. At this time, it appears the earliest that would be would be November 18. Also with that said, my preference would be to see what the proposed layout would look like with the maisons out and what the actual density would then drop to. You know, obviously tonight, we don’t, that’s really not available to us but I’d like to, for the second reading, to be able to see what that is and maybe as an alternative have your plan with the maisons and whatever that density is at that point, too. I’m fine, to be honest with you, with either product because I think if you drop the maisons, drop that density, put those others in, you are going to do a really nice job of it. You’re going to provide that, it is going to provide its own buffer. It has a lot of green buffer in front of it anyway between the commercial and the first residential. Anyway, I’m open either that. The one thing I did like was the flexibility of dropping it a little bit. It was a move toward a little less dense environment. But I don’t have strong feelings either way necessarily on the products themselves. Okay, is there anything further? Terrell – Just, too, I think it is also important to note that if we do vote on it for a first reading tonight and we set it up for second reading, just because we set a second reading date does not mean it can’t be tabled at that second one if we aren’t satisfied with the information that we get back then. There’s probably a lot of folks out there who don’t know necessarily how procedure work. If we’re not satisfied, we don’t have to have that second vote. Jones – One of the things I think is good is that some of the folks have talked about wanting to have some more time to visit and since we’d be looking at a November 18 meeting, that gives us some more time, it doesn’t compress it quite so much, so we can do whatever additional deliberation that we need to do. Mayor – Okay, it is nearly midnight here. With that said, do we have a motion then? Terrell – Well, let me ask you a question real quick in terms of if this is just a first reading. Instead of trying to outline all of the different conditions, specifically making it subject to our discussion this evening, staff comments, and presentations and then going in with the more detailed motions when we finally do get to that. Does anyone have a problem with leaving it kind of just a general one to get it passed the <inaudible>? Mayor – I don’t as long as we have kind of kept our notes. It is kind of nice on a second reading at times on other projects, usually more simpler projects, where you’ve got that first motion where you really have all those details and things you’ve held them to. I’m not saying that’s not a good idea but there are a lot of variables here… Terrell – Here is an idea. In the last one, I asked Lori I think it was and she did a transcript. I think we had enough discussion tonight that is worthy of another transcript so that we can kind of highlight some of the points that we want to bring up again. Hill – Jeff you might want a copy of that, too. Terrell – I just got off Lori’s mailing list for Christmas cards. Mayor – It is a throw back to the old days, huh? With that said, is there a motion tonight? Terrell – Mr. Mayor, I move approval on the first reading on Ordinance No. 480- 564 also being ZA08-031, Zoning Change and Development Plan for Carillon, subject to the staff comments, Council comments, and looking at the copy of the transcripts for the second reading which will currently be scheduled for the November 18 date. Jones – A friendly amendment would be to add comments and agreements made by the developer in our last meeting as well because we had some specific agreements. Terrell – So amended, and subject to Development Plan Review Summary No. 6, dated October 1, 2008. Hill – Second. Mayor – A motion and a second, please record your vote? Mayor – Okay, passes 5 – 1 on first reading.