The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 6MCITY OF SOUTHLAKE Department of Planning & Development Services STAFF REPORT November 13, 2013 CASE NO: ZA13-080 PROJECT: Plat Revision for the Southlake Town Square Garden District and Brownstones Phase C W:/xd1111WE SUMMARY: Cooper & Stebbins is requesting approval of a Plat Revision for Southlake Town Square Garden District and Brownstones Phase C on property described as Lot 24R and Lots 25-35, Block 24, Lots 1-16 and Lot 38, Block 25, Lot 1, Block 28, Southlake Town Square, Brownstones at Town Square, Phase B, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and Tract 2A5E, Richard Eads Survey, Abstract No. 481, City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, and generally located along Park Ridge Blvd. and east of Central Ave., Southlake, Texas. The current zoning is "DT" Downtown District. SPIN Neighborhood #8. REQUEST DETAILS: The applicant is requesting approval of a Plat Revision for Southlake Town Square Garden District and Brownstones Phase C to develop 60 Garden District residential units and 33 Brownstones. Because portions of this property were previously platted, a Plat Revision approval will be required for the final filing document. Please see the staff report for the associated Concept Plan (ZA13-011) for additional background information and a bulleted list of revisions to the plans since the September 3, 2013 meeting. The changes to the concept plan and site plan for the associated cases did not require any changes to the Plat Revision. ACTION NEEDED: 1) Consider approval of a Plat Revision ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Plans and Support Information — Link to Presentation (D) SPIN Reports: February 11, 2013 and June 10, 2013 (E) Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated August 28, 2013 (F) Surrounding Property Owners Map and Responses (G) Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only) STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (817)748-8067 Richard Schell (817)748-8602 Case No. ZA13-080 Page 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER: Brownstones at Town Square, LP APPLICANT: Cooper & Stebbins PROPERTY SITUATION: Generally located along Park Ridge Blvd. and east of Central Ave LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 24R and Lots 25-35, Block 24, Lots 1-16 and Lot 38, Block 25, Lot 1, Block 28, Southlake Town Square, Brownstones at Town Square, Phase B, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and Tract 2A5E, Richard Eads Survey, Abstract No. 481 LAND USE CATEGORY: Town Center CURRENT ZONING: "DT" Downtown District HISTORY: Key approvals associated with Southlake Town Square and residential development in Town Square: January 7, 1997 (ZA96-145): Original "PUD" Zoning & Concept Plan approved for Southlake Town Square; August 19, 1997 (ZA97-099 and ZA97-100): Southlake Town Square Phase I Development Plan and Site Plan approved; February 4, 2003 (ZA02-104); "DT" Downtown District Zoning & Concept Plan was approved; April 1, 2003 (ZA03-013) Specific Use Permit for the Brownstone residential units was approved. October 5, 2004 (ZA04-066 & ZA04-067): Revised Concept Plan & Site Plan for Southlake Town Square's Grand Avenue District was approved; May 3, 2011; (ZA13-068) A text amendment to Section 37 ("DT" Downtown District) of Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, creating new definitions for "Garden District" and "Garden District Residences" as well as providing additional development regulations for such development was approved. May 3, 2011; (ZA13-069) A revised Concept Plan for the Garden District, including 130 Garden District Residences and 10 Brownstones, was approved. SOUTH LAKE 2030 PLAN: Consolidated Land Use Plan The "Town Center" definition in the 2030 Land Use is as follows: The Town Center land use designation is intended to enhance and promote the development of the community's downtown. The goal is to create an attractive, pedestrian -oriented environment that becomes the center of community life in Southlake. It may include compatibly designed retail, office, cultural, civic, recreational, hotel and residential uses. All uses shall be developed with a great attention to design detail and will be integrated Case No. Attachment A ZA13-080 Page 1 TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: PATHWAYS MASTER PLAN WATER & SEWER: into one cohesive district or into distinct sub -districts, each with its own unique characteristics. A mix of different uses is encouraged to create a vibrant, lively, and unique environment. The "Town Center" designation provides the following guidelines for residential uses: • Residential uses are to be located between the proposed office or retail uses and existing residential neighborhoods. These uses are intended to provide a lower intensity transition between existing neighborhoods and commercial uses. • Residential uses should be well integrated with proposed open space and other civic uses to create a sense of place. • They should also be integrated with proposed commercial uses in a manner that provides internal automobile and pedestrian access to convenience commercial uses. • Residential uses are recommended to be to the density and scale that is appropriate based on the context and character of the proposed overall development. Traffic Impact: Residential Condominium/Townhouse Use (ITE # 230) Use Units Vtpd* AM -IN AM -OUT PM -IN PM -OUT EXISTING 140 820 11 51 49 27 APPROVAL PROPOSED (Garden District 93 545 7 34 33 18 and Brownstones Phase C ) PROPOSED 38 223 3 14 14 7 (Block 4R1) PROPOSED (Garden District and Brownstones 131 768 10 48 47 25 Phase C + Block 4R1) Net Difference -9 - 52 -1 -3 -2 -2 Vehicle Trips per Day The Pathways Plan shows an on -street bikeway planned along Central Ave. Sidewalks are shown along all public street frontages on the concept plan with additional sidewalks shown throughout the open space areas. All necessary public water and sewer infrastructure are currently in place for this development. Case No. ZA13-080 Attachment A Page 2 TREE PRESERVATION & LANDSCAPE: There are no existing trees on the site except those that the developer has planted, including Live Oaks and Magnolias. The preliminary landscape design is consistent with the Town Square theme. CITIZEN INPUT: Two SPIN meetings were held. The first SPIN meeting was held Monday, February 11, 2013. And a second SPIN meeting was held Monday, June 10, 2013. SPIN Meeting Reports for both meetings are included as Attachment "D" of this report. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ACTION: August 8, 2013; Approved (5-0) subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1 and Staff Report dated August 2, 2013 and noting the applicant's willingness to work with Staff to have a traffic calming devise included along Summit Avenue and the applicant's willingness to landscape and irrigate the property north of Main if construction does not begin within 12 months. COUNCIL ACTION: August 20, 2013; Tabled to the September 3, 2013 meeting. September 3, 2013; Tabled to the September 17, 2013 meeting. September 17, 2013; Tabled to the October 1, 2013 meeting. October 1, 2013; Tabled to the October 15, 2013 meeting. October 15, 2013; Tabled to the November 19, 2013 meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated August 28, 2013. Case No. Attachment A ZA13-080 Page 3 Vicinity Map Garden District and Phase C Brownstones P O � 00� T O 7�S7o Sh NST 77, CC Q ova CIVIC PL ,F]w P T w MAIN ST < w ( O (7 w FOUNTAIN z PL w > > O U) = F F M. 1709 E SOUTH LAKE BLVD G O O m c� m z o m o 0 Z ZA13-080 Plat Revision N I' vN F 7 0 450 900 1.800 < Feet s Case No. Attachment B ZA13-080 Page 1 Plans and Support Information Plat Revision ea p r� gillMENEM �� ryrrrpnnrr��nnrnrrrn,.nr..rrcrn..r..rc«r,.r '4 �� ryrrrpnnrr��nnrnrrrn,.nr..rrcrn..r..rc«r,.r '4 s S n gg� �. °gg�a4b @@p&p 1$ m Y� w s O g n OF MWMEN IIIIIINMEM II Case No. Attachment C ZA13-080 Page 1 1st SPIN MEETING REPORT El SOUTHLAKE SPIN MEETING REPORT CASE NO. N/A PROJECT NAME: The Garden District — Southlake Town Square SPIN DISTRICT: SPIN #8 MEETING DATE: February 11, 2013; 8:00 PM MEETING LOCATION: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX Training Rooms 3A — 3B TOTAL ATTENDANCE: Twenty-six (26) • SPIN REPRESENTATIVE(S) PRESENT: Vic Awtry (#7) APPLICANT(S) PRESENTING: Frank Bliss, Cooper & Stebbins; et al five (5) • STAFF PRESENT: Lorrie Fletcher. Planner I STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough: (817)748-8072 or dkilloughcw_ci.southlake.tx.us EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Property Situation • The property is located at Southlake Town Square; generally the northeast corner of East Southlake Boulevard and Carroll Avenue. Development Details • The original concept plan was approved in May 2011 — 130 Condominiums, 10 Brownstones and 2.4 acres of open space. • The applicant is requesting a revised concept plan to include: 28 Brownstones in 3 configurations 0 7 Custom Villa Homes (6 detached) o 83 Garden District Residences in 5 buildings o 2.2 acres of open space o Amenities to include: • Sidewalks • Landscape • River bend stream / meditation area • Spanish steps common area • Pet playground Case No. Attachment D ZA13-080 Page 1 Exhibits presented at SPIN: New Plan 1 1 2011 Plan Garden District Residences 83 130 Park Ridge Brownstones 9 10 Brownstones in the Garden 19 0 Park Ridge Villas 7 0 TOTAL 118 140 QUESTIONS / CONCERNS • Will the city maintain the central park area? No, the park area will be maintained by the HOA — it is a private open space that is open to the public. If the HOA pays, are they going to keep the public out? No, it is not gated... accessible to the public. • We are concerned the park will become a teenage hangout? We feel the environment will be accessible but secure, well managed and well lit. It is an urban environment — urban suburbia. • 1 live in one of the Brownstones and these issues have been addressed well. Kids figure it out... no problem. Case No. Attachment D ZA13-080 Page 2 • Is this development accessible to wheel chairs? The Spanish steps? It looks like it doesn't work. We have engineered 7 different points of access; only 2 are not ADA accessible. o Each condo has an elevator from the garage — the ability is there. SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives_ The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant_ Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council_ Case No. Attachment D ZA13-080 Page 3 2nd SPIN MEETING REPORT USOUTHLAKE SPIN MEETING REPORT CASE NO. ZA13-011 PROJECT NAME: The Garden District — Southlake Town Square MEETING DATE: June 10, 2013; 7:00 PM MEETING LOCATION: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX Training Rooms 3A — 3B TOTAL ATTENDANCE: Thirty-three (33) • SPIN REPRESENTATIVE(S) PRESENT: Matt Shurly (#8) and Vic Awtry (#7) • APPLICANT(S) PRESENTING: Larry Corsin, Cooper & Stebbins; et al five (5) • STAFF PRESENT: Lorrie Fletcher, Planner I STAFF CONTACT: Richard Schell: (817)748-8602 or rschellaci.southlake.tx.us EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Property Situation • The property is located at Southlake Town Square; generally the northeast corner of East Southlake Boulevard and Carroll Avenue. Development Details • The original concept plan was approved in May 2011 — 130 Condominiums, 10 Brownstones and 2.4 acres of open space. • In February 2013; the applicant proposed the following revised concept plan to SPIN: 0 28 Brownstones in 3 configurations 0 7 Custom Villa Homes (6 detached) 0 83 Garden District Residences in 5 buildings 0 2.2 acres of open space o Amenities to include: ■ Sidewalks ■ Landscape ■ River bend stream / meditation area ■ Spanish steps common area ■ Pet playground • Currently, the applicant is requesting a revised concept plan to include: 0 33 Brownstones in 3 configurations 0 100 Garden District Residences in 4 buildings o ± 3 acres of open space Case No. Attachment D ZA13-080 Page 4 Exhibits presented at SPIN: Garden Brownstones 21 0 Park Ridge East Brownstones 9 9 Park Ridge West Brownstones 3 1 Garden District Residences 60 130 Central Avenue Residences 40 0 TOTAL 133 140 Eliminates Garden District Residence buildings on the Main Street alley and the west side of Park Ridge, which allows this area to be developed independently, and sooner New plan made possible by eliminating buildings and individual garages in favor of clustering a mix of 3 and 4-story residences over larger central garages on north side Density reduced; broader offering of residential options; responsive to market demand; phaseable Open space reorganized but substantially same scale QUESTIONS/CONCERNS • What is the ratio of 1 — 2 — 3 bedrooms? 40 — 40 — 20% total • How many Brownstones? 33 Case No. Attachment D ZA13-080 Page 5 • 1500 square feet is basically apartment size... 1500 square feet was approved by City Council in 2011 • What was the density in 2011 plan? Minimum square footage of 1500; no more than 25% of total can be 1500 square feet • What about parking? 80 parking spaces; we are currently over parked by 600 parking spaces for Southlake Town Square. The parking garages are underutilized. • What is the price point? $325 - $350 per square foot • Will these be owner occupied or leased? These will be sold. We have no holding company or comps in this area. • So you won't have any restrictions against renting? People own and rent property throughout the city • Why is the construction so expensive? It is Cooper & Stebbins quality expectation and commitment made from the beginning • There are two different housing products. Is the condo HOA different from the Brownstones? The HOA(s) can set rules that protect value. We are discussing the best approach regarding the HOA. • According to your new plan, Summit Avenue no longer dead ends and is now a through street. We are concerned about 1709 cut through. There is a safety concern and may be increased traffic from those seeking parking. You have made good comments... I love the concept. There is a great need for condos. SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council. Case No. Attachment D ZA13-080 Page 6 PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA13-012 Review No.: Two Date of Review: 08/28/13 Project Name: Plat Revision— Southlake Town Square Brownstones at Town Square APPLICANT: Frank Bliss Cooper and Stebbins 1256 Main St. Suite 240 Southlake, TX 76092 Engineer: Jim Riley Brockette Davis Drake, Inc. Phone: (817) 329-8400 Phone: (214) 824-3647 E-mail: fbliss@southlaketownsquare.com E-mail: jriley@bddeng.com CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/27/13 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT RICHARD SCHELL AT (817) 748-8602 OR DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 748-8072. Include the addition name for the existing platted lots in the title block as is stated in the legal description — Southlake Town Square, Brownstones at Town Square, Phase B. Provide pedestrian access easements over all sidewalks and plaza areas. 3. All lots must comply with the underlying zoning district regulations and controlling specific use permit and plan approvals. 4. Dedicate right of way as needed for approved alignment of Central Ave. 5. The following changes are needed with regard to easements: a. Provide easements for water, sewer and/or drainage in compliance with approved construction plans. b. Show via dotted lines any easements previously abandoned and label with deed record of abandonment. 6. Please note the following sections from Southlake Ordinance 880-A moving forward with platting and permitting of this project: Sec. 9.5-298. Subdivision of property burdened by pipeline. When one or more residential lots in a proposed subdivision are crossed or come by or come within 100 feet of any existing oil or gas pipeline or pipeline easement, the subdivider shall, priorto and as a condition of city approval of the subdivision, execute the following waiver and hold harmless agreement, which shall be duly acknowledged in the manner provided by law, and which shall thereafter be recorded in the appropriate deed or other permanent county records: "[Subdivider Name], by and through its duly undersigned and authorized officer, does hereby state that it fully realizes that it is applying for a permit from the City of Southlake to build within 100 feet of an existing oil or gas pipeline or pipeline easement, and that the City of Southlake considers building near such pipeline or pipeline easement to have certain inherent dangers, including but not limited to explosion and release of noxious, toxic and flammable substances. For the aforementioned reasons [Subdivider Name] hereby RELEASES and agrees to forever HOLD HARMLESS the City of Southlake, Texas, its officers, officials, employees, successors and Case No. Attachment E ZA13-080 Page 1 assigns from all liability in any way arising from the building, use or habitation of [structure described in the said permit]." Sec. 9.5-299. Waiver/hold harmless agreement required for issuance of building permit. (a) Any person, firm or corporation wishing to obtain a building permit for the erection, construction, reconstruction or expansion of any structure, of which any portion of such erection, construction, reconstruction or expansion would occur within 100 feet of an existing oil or gas pipeline or pipeline easement shall, prior to and as a condition of the issuance of such building permit, execute the following waiver and hold harmless agreement, which shall be duly acknowledged in the manner provided by law and which shall thereafter be notarized and recorded in the appropriate deed or other permanent county records: "I, [Applicant's Name], do hereby state, on my oath, that I fully realize I am applying for a permit from the City of Southlake to build within 100 feet of an existing oil or gas pipeline easement; that I am fully aware of the dangers inherent in building near such pipeline or easement, including but not limited to explosion and release of noxious, toxic and flammable substances; and, further, that I do hereby RELEASE and agree to forever HOLD HARMLESS the City of Southlake, Texas, its officers, officials, employees, successors and assigns from all liability in any way arising from the building, use or habitation of the structure described in the said permit." (b) Prior to beginning any excavation, trenching or digging using powered equipment or hand tools that may damage a pipeline, any person within the city shall be required to contact the one call system and any other appropriate underground utility coordinating systems and determine if there are any pipelines or public utilities in the vicinity of the proposed activities. (c) If physical contact is made with a pipeline during any excavation, trenching or digging, the pipeline operator must be notified by the person or agency making the physical contact with the pipeline for any necessary pipeline inspection or repair. Tree Conservation/Landscape Review E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 IIFAkiI11:10fe1 Alois] iyiIiyi1:4q&13 No comments. Public Works/Engineering Review Steve Anderson, P.E., CFM Civil Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8101 E-mail: sanderson@ci.southlake.tx.us .r1Aki1:4:7e1 W9191iyiliyi1:401111&'1 The same set of civil plans may be used for the concept plan (ZA13-011), preliminary plat (ZA13-012), SUP for the brownstones (ZA13-053) and the SUP for the residential lofts (ZA13-054). Only one set of civil plans is required for each meeting submittal 2. Provide all necessary easements for water, sanitary sewer and drainage. Easements shall be 15' minimum and located on one lot — not centered on the property line. Case No. Attachment E ZA13-080 Page 2 3. Label utilities as "Public" or "Private". DRAINAGE COMMENTS: 1. Construction plans have been submitted and are under review. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS: Submit 4 copies of the civil construction plans (22" X 34" full size sheets) and a completed Construction Plan Checklist as part of the first submittal for review directly to the Public Works Administration Department. The plans shall conform to the most recent construction plan checklist, standard details and general notes which are located on the City's website. A ROW permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Operations Department (817) 748-8082 to connect to the City's sewer, water or storm sewer system. A Developer's Agreement will be required for this development and may need to be approved by the City Council prior to any construction of public infrastructure. Construction plans for these improvements must be acceptable to Public Works prior to placing the Developer's Agreement on the City Council agenda for consideration. A separate bond will be required for the Maintenance Bond and bound only unto the City of Southlake for a period of two years for all development projects. The Maintenance Bond cannot be tied to the Performance and Payment Bond in any way. Any hazardous waste being discharged must be pretreated Ordinance No. 836. Fire Marshal Review Kelly Clements Assistant Fire Marshal (817) 748-8671 kclements(cD-ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: An automatic fire sprinkler system will be required for each individual residential unit due to the limited fire apparatus access based on the minimal street widths. Submit plans to Reed Fire Protection, 14135 Midway Road, Suite G260, Addison, Texas 75001. Phone 214-638-7599. Each individual residential unit must be supplied with an exterior horn/strobe that is tied into the water flow switch of the sprinkler system for that unit to provide audible notification in the event that a fire occurs. FIRE LANE COMMENTS: Fire apparatus access needs to be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (minimum of 80,000 Ibs GVW). Fire access roads have been increased from the previous width of 20 feet wide with an additional 8 feet of parallel parking in the existing Brownstones, to 22 feet wide with an additional 8 feet of parallel parking. Fire lanes require minimum 30 ft. inside turn radius and minimum 54 ft. outside turn radius. FIRE HYDRANT COMMENTS: Case No. Attachment E ZA13-080 Page 3 Hydrants required at a maximum spacing of 400 feet for these multi -story residential structures. (Identical to the spacing for the existing Brownstones) Hydrants are also required at intersecting streets and at intermediate locations between as prescribed above, measured as the hose would be laid. The following should be informational comments only SPIN meetings for this development were held February 11, 2013 and June 10, 2013. Because portions of this property were previously platted, a Plat Revision approval will be required for the final filing documents. Contact the City Parks Department at (817) 478-8184 regarding placement of this project on a Park Board agenda if any park land dedication is proposed. Staff recommends any proposed landscape / bufferyard areas are included in areas designated as common area to be maintained by the homeowner's association. It appears this property lies within the 65 'LDN D/FW Regional Airport Overlay Zone, requiring construction standards in compliance with the Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No. 479. Additionally, the "Avigation Easement and Release" shown in Appendix 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483 should be executed on subsequent Plats to be filed in the County Plat Records. A Developers Agreement is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure. The Developer's Agreement for this addition should consider streets, drainage, park dedication requirements and fees, off -site sewer extensions, off -site drainage and utility easements and impact fees. Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment E ZA13-080 Page 4 Surrounding Property Owners Garden District Residences and Phase C Brownstones SPO # Owner Zoning Land Use Acreage Response 1. Town Square Ventures Lp DT Town Center 0.48 NR 2. Sits Grand Avenue Lp DT Town Center 2.44 NR 3. Sits Grand Avenue Lp DT Town Center 0.58 NR 4. Southlake, City Of DT Town Center 1.37 NR 5. Town Square Ventures Lp DT Town Center 3.62 NR 6. Sits Grand Avenue Lp DT Town Center 2.96 NR 7. Southlake, City Of DT Town Center 2.07 NR 8. Town Square Ventures Iv Lp DT Town Center 1.66 NR 9. Town Square Ventures V Lp DT Town Center 1.10 NR 10. Town Square Ventures Lp DT Town Center 2.27 NR 11. Early, Fidelma DT Town Center 0.07 NR 12. Smith, Ryan DT Town Center 0.06 NR 13. Gray, Tim A DT Town Center 0.06 NR 14. Mills, Michael D Etux Rita DT Town Center 0.06 F 15. Wang, Tzuchung S & Julia Huang DT Town Center 0.06 NR 16. Lewis, Terry W Etux Debra K DT Town Center 0.06 NR 17. Pekowski Family 1998 Trust DT Town Center 0.06 NR 18. Hale, Genevieve Etvir John DT Town Center 0.06 F 19. Kienast, Joseph P Etux Deanna DT Town Center 0.06 F 20. Nelson, Kenneth R Etux Sharon DT Town Center 0.06 NR 21. Posey, James H DT Town Center 0.06 NR 22. Schirle, Joseph L Jr Living Tr DT Town Center 0.06 NR 23. Vance, Frederick Etux Carol DT Town Center 0.06 NR 24. Talkington, Timothy J DT Town Center 0.06 NR 25. Ware, Demarcus O DT Town Center 0.06 NR 26. Julia, Thomas Etux Mary Jane DT Town Center 0.06 NR 27. Durant, Tom & Susan Durant DT Town Center 0.13 NR 28. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.16 NR Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 1 29. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.07 NR 30. Williams, Herbert S III DT Town Center 0.04 NR 31. Raif, Thomas V Jr & Jennifer DT Town Center 0.04 NR 32. Torres, Carlos DT Town Center 0.04 NR 33. Wandschneider, Gary K DT Town Center 0.06 NR 34. Visosky, Mark DT Town Center 0.07 NR 35. Ducharme, Paul E Etux Marianne (Response Form received from Kacy and Marcella Rodgers) DT Town Center 0.07 F 36. Jackson, Charles B Jr & Cathy DT Town Center 0.07 NR 37. Ryne, Wallace R DT Town Center 0.08 NR 38. Francis, Tim D Etux Pamela D DT Town Center 0.09 NR 39. Faulkner, Sandra Potter DT Town Center 0.09 NR 40. Angeluna Properties Llc DT Town Center 0.08 NR 41. Smith, Pete DT Town Center 0.08 - 42. Fout, April R Etvir George D DT Town Center 0.08 NR 43. Osorio, Federico G Etux Paula DT Town Center 0.08 NR 44. Martin, John Etux Patricia D DT Town Center 0.08 NR 45. Shetterly, Mark Etux Kathern DT Town Center 0.08 NR 46. Leaf, Makram J Etux Caroline M DT Town Center 0.07 NR 47. Depperman, Chris DT Town Center 0.07 NR Biersmith, Mark A Etux Sally A DT Town Center 0.07 48. Cranston, James Etux Etal DT Town Center 0.08 NR 49. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.12 NR 50. Arnold, William Etux Joanna DT Town Center 0.08 NR 51. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 52. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 53. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 54. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.05 NR 55. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 56. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 57. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 58. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 59. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 60. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 61. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 62. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.65 NR 63. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.13 NR 64. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.09 NR 65. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.08 NR 66. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.07 NR 67. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.08 NR 68. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 69. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 70. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 71. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 72. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 73. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 74. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 75. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 76. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 77. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.06 NR 78. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.08 NR 79. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.08 NR 80. Smith, Ryan Taylor & Catherine DT Town Center 0.10 NR Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 2 81. Fields, Jennifer DT Town Center 0.06 NR 82. Coons, Robert & Kathy DT Town Center 0.06 NR 83. Alexander, Stanley Etux Lisa DT Town Center 0.06 F 84. Cardillo, Valentino Etux S a DT Town Center 0.08 O 85. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.13 NR 86. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.10 NR 87. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 0.12 NR 88. 7330 Fair Oaks Blvd Prt Etal C3 Town Center 2.36 NR 89. Cole Mp Pm Portfolio Llc C3 Town Center 4.66 NR 90. Hd Development Propertiex, Lp C3 Town Center 11.60 NR 91. Shamrock Pipeline Corp, The C3 Town Center 0.41 NR 92. Sits Land Lp DT Town Center 5.35 NR 93. Brownstone At Town Square Lp DT Town Center 4.31 NR 94. Hawton, Derek Aubrey DT Town Center 0.06 NR 95. Town Square Ventures Lp DT Town Center 0.48 NR Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided Notices Sent: Ninety-five (95) Responses Received Seven (7) — Attached NR: No Response Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 3 Notification F ZA13480 Meeting Cate. August 8F 2013 at 6:30 PM Cardillo, V'alenigna t=tux 9 1560 Main St Squftake Tx, 76fM2 396188 25 22 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAI , FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE O E.DULE i�I PUBLIC KEANG. Being the owner(s) of the prope so note I above, are hereby i favor of �� ad t t�r0eoided about Oflc refer � ced above. , Space for comments fegarding your posl#I)n: 1 (cirde or the proposed Plat R i 4 i 4 1 Signature: C I Date Additional Signature:' Date- � J Printed Nimes)=A\b rlanrdng Depaterront_ One 1'vrm perpmperty. musk be property awneg0l) whose names) are irrIned at top. 0Ww%Aqt contact the Phone Number (optional):. TILL Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 4 811/13 Ci.southlal�.b,us Mail - SaAfilak Town Square Garden District & Brownstones CITY Oi' SOUTHLAKE Southlake Town Square Garden District S Brownstones Shawna Cardillo W Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:39 PM To: "mayor@ci.southlake.tx.us <mayor@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "placel@ci.southlake.tx.us" <place1@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "place2@ci.southlake.tx.us" <place2@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "place3@ci.southlake.tx.us" <place3@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "place4@ci.southlake.tx.us" <place4@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "place5@ci.southlake.tx.us" <place5@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "place6@ci.southlake.tx.us" <place6@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us" <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Cc: Valentino Cardillo (Sent via Email and Hand Delivered) August 1, 2013 Southlake Planning & Zoning Members and Southlake City Council Members, This communication is in reference to the proposed Garden District development which will be reviewed at the August 8th P&Z public meeting. This is an extremely difficult topic to cover succinctly via email 1 letter communication or via a three minute discussion at the meeting. Therefore, we have attached three plan documents to be referenced concurrently with this letter. Additionally, in an effort to keep it simple, we have outlined our concerns in bullet point format below. At the highest level we have two major concerns: 1) The inclusion to tum Summit Avenue into a through -street. Previously the plan was Summit Avenue would D21 be a through -street to the Garden District, 2) The addition of condominiums to the Southlake Town Square area. 1) Summit Avenue as a Pass -Through Street vs. Dead -End (Exhibit 2 and 3 yellow vertical line) • The plans presented in January called for Summit Avenue to be blocked via barricades prior to entering the center of the Garden District and not be a through -street. (Exhibit 1, red horizontal line) • On May 29th we met with Lawrence Corson, Director of Residential Development and Sales, of Cooper and Stebbins Development. He stated there was no reason Summit Avenue has to be a through -street in order to complete the remainder of the Garden District development plans. This is a very key point to this topic as no other development would be delayed with this modification. Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 5 811/13 Ci.southlake.txus Mail - Soulhlake Tmn Square Garden District & Bromstones • Critical Point #1: This will create an extremely hazardous pedestrian and vehicular situation at the intersection of Highway 1709. As the volume of traffic increases significantly attempting to exit and enter from Summit Avenue via a stop sign a serious, or potentially fatal accident occurring Is only a matter of time (Exhibit 3, lime green "X"). The already established traffic signal, no more than a tenth of a mile up from Summit Avenue, on to Central Avenue should continue to be the main access way to the new retail development. (Exhibit 3, orange colored line; including planned expansion/right turn of Central Avenue across from Federal Way to Hwy 114. Planned retail expansion noted as well) • Critical Point #2: This will turn the Brownstone residential neighborhood into a very busy vehicular "pass through" to the planned retail expansion behind, and adjacent to, the Garden District. (Exhibit 2 and 3, teal blue colored line) • The rebuttal offered by some is: traffic already enters Summit Avenue today and exits via Main Street to Central. This is true; however, volume is light compared to what will occur with a formal cut -through street. If Summit Avenue is not cut -through and someone does turn on to it with the hopes of passing to Meeting Street, they will quickly learn this is not possible and return to the designed Central Avenue controlled traffic light the next time. • Traffic will increase drastically in the existing alley behind all the current Brownstones (and future Brownstones) as it will become a passage way for vehicles circling trying to find parking on the new Meeting Street which will run in front of the new Brownstones. This creates a dangerous situation for all residents in the new and existing Brownstones trying to exit and enter their garages. It also creates eminent traffic danger to all pedestrians but especially children, and or pets, exiting their garages or utilizing the alley for some form of recreation, i.e., basketball or skateboarding. (Exhibit 2 purple colored line) • Visitors will search for parking when curb -side Meeting Street parking is full. Vehicles will be less likely to circle to Main Street if they cannot cut -through via Summit Avenue. According to Cooper and Stebbins, the-Southlake Fire Department is apathetic to this pass -through of Summit Avenue. It is not required for any reason. • It appears too easy for the section between Meeting Street and the Central Avenue extension to Hwy 114 to be extended through the park area from the Summit Avenue extension (Exhibit 2 and 3, pinkish red colored line), making the scenarios outlined above an even greater concern. This section is cleverly disguised on the diagram with trees as is the Summit Avenue cut -through. As time progresses many will find a way to utilize this cut -through; not only as a means to get to retail shopping, but potentially as a short cut to other events, including their place of work, all having nothing at all to do with Southlake Town Square. • Residential traffic will increase substantially. Estimating 33 new Brownstones, and four new condo buildings with 60 units each, will total 273 more residential units. If each home averages two vehicles this alone could increase traffic flow on Summit Avenue by a large portion of 546+ vehicles daily. Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 6 • Not only will residential traffic increase but commercial vehicles (delivery trucks and semis) will utilize passage 24X7 through a residential community with children. Proposed Solution: The passage way from Summit Avenue to Meeting Street should be closed. (Exhibit 2 and 3 yellow colored line, dead-end at horizontal yellow line) This should be filled with an additional Brownstone unit to ensure this issue is not continued at a later date. 2) Addition of Condominiums to the Southlake Town Square Area • Critical Point #1: If the proposed units are approved they should be approved as Co-ops vs. Condos. (including, three Garden District Buildings, a building in the surface parking lot next to the movie theater which is scheduled to be built first, and future surface parking lot proposals throughout the Town Square.) (Exhibit 2 and 3, marked as Condo 14) • Critical Point #2: Southlake schools are a large draw to this community. What an excellent way to get your child into the Southlake school district via uncontrolled rent rates; rent a 1700 sq. ft., or less, condnminium. • At a recent SPIN meeting Cooper and Stebbins indicated they most likely would hold a large portion of ownership of the condos. Thus, they plan to lease/rent these as they see fit. This is the definition of an apartment building. • The rebuttal Cooper and Stebbins will offer is Brownstones, and/or homes can be rented in Southlake. This is true; however the rental fee typically carries a high premium of around $5,000+ per month. A company in business (Cooper and Stebbins, or any other) that needs to rent 60+ units at a time has much different motives than an individual renting a Brownstone or two. In a co-op, all your neighbors have been screened by a board. They are financially stable, they can afford their home, and they have letters of reference from a variety of sources. They have agreed to abide by house rules. Rental activity is tightly controlled, not totally forbidden, usually, but controlled. You don't have to worry about your "owner -mostly building" turning into a "renter -mostly building". If a resident is being obnoxious, you can actually take action that works. • If a large percentage of condo units go into foreclosure, the remaining residents are going to have to pay higher monthly costs and/or the building is going to deteriorate. Also, the condo building is not first in line when it comes to recovering from the foreclosed property. The equivalent of foreclosure in co-ops is rare, because of the screening process, and the co-op building is first in line when it comes to recovering funds if an owner does get into trouble. • One of the advantages with a co-op is specific to sub -leasing. After the owner has resided in the co-op for one or two years typically, most co-ops allow the owners to sublease for one to two years, and then they must move back into the co-op. The renters oftentimes have to be interviewed by the board and disclose their finances Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 7 • Despite the fact many condo associations contend they are empowered to either approve or disapprove the transfer of ownership, the reality is they have little power at all. Co-ops on the other hand have the right to approve or deny the sale of shares on the basis, for example of the buyer's perceived inability to meet financial obligations. Parking will be greatly compromised by eliminating the existing surface parking and forcing more cars to completely fill or overflow the existing parking decks. This very easily could have a reverse effect on retail shop success as consumers look for convenient parking, not a long walk from the top of a parking deck. (Exhibit 2 and 3, Condo 1) Proposed Solution: No condominiums should be allowed. If passed in the existing architectural format these should be co-op managed buildings. Another alternative is to go to 100% high value Brownstone units with no condominium buildings. Recent Brownstone sales are turning rapidly. We need to be cognizant of both issues to guard against property devaluation in a city with a history of home ownership value maximization and appreciation. Respectfully, Valentino and Shawna Cardillo 1560 Main Street Southlake, TX 76092 3 attachments Exhibit 1.pdf 279K Exhibit 2.pdf 362 K Exhibit 3.pdf 397K Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 8 i a4 W CL O (D CL M� A rF M y O � A O (D 0 13 c C � 0 1 fD (Q r *-.% N O N M x Cr r+ Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 9 Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 10 Exhibit: 3 Retail Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 11 Notification Response Form ZAI3-480 Meeting Dais: August B, 2013 at 6:30 PM Ps trIX 173 3ummitAve 3authlake Tx, 76092 39818E 24 7 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owners) of the property sa noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Plat Revision referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: maucella R Rodgm (214) RSG-735-4 ww�,m �re�]larod�e�,cabionl i�e.ca� ��arcE}1�Sodg�s�anlJooat Signature: Additional Date: Date, a Printed Names): AWYC-UA Ap6ciLr Must !in alopnrtyavomr(s)whose rtarris(s) ura prtnted at tep. Otherwise contend the Planning Department. One form pe€ propindy. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 12 Notification Response Fo ZA134 B�0 meeting Date: August 6, 2013 at :30 PIS Hole, ftnevieve Mir John PO Box 92183 Scuthlake Tx, 76092 396laB 21 21 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORM5 VIA MAIL, F. BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PI Bung the owner(s) of the property so noted ab aver of apposed tv undeo (uiroie or underline one) the proposed Prat Revision referenced Space for comments regarding year position: Signature; Additianai Signature: Printed Nalme(s): � Must be property pwnw(e) vdwip narne(s) are Phone Number (optional): 6-�e d ) aii(p. MerMeeco ffm OR HAND DELIVERY _ID Hr=ARING. are hereby i about Date: f7lco Date, One Form per PmPeft Case No. ZA13-080 Attachment F Page 13 Notification Response Form ZA13-080 Meeting date: August 8, 2013 at 6:30 PM Smith, Pete 1575 Main St Southlake Tx, 76092 396185 24 13 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Plat Revision referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: Additional Signature: Printed Name(s): Must Le property oviner(s) wriose Date: 7 Date: are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning deportment Orm form per prop ery. Phone Number (optional): &0&oc� r ', 3 Case No. ZA13-080 Attachment F Page 14 7L-sg.07.2w13 1=:20 Atli Notification Response Fora ZA13-080 Meeting Cale: August 8, 2013 at 6.30 PM Mills, Michael D Etux Rita 1528 Main St 5authilxke Tx, 76092 398188 21 17 PALE - 'J f 2 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VlA MAIL, FAX OR HIND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner{s the property so noted above, are hereby nn favorof posed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Plat Revision referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: -/A Date- E3W124n13 Additional Signature: , } Date: Printed Narne(a): ; Must be property awner(s) whale name(a) are printed at Sop. Otherwise contad the Flaming Dc-aArnent One farm per prepRny. Phone Number (optional), % q�ff q5:�2. Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 15 Aug_0-/_2C13 11:17 AM 7 August 2013 TO: planning & Zoning Commission city Council Ref: ZA01-011/012/051100 and the re$j4oatigl des clopment of Town Sgwm in general PAGE . 1 / 8 Due to prior out of town. Commit=nts I wilt not be available to speak in poison at the upoo3ning P&Z and potential t otateil meetings concerning this subject and so will briefly Provide sty Darin Tr=ta in writing. Firm and forernost i am an avid supporter of continued development of the residential elernent to ffie'rown Square District The concept components proportions are consistent with successful urbn designs and with all that I learned while earning an undergraduate dct;tce from the la W School of'AroMteck a and Urban Design. We currently have an unfinished project that has nntfch apside remaining. Given the confusing naming and numberint scheme of'the 5 current cases (e.g. it is not elear to tree even if the `Site plat," lcyuirelnents are included in these cases} i will not attempt to comment on the cases individually but rather make overall commcuts on the project, My points are as follows: All. ey'sYidth Et is not clear to IM what the c'MVnt state of play is on this subject. Hevvcvot, I want to make it clear that I d0 aft # supperri widener the exi;i ng alley_Mvs ent h� existjng tb fcct. The arguineitls for status quit are rnauy and cvnipelling (ASUBI appearance of an off oettter swvale; uwFul life delgada#cn due to scabbing on exttu pavement to that which exists; ownership issues since the additional ividth wouid be owned by a different HGA than the existing; increased maintenance cost due to chipping thHt occurs at seams; increased spccd of traffic and accident risks on private property; there is no longer a pubhe 8dety access issue pett:Ming to the Gattlen District; cie. etc.). if for some reason a discussion is held about widening thc pavement then [lie existing HDA, as the owner of the existing alley land and pavelnnent, rims to officially be a part of that discussion. My pusi m' would be that to avoid economic. datnage to our 140A property` any widening of the alley would have to be done by removing the crdsting pavement and constructing a new alley with a monnlithic pour side to side. 9000 tie a€_Centrol AVnue While I am not nemssardy against relocatin8 the path of this street in concept, nor do I in ❑uWept oppose 0tfing ill the di-ainage weas just north of the Original/Existing i3rowvnstUne District [i, e. the original 114 hetnes plan approved tax 2003),1 am opposed to any changes to the Open Space created in perpetuity as a northern buffer between this residential district and the commercial area, as was created in 2004 at the time that Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 16 Sttmtoit Park im rvdui;ed froin approximately 5 acres (Le- going all the way south to 1709) to its cmrit size). To August o f 2004 the developer cairn to the Parks Board (on which I served at that time) proposing a xvidening of the. aarrow buffer ou the north end of the 13r€ =stones District as a t7radcoff for r-ducing the size Df Summit Park:. It was the Parks Board inteut, as included in the passed motion and recommendarion to P&Z/Council t1mt thi s wider}ed buffer not be subject to future change. The Dcvclo er agrocd, Although f have not gone with my own eyes to vetify, I was ads=iscd a Wuple of months later by the then. Community Services Dwi ector that this in perpeWity stipulation was carried forward Lind approved through the rest of the process. Given that av:uon ud that it was a. key element in approving the red Oon in the si7.e of h+umrnit park I do not b�:lieve it is appropriate to change that Whioh was inwnded to be permanent without signi-ticant vetting. I would also point out that tl c changes involved appear t(k cxuhattge `° Lu the-' open space for "priyote" open space which is two different acmiderations (nttless the city is going to maintain the private open space that is raps wing the public open space). Ru�llc� ink eYg�#� itlr in the Garden District (i.e. the 2003 approved Brownstone Dishiot) I am opposed to any building height (above seq. ravel notiust above Srad4) vxcecdir g thax inducted in tare approved 2003 Brownstones Plan. Ivry position is that there should riot be uny building higher above sea level by location within the original Brownstones Dislzict than approved previously. 'Said another way it is notiust the height of the building itself but also the heights above sea level and the setbacks. Wtffle I have no cmpathy for those %Ybo bay h#rttes without doing clue ditigento as to what may be built nest to room, wt did our due diligence and basf.xi our purchases on what was approved for construction adjacent to our homes_.. and now that is being revised so 1 am asking that our site lines a& approved in 2003 be respected and protected. I think the developer i€ ccnsidt+ring that, but I did notice a reference to "4sStory Pelithouses....while that (night not be problematic us it pertains w the new area acing considered addjacent to the existing least Parking Ganger it is of evnccm if it is being conskdercd in the 2001 Di-ownstone District. Lam Fnd of Hain Street This I do not believe is a developer issue but rather € n issue betwtit tine city and the 144A. 'floe current cases crate arld excellent oppurku pity to clean up a situation that you probably do n(n even kinnvv exists... i.e. the HOA owns the street which is the last block on the east end of Main while Oc city oums the rant of Iviain, The original documents show that area as being a landscaped "court". At some point it bccame obvious that a. scaond wens point was needed. to the alley in that am Until ftnrther dr-Winpmctit otcared_ so this court was tun od into a street but the ownership stayed with the HOA. If there is some technicality for this unusual owrwship the technicbEty needs to b1z resolved and this ownership +converted to the city. With the legal documents all opera at dic si oment #or other ernes this would bean etl;icientfme. to fix it, To Dave it like it is will create ongoing pi-oblems cfmai-otemncc, replaeemcnt, liabqlity, etc. etc. While it is unlBx y the 140A would want to clo&c this street and convert it to a "court" i do Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 17 believe that once the alley has a new entrance to Lhe north an arpMont could he made to do so. Thmik you for takfiv the ffim to read my information {ind for your efforts to War= the protec6m of existing owners with that of con iru.Eing approMiate development of tour distt`ict and of aia commtunity- Kehaei D. Mills 1528 Main Strect �outk lak TX 76092 CC-, Tbc Bi owmtoncq at Town Square IAOA € oard of DITectars Frank Bliss Lam Corson Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 18 From: Mike Date: August 15, 2013, 12:01; I4 AM GMT+01:00 To: "place 1&Lsouthlakeu,us" <place I @& southlake.tx.us>, "place2@ci.southlake.tx.us" <p1ace2@ci.southlake,tx.us>, "place3 ci.southlake.fx.us" <p1ace3@ci.9outh1akt.tx.us>, "place4(r ci.southlake.tx.us" <place4@ci.southl$ke.tx.us>, "p1am5g6.s6uthlake.tx.us" <place5@ci.south1ake.tx.us>, Place6 <place6@ci.south1ake.tx.us>, *mayor@ci.southlakc,tx.us" <mayor@Ci.soudflake.tx.us Cc: Arnold Bill Lisa Alexander Ryan Smith Corson Subject: astone Area Coning Cases Mr. Mayor and City Council; iXe to prior commitments I was not in town to attend last Thursday's P&Z meeting which included the consideration of 5 cases associated with The Brownstones District and a parcel to the immediate west across Central Avenue. I did provide a letter in advance to P&Z and yourselves (attached below) with my comments and have reviewed the meeting subsequently via Vol), Since I also have out of town commitments on the 22nd when 4 of these cases may be considered by council I am writing to cruphasize 5 points: Building l-IeightVSite Litres - row Since original Brownstone buyers purchased their property with the full Brownstone (114 Bruvmstones) District approved as Brownstones with building locations and sizes known, I ask that the these site lines be protected by not allowing any structure (including penthouse or mechanical equipment) to negatively impact the site lines as approved by the city prior to our home investment transactions. To accomplish this both the heights of the new structures need to be considered (relative to sea level —not just structure height since grade levels may also be changing) AND set backs (the combination of height above sca level and distance from the existing homes). Oprn Space Reg uirem enU It warns that during the Concept Plan reviews about two years ago when the remainder of The Brownstone District was renamed The Garden District, the Public Open Space just north of and outside The (origimd) Brownstone District boundary was exchanged for Private Open Space within The Garden District (alga The Brownstone District). This Public Open pace just North of Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 19 and outside the original Brownstone District was put in place in 2004 as a buffer between residential property and the planned commercial area along the 114 Frontage Road and was the quid pro quo for reducing the size of Summit Park from about 5 acres to about 2.2 acres. This exchange was a vein win since it made more sense to have commercial along 1709 rather than open space/park and instead have an open space buffer to the north between residential and commercial. To have one side of this trade undone concerns me, particularly since my recollection is (from the discussion at the Parks Board meeting) that it was understood that the buffer being created to the north of the Brownstones District would not be considered for future movement/change/exchange. I have reviewed the written minutes from that meeting but they do not include the discussion that occurred so I will listen to the audio tape of the meeting when I am next in town. While I not necessarily against considering a reroute of Central Avenue I would point out that placing it on an approved Concept flan gives it traction/momentum, as shown cuts into the originally approved Brownstone District with an arterial type road in a residential area rather than bordering a residential area, and since it isolates as an island the N part of the original Brown stone district it invites an argument for changing that piece to commercial from residential. 11OA owncd allev_p_aralleling Main Street The current proposal calls for extending this existing a11ey to the east to connect with Park Ridge. To avoid this private alley from being a 3 block straight shot from Park Ridge to Central I request that bollards be placed preventing traffic from being able to access the alley from Park Ridge and visa -a -versa. 10 Main Street east of Park Ridge At some point this area was changed from being a landscaped court (as shown in pre 2005 documents) to being a street. I believe this was done to provide a second access point to the alley paralleling the south side of Main, Street at the east end since until a subsequent Brownstone phase was completed there would only be one access point. However, for some reason the land that this city street is on was never transferred to the city and remains under HOA ownership. This situation just invites issues to arise (e.g. Maintenance, repair, replacemegt, liability, etc.) that will be pmblernatic for both the city gird the 1-IOA. Now, while the governing documents are being revised as part ofthesc applications; would be the most efficient opportunity to fix this situation by moving this public street to city ownership. Traffic Calming During the P&7- meeting there was a discussion about placing traffic calming devices on Summit Avenue and perhaps the proposed Meeting Street. While I am not sure these devices are needed, Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 20 I would request that if they are placed elsewhere they also he placed on Main Street to the east of Central. Otherwise, traffic that would otherwise logically take other routes will apt for Main as the path of least resistance and Main east of Central is no less of a residential street than Summit. Thank you, Mike Mills PS The best way to reach me with any questions over the next few weeks is by etnail, but unfortumt0y my access is going to he spotty at times. <Ciarden District Comments (August 2013).dccx> Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 21 Notification Response Form ZA13 -080 Meeting Date: August 8, 2013 at 6:30 PM Kienast, Joseph P Etux Deanna 1518 Main St Scuthlake Tx, 76092 39618B 21 22 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby (:];- 21nfopposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Plat Revision referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: Date. Additional Signature: date: :3 Printed Narne(s): Must be pruwrty owner(s) whose nan•e{sj are prinled at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One furrn per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 22 Alicia Richardson From: Lisa Alexander Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 8:58 AM To: mayor@ci,southlake.tx.us Subject: Garden District Plans Hi Mayor Terrell - I have been to just a few Council meetings but I want to tell you that the few I have been to I have really enjoyed the way you have run them. Thank you. I wanted to email you and some of the other council members with a couple more comments I have on some of the issues that were brought up last night. 1. Horne Depot - I would like to see the city pass an ordinance similar to what they passed behind Central Market. That will solve the problem. No wall was required when Bill Arnold's home was built backing up to Home Depot - no wall was built when the other brownstones were built down by Home Depot. To require a wall now seems a bit odd when the problem is with the time of day those trucks are using that area - Please consider passing a noise ordinance restricting trucks during times as was done behind Central Market 2. Summit Avenue - Planning and Zoning heard a 19 minute presentation on why one brownstone resident doesn't want Summit to be extended to Meeting Street. P&Z determined it was better for Summit to be a through street. I live at the corner of Summit and Main Street. Currently we have daily traffic that turns to go down Summit expecting Summit to continue. They make the tam and then are stuck. They either turn around in our alley or go through the alley to exit. Summit was never designed not to be a through street - otherwise the City would have made it a cul-de-sac. If you do not extend Summit to Meeting cars will still turn off of 1709 onto Summit you will just be increasing the traffic on Main Street. The cars are going to see brownstones they want to get to and will try to get there the most logical way - following Summit. By not putting Summit through to Meeting you will be forcing more cars on Main Street both East and West of Summit and adding to the traffic already on that road. You would be helping one brownstone owner by not increasing traffic by their front door but you would be doing so by adding more traffic to everyone else. I by the way would benefit from Summit staying a dead end. But I do not feel it benefits the entire neighborhood. 3. Residence Building - I think adding a residence building in the parking lot is a great idea. Pulling the side walk into Central Avenue more will close down that street to fast traffic, open it up to a more friendly walking environment and ascetically look better by hiding the garage behind the 5 story building. 4. Dog Park - Coopers & Stebbins mentioned putting a small dog park in at the same time as creating that oval park. I did not hear that mentioned but given the enormously high percentage of dog owners the current brownstone owners have (I count 12 just off the top of my head in 44 units) and no place to go and let the dogs play I feel this would be a wonderful addition to the area. Please make sure this is part of the plan. Thank you for taking the time to read my email -1 know you must get a ton of these. Thank you also for serving our City with great integrity and professionalism. It does not go unnoticed!! Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 23 Thanks!! Lisa Alexander 1562 Main Street Case No. Attachment F ZA13-080 Page 24