Loading...
05-22-08 PZ Agenda Packet TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA May 22, 2008 6:00 pm WESTLAKE CIVIC CAMPUS - BOARD ROOM 2600 J. T. OTTINGER ROAD 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETINGS HELD ON APRIL 24,2008 and MAY 8, 2008. 3. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING THE FOLLOWING CASES: A) SITE PLAN; CASE NO. SP-08-01 B) PRELIMINARY PLAT; CASE NO. PP-08-01; Lots 1-6 C) FINAL PLAT; CASE NO. FP-08-01; Lots 1-2 only ALL THREE APPLICATIONS LISTED ABOVE PERTAIN TO THE FOLLOWING TRACTS OF LAND: approximately 10.22 acres of land in the Planned Development 3- Planning Area 10 (PD 3-10) zoning district, being a tract of land situated in the William Huff Survey, Abstract No. 648, Tarrant County, Texas, and being a portion of that tract of land conveyed to AIL Investment, L.P., by deed recorded in Volume 13588, Page 189 and all of that tract of land conveyed to Hillwood Development Co. LLC (Tract 1) by deed recorded in County Clerk's Filing No. D205179108, both of Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; and, generally located at the Southwest corner of SH 377 and SH 170. 4. CONTINUE A PUBLIC HEARING, SCHEDULED FOR 7:00 PM, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS, BY REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 107 ACRES FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNING AREA 3 (PD 3-3) AND REZONING THAT ACREAGE TO BE CALLED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3- PLANNING AREA 12 (PD 3-12); (THIS CASE IS BEING CONTINUED FROM THE MAY 8, 2008, SPECIAL CALLED MEETING) 5. ADJOURNMENT. CERTIFICATION I certify that the above notice was posted at the Town Hall of the Town of Westlake, 3 Village Circle, Suite 202 and Westlake Civic Campus, 2600 J.T. Ottinger Road, Westlake, Texas, 76262, on Monday, May 19, 2008, by 5 p.m. under the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. Kim Sutter, TRMC, Town Secretary If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special needs, please advise the Town Secretary 48 hours in advance at 817-490-5710 and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you. Is A 7 MINUTES OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING May 8, 2008 PRESENT: Chairman Bill Greenwood and Commissioners Tim Brittan. Walter Copeland, Allen Heath and Sharon Sanden. ABSENT: None. OTHERS PRESENT: Town Manager Tom Brymer and Town Secretary Kim Sutter. 1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Greenwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. CONTINUE A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS, BY REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 107 ACRES FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNING AREA 3 (PD 3-3) AND REZONING THAT ACREAGE TO BE CALLED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNING AREA 12 (PD 3-12); AUTHORIZING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, A CONFERENCE AND EDUCATIONAL C'E'NTER, DATA CENTER, OFFICE AN"" RETAIL USES; DEFINING CERTAIN TERNIS; DESCRIBING AND INTERPRETING THE PD CONCEPT PLAN, REGULATING PERMITTED USES, HEIGHT, LOT SIZES, BUILDING LINES, TOTAL FLOOR AREA, PARKING, LOADING AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; LANDSCAPING, FLOOD PLAIN, AND DRAINAGE; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRO`v'IDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chairman Greenwood introduced the item. Planning and Zoning Commission 2 of 3 Special Meeting May 8, 2008 Town Manager Brymer addressed the Board regarding the case and advised the Commission that this is a continuance from the April 24, 2008, meeting, and the applicant has requested an additional continuance. Mr. Joe Schneider, Vice President of Land Development for Hillwood Properties, representing the applicant was present to address questions from the Commission. Town Manager Brymer advised that the following items have been provided to the Commission: - Briefing memo; - Draft of proposed ordinance; - PD Concept Plan; - Vicinity Maps; - Traffic Impact Analysis; - Letter from Staubach Company with regard to service/employee access; - Letter from Hillwood with regard to allowable density within the remaining portion of PD 3-3. Chairman Greenwood continued the public hearing. Mr. Joe Schneider, Hillwood Properties, addressed the Commission, and requested a continuance of the case to May 22, 2008. Discussed ensued with regard to traffic counts on Dove Road. There being no others requesting to address the Board regarding the case, Chairman Greenwood requested a motion to continue the public hearing. MOTION: Commissioner Brittan made a motion to continue the public hearing to May 22, 2008, at 7 p.m. Commissioner Heath seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of -0. Commissioner Sanden reminded Mr. Schneider of the sense of the Commission to have the applicant work with the Westlake Public :Art Society to explore opportunities for public art sites on the tract and/or opportunities to incorporate public art in the signage as they work through the site plan process. Mr. Schneider acknowledged the Commissions request. Planning and Zoning Commission 3 of 3 Special Meeting May 8, 2008 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE UPCOMING CONSIDERATION OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING OIL & GAS WELL DRILLING SITES. Town Manager Brymer addressed the Commission regarding the item. Mr. Brymer reviewed the policy relative to gas well drilling as approved by the Board of Aldermen during the April 28, 2008, workshop. Mr. Brymer advised the Commission that the process encompasses two components: 1) zoning related relative to land use and will be include a recommendation from the Commission; and 2) revisions to the technical standards relative to the drilling, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Board of Aldermen. Town Manager Brymer advised the Commission that, at the direction of the Board of Aldermen, staff is conducting the research relative to land use and technical review as they relate to gas well drilling in Westlake, and the process is expected to take 60 to 90 days. As a result of the direction by the Board and the estimated timeline, Mr. Brymer advised the Commission that the May 19, 2008, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting will not be held. Discussion ensued with regard to the technical standards of the proposed gas well drilling ordinance. 4. ADJOURNMENT. There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Greenwood asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Heath made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Brittan seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. Commissioner Sanden adiourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on the 22nd day of May 2008. William E. Greenwood. Chairman ATTEST: Kim Sutter, TRMC, Town Secretary ,J • �S MINUTES OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING April 24, 2008 PRESENT: Chainnan Bill Greenwood and Commissioners Walter Copeland, Allen Heath, and Sharon Sanden. ABSENT: Commissioner Tim Brittan. OTHERS PRESENT: Town Manager Tom Brymer, Town Attorney Michael Kallas, Town Secretary Kim Sutter, Planning and Development Director Eddie Edwards, Facilities and Recreation Director Troy Meyer, DPS Director Don Wilson, and Assistant to the Town Manager Ginger Awtry. 1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Greenwood called the meeting to order at 6:09 p.m. 2. REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 28,2008. Chairman Greenwood introduced the item and asked for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Copeland made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Commissioner Sanden seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 3-0, with Commissioner Heath abstaining from the vote as he was not present at the February 28 meeting. 3. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS, BY REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 107 ACRES FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNING AREA 3 (PD 3-3) AND REZONING THAT ACREAGE TO BE CALLED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNED AREA 12 Town of Westlake Page 2 of 5 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 24,2008 (PD 3-12); AUTHORIZING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, A CONFERENCE AND EDUCATIONAL CENTER, DATA CENTER, OFFICE AND RETAIL USES; DEFINING CERTAIN TERMS; DESCRIBING AND INTERPRETING THE PD CONCEPT PLAN, REGULATING PERMITTED USES, HEIGHT, LOT SIZES, BUILDING LINES, TOTAL FLOOR AREA, PARKING, LOADING AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; LANDSCAPING, FLOOD PLAIN, AND DRAINAGE; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chairman Greenwood introduced the item and opened the public hearing. Town Manager Brymer presented the case to the Commission. Mr. Brymer stated that the case includes the rezoning of a 107 acre tract located north of Dove Road and east of J.T. Ottinger, and currently is included in the existing PD 3-3. Mr. Brymer explained that the applicant is requesting a new planning area be created to include the 107 acre tract (PD 3- 12). Town Manager Brymer presented a comparison chart of the current and proposed uses: COMPARISON OF PERMITTED USES PD 3-3 PD 3-12 Office Office Retail Retail—Accessory Use Residential Conference/Education Center Hotel/Motel Data Center Golf Golf Restaurant Restaurant Town Manager Brymer advised the Board that, at the applicants request, the number of single family residences will not be reduced. Mr. Brymer further advised that the applicant is requesting a continuance of the public hearing to allow more time for the completion of a traffic impact analysis. Mr. Joe Schneider, Vice President of Land Development for Hillwood Properties, representing the applicant was present to address questions from the Commission. Commissioner Heath inquired as to the impact on residential housing density. Town of Westlake Page 3 of 5 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 24,2008 Planning and Development Director Edwards responded that the residential housing density for the acreage has not decreased; however, he reminded the Commission that the applicant must meet the Town's open space, setback. and building height requirements when development occurs. Mr. Joe Schneider, Hillw-ood Development, responded that the applicant intends to meet the open space requirements which could reduce the density. Chairman Greenwood expressed his concern that simply considering the case in front of the Commission at this time seems short sighted relative to development of the remainder of PD 3-3. MOTION: Commissioner Sanden made a motion to continue the public hearing to May 8. 2008, at 7 p.m. Commissioner Heath seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. Town Manager Brymer advised the Commission that information relative to residential density for the existing PD 3-3 will be provided to the Commission, as well as a map depicting the area as it relates to the existing PD, and the results of the traffic impact analysis. 4. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS, BY REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 10.22 ACRES FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNING AREA 8 (PD 3-8) AND REZONING THAT ACREAGE TO BE CALLED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNED AREA 10 (PD 3-10); AUTHORIZING OFFICE AND RETAIL USES; DEFINING CERTAIN TERMS; DESCRIBING AND INTERPRETING THE PD CONCEPT PLAN, REGULATING PERMITTED USES, HEIGHT, LOT SIZES, BUILDING LINES, TOTAL FLOOR AREA, PARKING, LOADING AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; LANDSCAPING, FLOOD PLAIN, AND DRAINAGE; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 5. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS, BY REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 10.82 ACRES FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNING AREA 9 (PD 3-9) AND REZONING THAT ACREAGE TO BE CALLED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3-PLANNED AREA 11 (PD 3-11); AUTHORIZING OFFICE AND RETAIL USES; DEFINING CERTAIN TERMS; DESCRIBING AND INTERPRETING THE PD CONCEPT PLAN, REGULATING PERMITTED USES, HEIGHT, LOT SIZES, BUILDING LINES, TOTAL FLOOR AREA, PARKING, LOADING AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; LANDSCAPING, FLOOD PLAIN, AND DRAINAGE; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PROVIDING A Town of Westlake Page 4 of 5 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 24, 2008 SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chairman Greenwood introduced items 4 and 5 and opened the public hearings for each. Town Manager Brymer presented item 44 (PD 3-10) to the Board and advised that the case includes the rezoning of approximately 10.22 acres currently located within PD 3-8, south of SH 170 and east of SH 377. Mr. Brymer advised that the density of the area will not be impacted and there are no changes in the permitted uses; however the applicant is requesting changes to the proposed regulations. Mr. Joe Schneider, Vice President of Land Development for Hillwood Properties, representing the applicant was present to address questions from the Commission. Director of Planning and Development Edwards reviewed the current and the proposed changes to the planning area with regard to lot size, lot width, rear and side yard setbacks, sign standards, landscaping, parking lot landscaping, lighting, and tree density. Discussion ensued with regard to the size of the signs, access from US 377 and US 170, type of tenants expected to occupy the buildings, proposed lighting and adherence to "dark sky' standards. Town Manager Brymer presented item #5 (PD 3-11) to the Commission. Mr. Brymer advised that there are no changes in the permitted uses; however the applicant is requesting changes the same proposed regulations as reviewed with item 44. Mrs. Michelle Corson, chair of the Westlake Public Art Society, requested the applicant consider consulting with the Westlake Public Art Society to explore opportunities to include public art in the signage. There being no on requesting to speak, Chairman Greenwood asked for a motion to close the public hearing. MOTION: Commissioner Heath made a motion to close the public hearings. Commissioner Sanden seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. MOTION: Commissioner Heath made a motion to recommend approval of the zoning cases as presented (PD 3-10, removing 10.22 acres from PD 3-8 and rezoning that acreage to be called PD 3-10; and PD 3-11, removing 10.82 acres from PD 3-9 and rezoning that acreage to be called PD-3-11), subject to the comparative tables (lot size and width, setbacks, signage standards, landscape development, parking lot landscaping, and lighting standards), presented with the case. Commissioner Copeland seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. Town of Westlake Page 5 of 5 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 24,2008 MOTION: Commissioner Copeland made a motion supporting the sense of the Commission to have the applicant explore opportunities for public art sites on the tracts and/or opportunities to incorporate public art in the signage as they work through the site plan process. Commissioner Sanden seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. 6. ADJOURNMENT. There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Greenwood asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Sanden made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Heath seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. Chairman Greenwood adjourned the meeting at 7:14 p.m. Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on the 22nd day of May 2008. William E. Greenwood, Chairman ATTEST: Kini Sutter, TRMS", Town Secretary TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TX STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION /BOARD OF ALDERMEN I. CASE INFORMATION Case No(s): SP- 08 -01, PP -08 -01 Lots 1 -6, and FP- 08 -01, Lots 1 -2 Only Date: 5 -22 -08 Request: Applicant is requesting approval of the following: Site Plan X (for Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -6) Preliminary X (for Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -6) Final Plat X (for Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -2) Development Name: Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -6 Location: Subject property is located at the southwest corner of SH 170 and SH 377. The site is 10.2 acres and is bounded on the east by SH 377, on the north by SH 170, on the west by Union Pacific RR right -of -way. The site has a triangular configuration. Owner: Hillwood Developer: Hillwood Zoning: PD- 3 -10 Proposed Use(s): The applicant intends to develop the site with neighborhood commercial /retail /service uses. Phasing: The applicant is submitting a site plan and preliminary plat for Lots 1 -6 of the subject property, and is submitting a final plat for Lots 1 and 2 with the intention of developing those 2 lots initially and developing the remainder in subsequent phases. II. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS 1. General: This is a request for approval of a site plan and preliminary plat for Lots 1 -6 of Westlake Corners South, as well as a request for approval of a final plat for Lots 1 and 2, Westlake Corners South. 1 This project represents the first stand alone retail development activity in Westlake. As such, it with be setting the aesthetic, design, traffic, and quality standards for such development in this area because there are additional sites available in this general area for further retail development by this owner in the future. For that reason, in the staff comments below, a heavy emphasis is placed on architectural design, traffic access management, and creating a "sense of place" for this neighborhood commercial /retail development. This development sets the tone for the community appearance we wish to establish for this western /southwestern retail gateway into the Westlake. The applicant represents that all conditions of zoning for PD 3 -10 that affect the site plan and platting for this property have been met. 2. Utilities (including on and off -site extensions and easement dedications): Water and sewer utilities for this site are provided by the Town of Westlake. All staff comments related to water and sewer lines have been addressed by the applicant including line sizing, as well as spacing of manholes, fire hydrants, and valves. A second water line crossing has been added to provide adequate service redundancy (i.e.- looping) and the Town's requirement that no "dead end line" may exceed more than 600' in length has been met. On -site access easements have been provided for all public improvements and off -site easements necessary for water and /or sewer utilities to serve the site will be dedicated by the applicant by separate instrument. A note must be placed on the utility construction plans showing the approved hydrant type, installation cross section, etc. All on -site electric utility lines, new or existing, should be placed underground. 3. Storm water (including on and off -site facilities and easement dedications): The applicant's engineer has verified that the drainage structures under SH 377 have capacity to receive run -off from this site. Further, the applicant's engineer has confirmed that the site can be properly drained without an on -site storm drain system (i.e.- detention or retention). The time of concentration has been changed to a 10 minute time of concentration per our requirement for a retail site. No off -site drainage easements are necessary to serve this site. There is no mapped FEMA 100 -year floodplain on the subject property. 2 4. Setbacks /Building Lines: The building line for Building 1 on Lot 1 along SH 170 is requested at 35' given its function as a side setback, as opposed to the required 50' front - setback. Staff is in support of this request. 5. Parking /Fire Lanes: Proposed on -site vehicular parking meeting the Town's standards is being provided. Due to challenges of the site's configuration, the standard 50 foot fire lane inside radius is being requested to allow for the industry accepted 25 foot minimum (per the International Fire Code, Sec. 503.3.4). This request is supported by staff. Certain parallel parking at the rear of Building 1 on Lot 2 has been modified to be designated as only for unloading /loading spaces for this building. 6. Solid Waste Collection Facilities: Shared dumpster locations are shown on the site plan. These locations shall be screened with materials that must match building architecture and building materials. 7. Street/Highway Right -of -Way Dedication Requirements: No additional right -of -way dedication on SH 377 is required to be dedicated for this project given the applicant's representation that: a.) TxDOT will allow their existing lane capacity to be striped for use as an acceleration /deceleration lanes for all site ingress /egress points on SH 377 and, b.) should TxDOT require use of this lane on SH 377 in the future for through - traffic, there is adequate right -of -way remaining on -site to build replacement acceleration /deceleration lanes to serve the development's points of ingress /egress. The applicant has stated that there is 25' to 30' of right -of- way from back of curb to the property line that is sufficient for future replacement acceleration /deceleration lanes, if needed. No additional right -of -way dedication is required on SH 170 to serve this site. 3 8. Traffic Access Managementlinternal Site Circulation and Connectivity to Adjacent Property Tracts (both owner's and non - owner's tracts): Roadway access for the subject site is provided entirely by TxDOT controlled roadways (SH 170 and SH 377). As such, minimum access requirements are set by TxDOT. However, with TxDOT concurrence, the Town can set access requirements over and above TxDOT minimum standards. Access management standards are set by the Town to provide adequate site access to the property owner, while providing for proper through- traffic movement balanced with safe turning movements. Turn movements into the site that are from main lanes or that conflict with too many other turning movements at one point of ingress /egress should be not be allowed. The applicant has requested 1 point of ingress /egress on to their site off of SH 170 and 3 points of ingress /egress off of SH 377. These points of ingress /egress should be subject to these conditions: a. The SH 170 ingress /egress point is acceptable if it uses a split- throat right - in /right -out only design as shown on the applicant's site plan. b. the 3 access points on SH 377, with the spacing shown on the applicant's site plan, are acceptable (assuming TxDOT concurrence), if.. 1. All 3 of the SH 377 access points shown on the applicant's site plan are to be served by a deceleration /acceleration lane that is currently excess TxDOT lane capacity (now used as shoulder) and must be striped per Town requirements to provide for this deceleration /acceleration lane function. 2. The northern SH 377 ingress /egress point (closest to the SH 377 and 170 intersection) should be designated as right -in /right -out only if TxDOT and the Town concur that there are too many left turning movements to make full ingress /egress movements safely at this location. 3. The remaining 2 ingress /egress points on SH 377 be permitted to serve as full ingress /egress points provided adequate deceleration /acceleration lane capacity is provided per 8 -b -1 above. If this is not provided, the southern -most ingress /egress point should be restricted in to right -in /right -out turning movements only. !9 9. Site Design While the applicant plans to phase his development by developing Lots 1 and 2 first, the site plan submitted covers Lots 1 -6. Thus, the comments below also apply to Lots 3 -6 as well. A. Materials, Building Design, Architecture, and Hard Screening Materials. The attached exterior elevations show the building materials to be used will be: • simulated stone • concrete with textured painting and cast reveals • wood kickers • standing seam metal roofs • concrete column • galvanized steel awnings at certain points on each building • a contrasting awning material at other points on the building • texturized paint • metal /wood kicker These materials are acceptable and should be used in all the buildings on the site without significant deviation, unless a formal site plan amendment is approved. Roof lines. The roof line and tower element in Building 1 on Lot 1 are acceptable. The roof line on Building 1 on Lot 2 must be revised to show further roof line articulation at the north and south ends of the building to avoid a monolithic rectangular building appearance facing SH 377. Architecture. All buildings are required to have 4- sided, 360 degree architecture. The Town's development standards require all sides of these buildings to be articulated. Building 1 on Lot 1 must be articulated on all 4 sides due to its full street view. The drive -in access for this building must be placed on the south side of the building only. All remaining buildings on Lots 2 -6 must be articulated on all sides except for the side facing the Union Pacific RR right -of -way (i.e.- articulation on 3 sides), if it has no street view and is being used only for service access as well as loading /unloading. Since four -sided architecture is required and the side of this building facing the railroad would not be articulated, this building side must have adequate treatments to break -up monolithic appearances including banding and variation of building materials in attractive patterns. 5 Hard Screening. All gas meters, electric meter boxes, breaker boxes, and conduit, etc located at a building's service entrances should be screened with materials that match the building's architecture and materials, and /or placed inside the building, and /or be painted to match the building. All heating /air conditioning equipment, placed on the ground near the building or on the roof, must be fully screened from view. B. Landscaping and Landscape Screening A tree survey and landscape plan has been submitted that reflects one of the conditions of the zoning granted for this site involving a reduction in trees required. There is one existing protected tree on -site that will be mitigated per the Town's ordinances. Language needs to be added to the landscape plan that all plantings in public right -of -way are the applicant's maintenance responsibility and adequate clearance for service vehicles must be observed. All electric transformers, irrigation equipment, gas meters, etc located away from the buildings, or located at the sides of buildings, should be totally screened with landscaping. C. Signage Numbers and sizes of monument signs for this site were set as condition of zoning. Monument sign locations are shown on the site plan. All of these signs will require detailed review per the Town's sign permit ordinance. However, the monument signage for this site plan approval process should comply with the details submitted with this site plan as minimum standards regarding sign size, illumination, and materials. All sign materials must harmonize with site's architectural theme and materials. Sign faces must have internal illumination or fixtures that direct all light downward toward the sign face or a combination thereof. D. Lighting The applicant has submitted a photometric survey stating that it meeting the Town's standards. A note should be placed on the photometric plan and the site plan stating that the site plan complies with the Town's lighting standards. Prior to construction, the applicant needs to submit the type of parking lot light fixture proposed for staff review and approval for the entire site as well as any on- building light fixtures (sconces) for Buildings 1 and 2, if any are proposed. All fixtures must meet Town N standards to direct all on -site light downward on the applicant's site only and minimize ambient light migration off -site. E. Water Features /Public Art No water features (i.e.- storm water retention) is required for this site. Locations for public art may be available, are encouraged, but not required. The applicant has indicated a willingness to work with the Public Arts Committee regarding placement of public art on this gateway location. F. Pedestrian Circulation (within the site) Pedestrian traffic should be provided by a delineated means of safe foot travel on site. Ways to accomplish this include stamped colorized concrete cross walks. G. Trails /Open Space No trail locations are required since the site is not located in the 100 - year flood plain per the Town's trail plan. 10. Other: A. This property is in MUD 1 and will require de- annexation from the MUD 1 boundaries. The applicant has proposed that this be completed prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy of the buildings on Lot 1 and 2 as opposed to making it a condition of filing the final plat for Lots 1 and 2. Staff concurs with this request. B. All vicinity maps on all documents should be changed to read "JT Ottinger Road" as opposed to " Ottinger Road" and all buildings on all lots on all documents should be numbered sequentially to be the same as the lot number on which the building is located. C. No accessory buildings should be allowed on this site. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the site plan and preliminary plat for Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -6 and the final plat for Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -2 subject to following stipulations: 1. Utilities: approval with all staff changes as submitted by the applicant as described in above Section 11 -2 of this, including a note being placed on the utility construction plans showing approved hydrant type, installation cross section, etc. All on -site electric lines, new or existing, shall be underground. 2. Storm water: approval with all staff changes as submitted by the applicant as described in Section II -3 of this report 3. Setbacks /Building Lines: approval with the requested 35' building line for Building 1 on Lot 1 along SH 170 as requested. 4. Parking /Fire Lanes: approval with the 25' inside radius fire lane width and with certain parallel parking at the rear of Building 1 on Lot 2 being designated for loading /unloading only with the site plan change to reflect these items. 5. Solid Waste Collection Facilities: approval with the dumpster locations as designated on the site plan and all dumpsters screened with solid screening using materials that must match building architecture and building materials. 6. Street/Highway Right -of -Way Dedication Requirements: approval with no additional right -of -way dedication required subject to the following conditions: a.) TxDOT will allow their existing lane capacity to be striped for use as an acceleration /deceleration lanes for all site ingress /egress points on SH 377 and, b.) should TxDOT require use of this lane on SH 377 in the future for through - traffic, there is adequate right -of -way remaining on -site to build replacement acceleration /deceleration lanes of serve the development's points of ingress /egress. The applicant has stated that there is 25' to 30' of right -of- way from back of curb to the property line that is sufficient for future replacement acceleration /deceleration lanes, if needed. c.) No additional right -of -way dedication is required on SH 170 to serve this site. 7. Traffic Access Ili'lanagement;lnternal Site Circulation and Connectivity to Adjacent Properly Tracts (both owner's and iron- ov„ner's tracts): approval of 1 point of ingress /egress on to their site off of SH 170 and 3 points of ingress /egress off of SH 377 subject TxDOT approval and to these conditions: E:? a.) the SH 170 ingress /egress point is acceptable if it uses a split- throat right -in /right -out only design as shown on the applicant's site plan. b.) the 3 access points on SH 377, with the spacing shown on the applicant's site plan, are acceptable, if all 3 of the SH 377 access points shown on the applicant's site plan are to be served by a deceleration /acceleration lane that is currently excess TxDOT lane capacity (now used as shoulder) and must be striped per Town requirements to provide for this deceleration /acceleration lane function. c.) The northern SH 377 ingress /egress point (closest to the SH 377 and 170 intersection) should be designated as right -in /right -out only if TxDOT and the Town concur that there are too many left turning movements to make full ingress /egress movements safely at this location. d.) The remaining 2 ingress /egress points on SH 377 be permitted to serve as full ingress /egress points provided adequate deceleration /acceleration lane capacity is provided per 7 -b above. If this is not provided, the southern -most ingress /egress point should be restricted in to right -in /right -out turning movements only. 8. Site Design: approval subject to: staff's review and approval of the final exterior elevations for all building on Lots 1 -6, that the final exterior elevations comport to the applicant's attached preliminary exterior elevation drawing, as well as the following requirements for Lots 1 -6: A. Materials, Building Design, Architecture, and Hard Screening 1. Materials. Approved building materials for this project shall consist of the following minimums described in Section II -9 -A above. These materials will be used in all the buildings on the site without significant deviation, unless a formal site plan amendment is approved. 2. Roof lines. The roof line and tower element in Building 1 on Lot 1 are acceptable as submitted. The roof line on Building 1 on Lot 2 shall be revised and subject to final approval by staff to show further roof line articulation at the north and south ends of this building to avoid a monolithic rectangular building appearance facing SH 377. 3. Architecture. All buildings are required to have four - sided, 360 degree architecture. The Town's development standards require all sides of these buildings to be articulated. Building 1 on Lot 1 must be articulated on all 4 sides due to its full street view. The drive -in access for this building must be placed on the south side of the building only. All remaining buildings on Lots 2 -6 must be articulated on all sides except for the side facing the Union Pacific RR right -of -way (i.e. - articulated on 3 sides), if it has no street view and is being used only for service access as well as loading /unloading. Since four -sided architecture is required, and the walls of buildings facing the railroad will not be articulated, this wall must have adequate treatments to break -up monolithic appearances. These can include banding, inlays, coining, and variation of building materials in attractive patterns as approved by staff. All these items must be reflected on final elevations and approved by staff prior to building permit issuance. 4. Hard Screening. All gas meters, electric meter boxes, breaker boxes, and conduit located at service entrances of buildings should be screened with materials that match the building's architecture and materials or be placed inside the building. All heating /air conditioning equipment, whether placed on the ground, near the building, or on the roof, must be fully screened from view. B. Landscaping and Landscape Screening: approval subject to: 1. adding language to the landscape plan that all plantings in public right - of -way are the applicant's maintenance responsibility and adequate clearance for service vehicles must be observed, and 2. All electric transformers, irrigation equipment, gas meters, etc located away from the buildings, or at/near the side of buildings, shall be totally screened with landscaping. C. Signage: approval subject to the monument sign requirements set by zoning and the locations shown on the site plan. Further, all of these signs will require detailed review per the Town's sign ordinance process. Additionally, the monument signage for this site plan approval process shall comply with the details submitted with this site plan as minimum standards regarding sign size, illumination, and materials. All sign materials shall harmonize with site's architectural theme and materials. Sign faces must have internal illumination or fixtures that direct all light downward toward the sign or a combination thereof. D. Lighting: approval subject to a note being placed on the photometric plan and the site plan stating that the site plan complies with the Town's lighting standards. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit the type of parking lot light fixture proposed for staff review and approval for the entire site as well as any on- building light fixtures (sconces) for Buildings 1 and 2, if 10 any are proposed. All fixtures should fit with the site's architecture and design as well as must meet Town standards to direct all on -site light downward on the applicant's site only and minimize ambient light migration off -site. C. Water Features /Public Art: recommend approval noting that no water features (i.e. - storm water retention) are required for this site. Locations for public art may be available, are strongly encouraged, but are not required. The applicant has indicated a willingness to work with the Public Arts Committee regarding placement of public art on this gateway location. D. Trails /Open Space: not applicable as there are no trail locations required since the site is not located in the 100 -year flood plain and there is no open space dedication required for this site per the Town's trail plan. 9. Other: recommend approval with these additional stipulations: A. The applicant shall, prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the buildings on Lot 1 and 2, have Lots 1 -6 de- annexed from the MUD 1 boundary. B. All vicinity maps on all documents shall be changed to read "JT Ottinger Road" as opposed to "Ottinger Road" and all buildings on all lots on all documents shall be numbered in the same sequence as the lot number on which the building is located. C. No accessory buildings shall be permitted on the site. 11 WE- TLAKE CORNER___ SOUTH Site Plan and Preliminary Plat (Lots 1 thTu 6) Pz oS/zZioB Finn] Plat (Lots 1 & 2) SITE LOCATION -!N"- r s I uu 0 f M 2 PROPOSED USES: Neighborhood Commercial, Retail and Service Uses _- S.H.170 EXISTING 1^ -ti y f, .tII IANCC GA1[WAY- PfIAiC yA. AS 4M VOL 1 14335 PC 90 OUNIPST ion W_ "I A �J7`F r INGRE55� RsE0 �/ N928 %]244 E S32°3G'47'E HE ` .59.93' ET 579°6'3 "E _ -- / 3o.dD• / 1931 °55'26"w 110.50, REWL 531-55 WE '11 "E os' � E DRAINAGE M1@ io E INV£SINE III .f . ATER 4 - R EASFNEN7 O'2VE .ILL ' VOL �ti � / T =29 ?6556 L =59.]1• 266 85' -PROPOSED INGRESS AND EOflE55 659 °0'20 ' NBE — — 524, ACRES SO FT AREA COVERAGE IYIiL/1'- 2000'1 )' 33'•w >6' i 7500 B.6% 15f.. Y LOT I/ OT 2 SHARED 290.97' DLAPSTER LOCATION - - 1 v 6S OFF STREET % RE - LA0I HO SPACE O 33 9431000 SF l!) - ALL /ANCE 110 SUII0llw PARrAERS, LLP / rC„a7'1264 C •�•' ' LEGEND' E %ISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT TO BE REMOVED --i• -` L COMMERCIAL 1Q� DUMPSTER ,E SCREENING DETAIL NOTES: - -- N15 1. WATER WILL DE SUPPLIED BY THE TOWN OF WTSTLAYLE. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE. OFFICE (PD -8) 2. ALL PAYING TO BE CONCRETE 4 Sal la Walt 51RI1E 3. VISIBILITY TMANOELS AT ALL STREET INTERSECTIONS WILL COMPLY WITH THE TORN OF }yP WESILME ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR ROADWAY FACILITIES AND TADOT STANDARDS. tiV IrF P4/STER L)dATION OW{{,,Oi LOT 5 $HARED ti 1 l 4. ®® A EXISTING 1^ -ti y f, .tII IANCC GA1[WAY- PfIAiC yA. AS 4M VOL 1 14335 PC 90 OUNIPST ion W_ "I A �J7`F r INGRE55� RsE0 �/ N928 %]244 E S32°3G'47'E HE ` .59.93' ET 579°6'3 "E _ -- / 3o.dD• / 1931 °55'26"w 110.50, REWL 531-55 WE '11 "E os' � E DRAINAGE M1@ io E INV£SINE III .f . ATER 4 - R EASFNEN7 O'2VE .ILL ' VOL �ti � / T =29 ?6556 L =59.]1• 266 85' -PROPOSED INGRESS AND EOflE55 659 °0'20 ' III, •E 10,14' •rC'��`- X954°0' ¢s "E ,so. T9' e ow20°E\ 25.00' 9500.,V `ANOPEGN NCRE65 EGRESS D "W SITE AREA BUILDING' BUILDING VICINITY MHF LOT ACRES SO FT AREA COVERAGE IYIiL/1'- 2000'1 )' 33'•w >6' i 7500 B.6% 61 ' 8.13'1000 Si E U' IIIG' 2W' 300' 290.97' 194 7.29'1000 Sf 37 . 10.57!1000 BE . S' 90`x 727. 3.00 10.7% 19' a III, •E 10,14' •rC'��`- X954°0' ¢s "E ,so. T9' e ow20°E\ 25.00' 9500.,V `ANOPEGN NCRE65 EGRESS D "W Li SH- 170 •___...r - SITE M J4' ' I 35EO INGHL66 EGRESS SITE AREA BUILDING' BUILDING VICINITY MHF LOT ACRES SO FT AREA COVERAGE IYIiL/1'- 2000'1 )' 33'•w >6' i 7500 B.6% 61 ' 8.13'1000 Si , L U' IIIG' 2W' 300' 42826600 14.6% 194 7.29'1000 Sf 37 . 10.57!1000 BE . � � 727. 3.00 10.7% T b a 33 9431000 SF _.. _. HASrnllr nuuR WALP: 1" _ IIR)' 21 4.671000 BE •— TO MLTCN ouna�xa N +rw,Als LEGEND' 13 6.501000 SF L 24 WIDE FIRE LANG 111 BUSINESS MONUMENT SIGN - TYPE I hftll -TENANT DUMPSTER SCREENING DETAIL NOTES: - -- N15 1. WATER WILL DE SUPPLIED BY THE TOWN OF WTSTLAYLE. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE. OFFICE (PD -8) 2. ALL PAYING TO BE CONCRETE 4 Sal la Walt 51RI1E 3. VISIBILITY TMANOELS AT ALL STREET INTERSECTIONS WILL COMPLY WITH THE TORN OF }yP WESILME ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR ROADWAY FACILITIES AND TADOT STANDARDS. tiV IrF C THE LW YEAR FLOOD PLAN4 DOTS NOT ENCUMBER THE PROJECT SITE mI ®® / y� Li SH- 170 •___...r - SITE M J4' ' I 35EO INGHL66 EGRESS SITE AREA BUILDING' BUILDING VICINITY MHF LOT ACRES SO FT AREA COVERAGE IYIiL/1'- 2000'1 )' 33'•w >6' i 7500 B.6% 61 ' 8.13'1000 Si , L U' IIIG' 2W' 300' 42826600 14.6% 194 7.29'1000 Sf 37 . 10.57!1000 BE . � � 727. 3.00 10.7% T b a 33 9431000 SF _.. _. HASrnllr nuuR WALP: 1" _ IIR)' 21 4.671000 BE •— TO MLTCN ouna�xa N +rw,Als LEGEND' 13 6.501000 SF L 24 WIDE FIRE LANG 111 BUSINESS MONUMENT SIGN - TYPE I hftll -TENANT DUMPSTER SCREENING DETAIL NOTES: - -- N15 1. WATER WILL DE SUPPLIED BY THE TOWN OF WTSTLAYLE. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE. OFFICE (PD -8) 2. ALL PAYING TO BE CONCRETE 4 Sal la Walt 51RI1E 3. VISIBILITY TMANOELS AT ALL STREET INTERSECTIONS WILL COMPLY WITH THE TORN OF }yP WESILME ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR ROADWAY FACILITIES AND TADOT STANDARDS. tiV IrF C THE LW YEAR FLOOD PLAN4 DOTS NOT ENCUMBER THE PROJECT SITE 9' p 5. THE FIRE NNE CONFIGURATION ASSUMES BUILDINGS TO BE EQUIPPED WITII FIRE / y� SPRINKLERS. IF BUILDINGS DO NOT NAVE SPRINKLERS, THE MILE LANE WHA NEED TO / 7 BE ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY. ........ 6 REFER r0 LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE LOCAIIM OF ALL PROPOSED LANDSCAPING AND ° C r 11w SCREENING. AUTO PARKING DETAIL 7. REFER TO LIGHTING PLAN FOR PROPOSED SITE LIGHTING. HT6 8, VARIANCE REQUESTED TO REDUCE BUILDING SET BACK ALONG 6H 170 FROM 5VTO 35'. 9, VARMAYE REQUESTED TO BENCE FIRE LANE LNNNUM RADIUS FROM 50'TO 25'. ,r OL 10 r'P /� 1 [ S1RrPE w OWNER /DEVELOPER: DESIGNER /ENGINEER: J AIL INVESTMENT, LP JACOBS 13600 HERITAGE PARK1V'AY l --- FORT 24 RIO 1% 76177 Carter Burgess IBn1229 -6ao6 - aA1• c CARTER a BURGESS, INC PARALLEL PARKING DETAIL xrs c CIIAFaAAGV A PD SITE PLAN FOR WESTLAKE CORNERS SOUTH LOTS 1'-6 FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY BE AG 10.2 ACRESCO —SED a 2 T09TS 01 LAN SI UJI, rH T4 w Ll � . -1 SURVEY. ABSTA 1 AME A,A. I. TOPN 01 PE6ILAYE, 1 - EARS. MAY 15, 2008 SHEET I aY 3 4 SITE AREA BUILDING' BUILDING I PARKING PARKING LOT ACRES SO FT AREA COVERAGE I PROVIDED RATIO 1 7500 B.6% 61 ' 8.13'1000 Si 2 4W86,903.617 42826600 14.6% 194 7.29'1000 Sf 37 . 10.57!1000 BE . 3 727. 3.00 10.7% 4 0.78 33,9853 3,500 103% 33 9431000 SF 5 1.05 1 45,764.6 4,500 9.8% 21 4.671000 BE 6 1.45 63,362.5 2,000 32% 13 6.501000 SF A PD SITE PLAN FOR WESTLAKE CORNERS SOUTH LOTS 1'-6 FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY BE AG 10.2 ACRESCO —SED a 2 T09TS 01 LAN SI UJI, rH T4 w Ll � . -1 SURVEY. ABSTA 1 AME A,A. I. TOPN 01 PE6ILAYE, 1 - EARS. MAY 15, 2008 SHEET I aY 3 4 KEY STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the site plan and preliminary plat for Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -6 and the final plat for Westlake Corners South, Lots 1 -2 subject to following stipulations: E KEY STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Utilities: 2. Storm water: 3. Setbacks /Building Lines: 4. Parking /Fire Lanes: 5. Solid Waste Collection Facilities: 6. Street /Highway Right -of -Way Dedication Requirements: 0 7. Traffic Access Management /Internal Site Circulation and Connectivity to Adjacent Property Tracts (both owner's and non - owner's tracts): y The SH 170 ingress /egress point ➢ The 3 access points on SH 377 ➢ The northern SH 377 ingress /egress point (closest to the SH 377 and 170 intersection) ➢ The remaining 2 ingress /egress points on SH 377 7 AERIAL VIEW - PROPOSED INGRESS/EGRESS 570 Fhu ®� EXAMPLE - ROANOKECROSSING ACCESS MANAGEMENT I 3 o� 9 h� Marshall Creek Rd tr J 1 333000 , i P 6 � %� //r //I WAL *MART raw s�w►�� . . y A • w S 0 Po EXAMPLES - INGRESS /EGRESS I$SUE$ 1 WC EXAMPLES - INGRESS /EGRES$ ISS41E$ 2 �u "1 11 8. Site Design: Materials, Building Design, Architecture, and Hard Screening ■ Materials ■ Roof lines ■ Architecture ■ Hard Screening y Landscaping and Landscape Screening: ➢ Signage: ➢ Lighting: Water Features/Public Art:. y Trails/Open Space: 12 BUILDING CONCEPT ELEVATIONS 1D:f11L ROOP �_ ,.,,.; ROOF T NIFT& 7. TOMM PAW NEE En SfillATM � Oomc1 ML,. � —= N DMMTm 8101U —w. STM AM SR%"TED a— PANT AM CAST �S ST0- O'BRIEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. US 377 + SH 170 EL 09---- ARCHITECTURE INTERIORS PLANNING TOWN OF WEST LAKE• TEXAS HILLWOOD PROPERTY COMPANY 13 4w ma"m — oow_� wri TEXTMD PANT AM CAST MEfM ROOF 7 001000[ wrr" TOOIOM T-T- rAwr ow 7-A Off' oyAm MAU 7. PA"' 100 FM F71 wr-y"Molli SfillATM � Oomc1 ML,. � —= N DMMTm 8101U —w. STM AM SR%"TED a— PANT AM CAST �S ST0- O'BRIEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. US 377 + SH 170 EL 09---- ARCHITECTURE INTERIORS PLANNING TOWN OF WEST LAKE• TEXAS HILLWOOD PROPERTY COMPANY 13 4w EXAMPLES OF OTHER DEVELOPMENTS - FRONT &SIDE VIEWS 14 EXAMPLES OF OTHER DEVELOPMENTS - BACK WALL VIEWS 1 15 EXAMPLES OF OTHER DEVELOPMENTS - BACK WALL VIEWS 2 16 B. Staff has reviewed the Preliminary Plat and the applicant has addressed most of staffs comments. However, as of the date of this memo there were still items that staff thinks should be addressed prior to approval. C. Staff has reviewed the Final Plat and the applicant has addressed most of staffs comments. However, as of the date of this memo there were still items that staff thinks should be addressed prior to approval. As of the date of this memorandum, staff is still reviewing the applicant's submissions in response to staffs comments at the Development Review Committee meeting. Based on that review, staff will present a full recommendation to the Commission at Thursday's meeting. ACTION REQUESTED: The Commission can for each of these items, approve the item as submitted, approve it with stipulations per staff recommendations, deny the item, or continue the hearing for the item. Consequently, three actions are being requested: A. Make the recommendation "That the Westlake Board of Aldermen approve as submitted, or approve with stipulations, or deny, or continue the hearing for, the proposed PD Site Plan SP- 08 -01." B. Make the recommendation "That the Westlake Board of Aldermen approve as submitted, or approve with stipulations, or deny, or continue the hearing for, the proposed Preliminary Plat PP- 08 -01." C. Make the recommendation "That the Westlake Board of Aldermen approve as submitted, or approve with stipulations, or deny, or continue the hearing for, the proposed Final Plat FP- 08 -01." Town of Westlake Memo To: Chairman Bill Greenwood and Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission From: Eddie Edwards, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Regular meeting of May 22, 2008 Date: May 16, 2008 ITEM Continue a Public Hearing and take appropriate action regarding an application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Westlake, Texas, by removing approximately 107 acres from Planned Development 3- Planning Area 3 (PD 3 -3) Planned Development 3- Planning Area 12 (PD 3 -12). and rezoning that acreage to be called BACKGROUND For review, the applicant desires to rezone approximately 107 acres generally located North of Dove Road and East of Ottinger. (See enclosed site plan.) This property is currently zoned within PD 3 -3, which means it is part of "Planning Area 3" of the "Planned Development 3" zoning district. The subject property is surrounded by property owned by the applicant. The surrounding property to the North and to the East is zoned PD 3 -3, the property to the West is zoned R -2, and South boundary is bordered by Dove Road with R -5 zoning across the road. By amending the boundaries of PD 3 -3, the planning area is reduced to approximately 257 acres. However, the entitlements including the allowable number of houses, square feet of resort hotel and the square feet of office use are not changed. Thus allowing the exact same potential square footage e remaining previously 57acre approved The approximately 365 acres, to be constructed on t g newly created planning area PD 3 -12 (Planning Area 12 of Planned Development 3) has b specifically tailored to accommodate the proposed conference and education center, possible data center and their associated uses. The height increase requested is similar to that recently approved for the PD -1 (Maguire- Solana) planning district. The residential slope requirements are being changed from 5:1 to 4:1. At the regularly scheduled meeting of April 24, 2008, the Commission voted unanimously for a continuation of the Public Hearing until May 8, 2008 at 7:00 pm. Although the meeting continuation was requested by the applicant in order to allow more time for the completion of a traffic impact analysis, the Commission expressed several concerns as well and asked for additional information. The areas of concern are: • additional information concerning the impact to density for the remaining 257 acres within PD 3 -3 current use plans and design for the remaining PD 3 -3 area along with types and percentages of open space information in the traffic impact analysis for JT O d trafficRareas, ea Dove Road and what that means for the school, bridges, increase The Board of Aldermen met on Monday, April 28, 2008 for their regularly scheduled 9, 008 meeting and also voted unanimously to continue lde en expressed lthe� same colncerns noted by m g at 7:00 pm. Additionally, the Board of Al erm the Commission. May 8th to ng and Zoning Commission met again at 7:00 pm on Thursday, The Planni ' e the Public Hearing for this case and voted he unanimously asked for the additional continue Ma 22, 2008 at 7 :00 pm. T pp to be held Thursday, Y ' uance in order to obtain more information and conduct additional investigations contra relating to several site access options. t of attachments for your review. It is the same information you received in Below is a list Analysis with a summary, the May 8th P &Z agenda packet. It includes the Traffic the a applicant. In addition, you will find an assessment of this analysis provided by pp f naineo hire by the To`vn and two letters. One letter is a 3rd party traffic is e. a changes, specifically performed b� the effects of the PD from the applicant, Hillwood, summarizing density of the remaining PD 3 -3 and one from Deloitte's land broker, The regarding the access. Staubach Company, relating to the service/employee UPDATE for Mav 22 "d Meetin Town staff is still reviewing the applicant's As of the date of this memoran dum, iven to the applicant at the submissions in response to the latest 13, 2008. Once this review is meeting h comments /requests n May s g the Commission at Development Review Committe m tlallld o omme recommendation to completed, Town staff present Thursday's meeting. ACTION REQUESTED Make a recommendati as presented amendments to PD supplement ATTACHMENTS Draft of proposed Ordinance for the newly created zoning district PD 3 -12 PD Concept Plan Vicinity Maps — 2 different aerial views Applicant's Traffic Impact Analysis with summary Board of Aldermen to approve the proposed (See enclosed draft Ordinance.) Traffic Impact analysis comments by P party Engineer Letter from The Staubach Company; Re: service /employee access Letter from Hillwood; Re: allowable de PD 3 -3 within the remaining portions Paae Number Pages 1 -21 Pages 22 Pages 23 -24 Pages 25 -42 Pages 43 -44 Pages 45 -47 Pages 48 -50 S-- 1 z/ C's WHEREAS, on August 24, 1992, the Board of Aldermen (sometimes referred to as the "Board") of the Town of Westlake, Texas (the "Town"), adopted a Comprehensive Plan (the "1992 Comprehensive Plan") for the Town; and WHEREAS, on November 16, 1992, the Board, adopted a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance(the"Zoning Ordinance"); and WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance has been amended by the Board after receiving recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission (the"Commission"); and WHEREAS, on September 15, 1997, based on the recommendations of the Commission, the Board amended the Zoning Ordinance and the subdivision regulations by the adopting of a Unified Development Code(the"UDC") for the Town, and WHEREAS, the UDC has been amended, with the most recent amendments being adopted on August 23, 2003; and WHEREAS, there is located within the corporate limits of the Town an approximately 365 acre tract of land (commonly known as Planning Area 3 - Resort and hereinafter sometimes referred to as the"Planning Area"); and WHEREAS, the Board of Aldermen agrees that the boundaries for PD 3-3 must be amended and certain uses clarified in order to accommodate the aforementioned Conference and Educational Center and Data Center; and 2008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center Page I ORDINANCE Page 1 of 50 WHEREAS, the Board believes that the interests of the Town, the present and future residents and citizens of the Town, and developers of land within the Town are best served by adopting this Ordinance, which the Board has determined to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Thoroughfare Plan, Open Space Plan, and Master Water and Sewer Plan all as amended: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD ;•" ALDERMEN OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE,TEXAS: That the recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated herein, adopted by the Town and declared to be true and correct. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Westlake, Texas, as codified in the Code of Ordinances and the Planned Development Supplement, , is hereby amended by this PD Ordinance, by amending the property described in the attached Exhibit I attached hereto by reference for all purposes. This PD will be subject to the concept plan, development standards, and other regulations attached hereto. PART III Upon the adoption of this PD, the Town Secretary shall promptly enter the new Planned Development on the Town's Official Zoning Map, which entry shall include the abbreviated designation "I'D No. 3-12" and the date that this Ordinance was adopted by the Board, PART IV It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Board of the Town that sections, paragraphs, clauses and phrases of this Ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections of this Ordinance since the same would have been enacted by the Board of the Town without the incorporation in this Ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. ,2008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center Page 2 ORDINANC' Page 2 of 50 WM--M This Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE,TEXAS, ON THIS DAY OF I ATTEST: Town Secretary , Town Manager Stan Lowry,Town Attorney, 12008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center Page 3 ORDINANCE Page 3 of 50 PD Concept Plan means a plan for development which enables the town to evaluate major impacts of a proposed zoning district or planned development district. PD Ordinance means this planned development zoning district ordinance, including any approved PD Concept Plan. PD Supplement means that certain Circle T Planned Development Zoning District As codified in the Planned Development Supplement. Town means the Town of Westlake, Texas. UDC means the Town's Unified Development Code, as amended. SECTION 4 PD SUPPLEMENT The Board adopted the PD Supplement. The PD Supplement includes additional standards that are applicable within this PD District. The PD Supplement establishes additional standards for the following: (i)concept, informational, development and site plans; (ii) signs-, (iii) landscaping, (iv) roadway construction, parking and loading; (v) fencing; (vi) lighting; (vii) other special standards; and (viii) illustrations. To the extent that there is any conflict between a provision in the PD Supplement and this PD Ordinance, the terms of this PD Ordinance shall control. Section 5.1 Applicable Town Ordinances Except to the extent provided by the PD Concept Plan, this PD Ordinance and the PD Supplement, development within the PD District shall be governed by the following UDC standards: With respect to the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use area, by the O-H Office Park-Hotel Except to the extent provided by the PD Concept Plan, this PD Ordinance, and the PD Supplement, development within the PD District shall also be governed by the Applicable Town Ordinances. In the event of any conflict between (i) the PD Concept Plan,this PD Ordinance and the PD Supplement and (ii)the Applicable Town Ordinances, the terms, provisions and intent of the PD Concept Plan, this PD Ordinance and the PD Supplement shall control. Except as provided below, in the event of any conflict between the UDC and the Applicable Town Ordinances, the terms,provisions and intent of the UDC shall control. Section 5.2 General Approval Criteria To the extent, if any, that the Applicable Town Ordinances (and, in particular, the subdivision regulations of the UDC) grant to the Board, the Commission, the Town Manager or any other Town employee or consultant, the authority to approve any aspect of development within the PD District (including, but not limited to, preliminary or final plats or any aspect thereof or any agreements or permits related thereto) based on conformity with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan or Thoroughfare Plan (or with the objectives, goals or policies of such plans), then such authority shall be Article 1. General Provisions ,2008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center Page 2 ORDINANCE Page 7 of 50 This ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the "Circle T Planning Area No. 3-12 Conference and Educational Center Ordinance", or simply as the"PD Ordinance". MME14113013- This PD Ordinance is adopted to provide for a superior design of lots or buildings-, to provide for increased recreation and/or open space opportunities; to provide amenities or features that would be of special benefit to the property users or community; to protect or preserve natural amenities and environmental assets such as trees, creeks, ponds, floodplains, slopes or hills and viewscapes; to protect or preserve any existing historical buildings, structures, features or places; and to provide an appropriate balance between the intensity of development and the ability to provide adequate supporting public facilities and services. Section 3.1 Usage For purposes of this PD Ordinance, certain numbers, abbreviations,terms, and words shall be used, interpreted and defined as set forth in this Section. Other terms and words are defined elsewhere in this PD Ordinance. Unless the context clearly indicates to the contrary, words used in the present tense include the future tense, and words used in the plural include the singular. The word "shall" will be interpreted as mandatory, and the word "may" as permissive. Applicable Town Ordinances means the UDC and all other ordinances,rules, and regulations that are adopted by the Board and that are applicable to development within the PD District 3-12. Board means the Board of Aldermen of the Town of Westlake,Texas. Commission means the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Westlake,Texas. Floor Area means the total area of all floors of all buildings on a lot or unified development site measured between the outer perimeter walls of the buildings excluding(i) area in a building or in a separate structure (whether below or above grade) used for the parking of motor vehicles, (ii) courts or balconies open to the sky,and (iii) roof area used for recreation. Masonry means brick, stone, cast stone, concrete, glass block, split-face concrete masonry unit, or other masonry materials approved by the Board, PD District means the planned development zoning district established by this PD Ordinance. Article 1. General Provisions 2008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center Page I ORDINANCE Page 6 of 50 Section 5.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center..................................9 SECTION 6 FRONT YARD SETBACKS...................................................................................V Section 6.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center..................................9 Section 6.2 {3cnera ---.---.-------.-----''-----'----.----.l0 SECTION REAR YARD SETBACKS...................................................................................l0 Section 7.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center................................lO SECTION SIDE YARD SETBACKS......... ............................... ...........................................l| Section 8.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center................................ll SECTION SLOPE REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................\l Section 9.1 Residential Slope........................................... --...... ..............................ll SECTION 10 MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS....... ................ .......|| Section 10.1 Hiking and/or Biking Trails...................................... ...............................\2 Section 10.2 Landscape Irrigation...................................................................................12 Section10.3 Fencing..... ............................................................... ............... .................l2 Section 10.4 Lighting---.--.--.—......—..—.—...---.---'—..--,----..J2 EXHIBIT \ Legal Description ofPlanning Area 3-12 EXHIBIT PD Concept Plan Table of Contents ,2008 yA3'\Z Conference and Educational Center ORMANCE .......................................... Page 11 Page 5of5O SECTION SHORT TITLE SECTION2 PURPOSES.......... .............................................................. ........................... ........l SECTION GENERAL DEFINITIONS ............................................... .....................................l Section 3.1 Usage -----.----.-----.--..----_ ........................ ...........| SECTIONS APPLICABILITY OF EXISTING REGULATIONS.............................................. Section 5.1 Applicable Town Ordinances.............................. ........................................2 Section 5'2 General Approval Criteria...................... ................ ......... ..........................2 8BCTT[DNb CONCEPT PLAN, DEVELOPMENT PLANS,AND SITE PLANS. .................... 3 Section6.1 PD Concept Plan.............................................. ...........................................] Section 0.2 I'D Development Plans................................................................................j ARTICLE11. USES......................................................................................................................4 SECTIONLAND USE SCHEDULE..................................................... ..................................4 ARTICLE 111, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS----.--.—.------'--..—.---..'9 SECTIONDENSITY............. .............. ...................................................................................y Section 1.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center..................................9 SECTIONMINIMUM LOT SIZE.................. ................ ...... ..................................................y Section 2.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center..................................9 SECTIONMINIMUM LOT WIDTH.......................................... .... ....... ................................g Section3.1 Office................................................................................................. .........9 SECTION 4 MAXIMUM BL]lLDTNK] HEIGHT.............................................---. ......................) Section 4.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center..................................Q S ection4.2 Exceptions� to 8eiobi Requirements.. ---..---.--..—'..-.—.--,..9 SECTION MINIMUM BUILDING SlZE..,--.-----.-----.--.—'--...---..—.,g Table vfContents 2008 PA 3-|2 Conference and Educational Center Page ORDIINIANICE Page 4 of 50 exercised to the extent necessary to determine whether the aspect of development being approved is consistent with the PD Concept Plan, this PD Ordinance,. the PD Supplement and the objectives, goals, and policies of such plan, ordinance and supplement. Section 6.1 PD Concept Plan, A PD Concept Plan for this PD District shall be approved prior to the approval of any development plans and site plans required by this PD Ordinance. The PD concept plan shall comply with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the Open Space and Trail Plan, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, the Master Water and Sewer Plan of the Town and the Master Drainage Plan of the town and the UDC Section 6.2 PD Development Plans Article 1, Section 1-3, (3) of the Planned Development Supplement states that PD development plans shall not be required for development within any of the PD Districts. Section 6.3 PD Site Plans PD site plans are required for development within the PD District. Article 1, Section 1-3 (4) of the PD Supplement governs the process by which PD site plans are submitted and approved (including, but not limited to., the submittal requirements, approval criteria, and conditions). Article I. General Provisions 12008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center Page 3 ORDINANCE Page 8 of 50 Buildings, structures, and land within the sub-areas identified on the PD Concept Plan shall be used only in accordance with the uses.pemiitted in the following "Land Use Schedule". The symbol "Y' shall mean that the use is permitted as a principal use by right. The symbol "S" shall mean that the principal use is permitted only after first obtaining a "Specific Use Permit" as set forth in the UDC. The symbol ­A" shall mean that this use is specifically permitted as an accessory use to a main use (this does not exclude other land uses which are generally considered accessory to the primary use), A blank square shall mean that the use is not allowed as a principal use. AND DATA CENTER LAND USE SCHEDULE PERMITTED Permitted"X" USES Special Use'IS" a Accesses ry"A" AGRICULTURAL USES Orchard Plant Nursery(Growing) X Plant Nursery(Retail Sales) Fauns General(Crops) X Farms General(Livestock,Ranch) x Veterinarian(indoor Kennels) Veterinarian(Outdoor Kennels) Stables Wrivate Use) S Stables(As a Business) RESIX)ENTML USES Single Family Detached Single Family Zero Lot Line Single Family Attached Duplex Home Occupation Servarilsi'Caretakers Quarters Accommodation for Einployet-s!Cusioniersl,'Visitors A Swimming Pool(Private) A Detached Garage(Private) A Sport Tennis Courts(private) A Article 11. Uses .2008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center- Page 4 ORDINANCE Page 9 of 50 PERMITTED Permitted "X" USES Special Use'IS" Accesson,"A" INSTMUTIONAL and GOVERNWNTALUSES Emergency Ambulance Service x Post Office(Governmental) x Mailing Service(Private) x Heliport Helistop/Venj-stop S Telephone,Electric.Cable,and Fiber Optic Switching Station x Electrical Substation S Utility Distribution Lines' x Utility Shop and Storage A Water and Sewage Pumping Station (below grade) x Water and Sewage Pumping Station (above grade) S Water Storage Tank and Pumping System(Elevated or Above Grade) S Water,Sewer.Electric,and Gas Meters x Electric Transformers x Private Sirccts/Afleysf Drives x Retirement Home Nurging/Convalescenit Home Hospice Hospital Psychiabic Hospital Clinic A Child Daycare.(Public;7 or more) Child Daycare(Private,7 or more) A` School.K-12(Public or Private) School(Vocational) Collc9c or University x Community Center(Public) Civic Club x Church or Place of Worship x Use Associated to aReligious InsI, x Government Building x Police Station x Fi—St.d-i x Library x Data Center x Article 11. Uses PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center- Page 5 ORDINANCE Page 10 of 50 PERMITTED Permitted "X" USES Special Ilse"S" Accessory`r,A" GAD CM USES Multifamily(Apartments) Offices(General) X Studio X Banks and Financial Institutions X Information Processing X Hotel-Motel X Hoteh'Motel with Conferencing Facility X Laundry%Dry Cleaning(<3,000 S.F.) A Laundry/Dry Cleaning(Drop/Pick) A Shoe Repair A Beauty Parlor/Barbershop A Clothing Store A Quick Copy/Duplicating-Services A Personal Services A Liquor Store Micro-brevvery and Wine Production and Sales(<30,000 S.F.) S Grocery Convenience Store A Service Station Drug Store A Variety Store A Bakery Sales A Stationery and/or Book Store .A Antique Shop Art GaflervlMuseums A Hardware Store Sporting Goods A Paint and Wallpaper Cloth Store Retail Stores-General (Excluding Second Hand Goods) A Restaurant,Cafe or Dining Facility X Auto/Truck Paris and Accessories Household Furniture./Appliances (including Sales and Service) Fanner-s Market Feed Store Parking Structure X Cafeteria(Private) A Article I1. Uses 2008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center- Page 6 ORDINANCE Page 11 of 50 PERMITTED Permiffed -X" USES Special Use'IS" Accessory"A" Job Printing,Lithography,Printing,or Blueprinting A Vehicle Display and Sales(inside) Medical Laboratory Conference Center X Motion Picture Theater A Custorn Business Services X Electronic Appliances Store-and - Computer Sales and Service Tavern,Bar or Lounge S Dance Halls/Nightclubs S AMUSIEMIMIRWIlEATION Golf Course(Public or Private) X Park or Playground(Public or Private) X Satellite Dish X Non-Commercial Radio Tower Race Track Operation Recreation Facility,Health Studio X Country Club(Private Membership) X GolfClubbouse(Public or Private) X Community Center(Private) X Recreation Center(Private) X Hike Bike and Equestrian Trails �Public or Private) X Golf Maintenance Facility A Health/Spa Facilities(Private) A Athletic Fields(Private) A Athletic Courts(Private) A Equestrian Center A Athletic Courts(Public) A Conunercial Amusement(inside) A Lake CruisclWater Taxi AUTOSERVICU Truck!Tiaiier Rental Auto Body Repair Auto Mechanical Repair A Article 0LUses 2008 PA3-12 Conference and Educational Center- Page ORDINANCE Page 12of5D PERMITTED Permitted"X" USES Special Use I'S" Accessory"A" Quick LubetOil Change Vehicle Maintenance(Private) A WHOLESALE TRADE Wareliousel'Storage(Inside) WarehouselStorage(Outside) Scrap"Waste Recycling Cohlection and/or Storage Gas/cheinical Bulk Storage Light Marnificturing/Assenibly Apparel Manulacturing Packaging and/or Distribution Printing,Engraving and related Reproductive Services Distribution of Books"Other Printed Material Machine Sbop Weldin�g Shop Temponary Construction Office X� Temporary Construction Materials Storage X3 Temporary Sales Office, x4 L Individual retail occupants(except grocery store and drug store)cannot exceed 25,0U0 square feet. 2. Including water,sewer,electric,gas,cable,telephone,fiber optic,and other public and private utility distribution lines. 3. Limited m period nfconstruction. 4. Limited to^`buiW'oufperiod. 5. "Private"shall be deemed to include a daycare that is made available to any ernployee on the property. 6. Limited to white collar research and development(i.e.,non-industrial,non-chernical,and non-water processing). An accessory use or structure pvbicb is customarily incidental to the principal use or atrochxn: and which is located on the ouozc lot or tract of land, obaD he permitted as an accessory use without being separately listed as a pennitted use. Article 0LUses ,2UUQ 9&3-|2 Conference and Educational Ccoter- 9o�c8 ORDINANCE Page 13of50 ARTICLE 111. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 1.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center: The maximum aggregate floor area for the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center shall be 1,250,000 square feet and limited to a total of 1,200 Guest rooms (Guest rooms defined as rooms used for overnight accommodations). Section 2.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center The minimum lot size for the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use area shall be 200,000 square feet. 0� 9 W11-11111 Section 3.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center The minimum lot width for the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use area shall be 200 feet. Section 4.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center Except as provided below, the maximum height for all Structures within the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use area shall be no higher that an elevation of 735.00 feet above mean sea level. Section 4.2 Exceptions to Height Requirements The height limits imposed above shall not apply to (a) chimneys and vent stacks, church spires, cupolas, entry features, skylights, or other architectural features that are not intended for occupancy or storage-, (b) flag poles and similar devices; or (c) heating and air conditioning equipment, solar collectors, and similar equipment, fixtures and devices provided such equipment, fixtures, and devices are screened from view with a solid wall that is architecturally consistent with the design of the building to which they are attached. MA Section 5.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center The minimum building size for Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use shall be 3,000 square feet. Section 6.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center The minimum front yard for the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use area shall be 100 feet. Article 111. Development Standards ,2008 PA 3-12-Conference and Educational Center Page 9 ORDNANCE Page 14 of 50 Section 6.2 General A. Required front yards must be open and unobstructed except for fences and signs allowed by this I'D Ordinance-, provided, however, ordinary projections of window sills, belt courses, cornices, and other architectural features may not project more than 12 inches into the required front yard. A fireplace chimney may project up to two feet into the required front yard if its area of projection does not exceed 12 square feet. Cantilevered roof eaves and balconies may project up to five feet into the required front yard. B. The front yard setback is measured from the front lot line or from the required right-of-way, whichever creates the greater setback. C. If a lot runs fi•om one street to another and has double frontage, a required front yard must be provided on both streets. If access is prohibited on one frontage by plat, the following structures or portions of structures in the yard along such frontage are governed by the rear yard regulations: swimming pools; game courts, fences-, garages; and other accessory buildings. D. If a comer lot has two street frontages of equal distance, one frontage is governed by the front yard regulations and the other frontage by the side yard regulations. If the comer lot has two street frontages of unequal distance, the shorter frontage is governed by the front yard regulations and the longer by the side yard regulations. Section 7.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center The minimum rear yard for the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use area shall be 100 feet. Section 7.2 General A. Required rear yards must be open and unobstructed except for fences and signs allowed by this PD Ordinance: provided, however, ordinary projections of window sills,, belt courses, cornices, and other architectural features may not project more than 12 inches into the required rear yard. A fireplace chimney may project up to two feet into the required rear yard if its area of projection does not exceed 12 square feet. Roof eaves may project up to three feet into the required rear yard. Balconies may not project into the required rear yard. B. The rear yard setback is measured frorn the rear lot line. Article M. Development Standards .2008 PA 3-12-Conference and Educational Center Page 10 ORDINANCE Page 15 of 50 SECTION 8 SIDE YARD SETBACKS Section 8.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center The minimum side yard for the Conference and Educational Center and Data Center use area shall be 75 feet. A. Required side yards must be open and unobstructed except for fences and signs allowed by this I'D Ordinance; provided, however, ordinary projections of window sills, belt courses, cornices, and other architectural features may not project more than 12 inches into the required side yard. A fireplace chimney may project up to two feet into the required side yard if its area of projection does not exceed 12 square feet. Cantilevered roof eaves may project up to three feet into the required side yard. Balconies may not project into the required side yard. B. The side yard setback is measured from the side lot line, except when a fi•ont yard is treated as a side yard, in which case, the setback is measured from the lot line or the required right-of-way, whichever creates the greater setback. C. Air conditioning units may be located in the required side yard, but not nearer than one foot to the property line. Section 9.1 Residential Slope Except as provided below, non single family structures shall not exceed the height of a line drawn at a slope of 4:1 (including streets and other rights of way) from any single family lot line. If the grade of the ground rises or falls from the point of origin of the slope line, the maximum permitted height shall increase or decrease by the difference in grade. Section 9.2 Roadway Slope Non single family structures shall not exceed the height of a line drawn at a slope of 2:1 (including streets and other rights of way) from the right-of-way line of any roadway. If the grade of the ground rises or falls from the point of origin of the slope line, the maximum permitted height shall increase or decrease by the difference in grade. Section 10.1 Hiking and/or Biking Trails. If required by the Town, public hiking and biking trail(s) shall be located along and generally parallel to public rights-of-way and designed such that the trails)s) do not penetrate greater than 100 feet onto the subject property in any direction. The design of the trail pathway shall meander in keeping with the nature of the area and proposed development. Article 111. Development Standards .2008 PA 3-12 -Conference and Educational Center Page I I ORDINANCE Page 16 of 50 Section 10.2 Landscape Irrigation. Upon the submission and approval by Town staff of a landscape design utilizing low water or Xeriscaping plantings, the inclusion of all automated landscape irrigation system may be waived for part or all of the subject property. A temporary irrigation system my be utilized at the owner's discretion to allow for the establishment of plantings, but such a system may be temporarily or permanently disengaged, at such owner's sole discretion. Section 10.3 Fencing, Fencing around any data center use may exceed seven feet in height if such height is reasonably required for the security of such data center; provided, that any fencing that exceeds seven feet in height be screened from adjacent rights of way or properties by topography, structures or plantings. Section 10.4 Lighting. A. Luminaries used for building security or to illuminate building facades, entrances, parking areas and loading and service areas may be installed (i) on the building facade but not above the building roof line; and (ii) anywhere on the lot with a maximum height of 25 feet, but not higher than the building roof line. B. Luminaries used to illuminate pedestrian areas shall have a maximum height of 12 feet, and no pedestrian walkways are allowed to run parallel to a line of upright fixtures (excluding bollards 12 feet or less in height) and a building. Walkways connecting pedestrian areas and adjacent buildings shall be allowed to be located in this area, so long as the primary intent is to connect the pedestrian walkway and the building. Section 10.5 Tree Requirement. No more than 25 large trees (including existing trees-) per acre of the site's permeable green space shall be required. The foregoing sentence shall not apply to portions of the site dedicated to open pasture, and any additional trees required shall be concentrated In appropriate areas to provide buffering from adjacent sites and public rights of way. Article 111. Development Standards ,2008 PA 3-12-Conference and Educational Center Page 12 ORDINANCE Page 17 of 50 FAM�Um�.` EXHIBIT I Legal Description of Planning Area 3-12 EXHIBIT 2 PD Concept Plan Article TV. Exhibits 2008 PA 3-12 Conference and Educational Center- Page B ORDINANCE Page 18 of 50 rV BEING a tract of land situated in the Jesse Gibson Survey, Abstract Number 592,the Wilson Medlin Survey,Abstract Number 1958, the Charles Medlin Survey,Abstract Number 1084 and the G. Hendricks Survey, Abstract Number 680,Tarrant County,Texas,and being a portion of that certain tract(Tract 2)of land described by deed to AIL Investment, L.P., as recorded in Volume 13275,Page 542,County Records, Tarrant County,Texas,and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows. BEGINNING at a 5/8 inch iron rod with plastic cap stamped"Carter&Burgess"set being an ell comer in the southerly property line of said AIL Tract 2, said point also being the northeast �lroperty comer of that certain tract of land described by deed to Lakeway Land, Ltd., as recorded in Volume 13978,Page 222, County Records,Tarrant County,Texas; THENCE S 89"49'56"W 787.23 feet alon the common iroDerti line of the southerlv Drovertv THENCE N 00045'29"W, 357,87 feet; THENCE N 20032'l O"E,243.20 feet; C&B Job No. 0l 5007.094 ACF 42412 CTR April 15,2008 J:\JOB\01 500701\094\SUR\WP\LEG\PD3-12ZONING,doc Page I oft Page 19 of 50 a JAMES F. KASSON 4500 C&B Job No. 0 15 007.094 ACF#2412 CTR April 15,2008 J:\JOB\01 500701\094\SUR\WP\LEG\PD3-12ZONING.doe Page 2 aft Page 20 of 50 ._-----------_ vl w - RICHARD. TEARS SURVEY �ti ABSTRAOT NUMBER 402 U. JESSE SUTTON SURVEY b, AMfTRACT WUMB(ER 1459 It I -•- n PD__ _ __ PR0x1&AATE '>URVEY l iNE I SURVEY LINE APPR0Xi6aATE SUPVEr 1.{NE chi ! 4 3-52 'o .n 0 107.375 ACRES � 41L INVESitoyr, L.P. REMAMER i 07 a Q v� z ER VOL.132%5,PO.S 2 PD 3-3 <2 0�4 c�5 PD 3 3 gi b a iR T 2 PART 2 y I— PART I cc Sq!l is o 0>-o «o U L 4KEWAY L WO, LTD, L 1 R-.'c w a VOL,J3978,PG,222 im ;rte DOVE .: L �.-.1 i i; C13 AN EXHIBIT SHOWING PD 3--12 ZONING __......•.........::........ TOW�T1HOF WESTIAKE,OTARRANT ZONIMG 1aMES F. K,ASSON , .0 . w ..4500.. .. :,_. T � p pti:ti SCALES'-1000' FILE° J,\JOB\01500701\094\SUR\5D0794ZI.dgn i DATE# 15-Air-06 (O (D N s O C57 O 40 campsms Service Vehicle Traffi Guest Traffic All guests arriving at the facility would enter and exit the site from Westlake Parkway- Guests would arrive Via shuttlelvan/coach, private or rental automobile, or taxi. Page 3 of 3 Printed on.4/29/108 Page 25 of 50 Summary of Traffic)Transportation Assumptions for Pro)ect X Used by DeShazo,Tang&Associates,Inc.for Trip Generation/Parking Demand Models Based Upon: Phone Interview w/Owner,Gensler,DT&A;plus,DT&A assumptions All information pertains to original construction phase,unless otherwise stated. (PREUMINARY,subject to review and revision) GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Number of Guest Rooms: 800 2. Assembly Area: 94,000 SF a. >75%of capacity from June through n-dd-December;<75%of capacity from January through May. b. highest Monday through Wednesday,lower on Thursday and Friday,no weekend attendance except for extended-period programs NUMBER OF GUESTS 6. Typical range in number of guests:50-1000 per program 7. Maximum number of guests on site at one thne,when considering overlap ol multiple programs: 1,500(not all guests stay overnight) Page I of 2 Page 28of50 ESTIMATED SERVICE VEHICLE NEEDS 13. Estimated number of"18-wheeler" veMcles serving the site: 14 per week 14. Estimated number of"Single UnW trucks service the site: 15-25 per weelvi 15. Deliveries can be scheduled by the Owner,as needed Page 2 of 2 Primed on.4/272/08 Page 27 of 50 ir-qj IF ■ Prepared for. Gensler 711 Louisiana,Saute 300 Houson,Texas 77002 MMMEME DMA#07252 Page 28 of 50 DRAFT-a5h aw,Tang&.aissaci&4 Inc. Alai@ 21,200 Traffic Impact o. Center a" t Table Of Contents EXECUTIVESUMMARY ARY............................................................................................I INTRODUCTION...............................................................................I......................'I Purpose...............................a.......................,.................................................................t ProjectDescription........................................................................................................2 StudyParameters.........................................................................................................2 StudyArea...................................................................................................................2 TRAFFICIMPACT ANALYSIS.................................................................................. Approach...............................a.............................._.......................................................3 Background Traffic Volume Data..................................................................................3 Sate-Related Traffic......................................................................................................3 Trip Generation and Mode Split....................... .....__............. .....................................3 Trip Distribution and Assignment....................................... .......... .............__................4 Site-Generated Traffic Volumes....................................................................................5 Traffic Operational Analysis—Roadway Intersections..............................._..............5 AnalysisMethodology...................................................................................................5 AnalysisTraffic Volumes...............................d...............................................................6 Summaryof Resul ts.........................................................................•.............................6 RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................I.........................3 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................ CorB.arntc C047 MIir GNI ter Traffic but nrt Amrlpis Table of Contents Page 29 of 50 DRAFT-DeShazo,Tang&Aswdales,hic. April2l,M The services of DeShazo,Tang & Associates, Inc. (DT&A) were retained by Gensler on behalf of the Owner to conduct a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for development of a Corporate Conference Center in the Town of Westlake,Texas ("the Project"). The 106.9- acre site is part of the Circle T Ranch and is currently zoned as a Planned Development District The purpose of this report is to summarize the findings of the TIA for use by the Owner in a request for an amendment to the existing PD zoning to facilitate the Project The proposed development does not operate like a traditional hotel or other land uses,so no standardized trip generation characteristics are available for this analysis. Hence, trip generation projections for the Project were calculated by a trip generation model developed by DT&A based upon estimated information provided by the Owner and from DT&A's own assumptions based upon professional judgment. For purposes of this analysis, two traffic assignment scenarios were considered: Scenario 1-All traffic(except service vehicles)accesses the site through the main entry via Westlake Parkway, Scenario 2 - All guests traffic accesses the site through the main entry via Westlake Parkway; while all staff traffic access the site through a secondary driveway located on Ottinger Road. Since most of the property immediately surrounding the site is currently rural in nature, the roadway network serving the site is commensurately rural in character and/or is only partially constructed to the ultimately-planned cross-section. Due to the intermittent nature of site traffic and the extensive use of private transit, the traffic impact to the local roadway network will be moderate, Depending upon the decision of whether to designate staff traffic through the main entrance or a side entrance on Ottinger Road, traffic to roadways other than Westlake Parkway may be negligible. As future development occurs and the local thoroughfare network is expanded, reconfiguration of the site driveways may be appropriate in order to achieve proper intersection spacing and traffic capacity. END Corparale Conftwo?&(lenfer Traffic hirimcl Analois Page i Page 30 of 50 DeShazo,Tang&Associates,Inc. Engineers Planners 400 Sou lie Hointon Street Suite 330 Dallas,TX 75202-4899 214.748,6740®FAX 234,748.7037 www,deshazatang.corn To Mr.David Alderete—Gensler From: DeShazo,Tang&Associates,Inc. Date: April 21,2008 RL- Traffic Impact Analysis for Corporate Conference Center in Westlake,Texas DMA Pr*ct No.07252 INTRODUCTION The services of DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. (DT&A) were retained by Gensler on behalf of the Owner to conduct a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIP.) for development of a Corporate Conference Center in the Town of Westlake,Texas("the Project"). DT&A is an engineering consulting firm providing licensed engineers skilled in the field of traffic/transportation engineering. The proposed Project is a conference center for the private use of a corporate tenant located on a 106.9-acre site. The subject site is part of the Circle T Ranch and is currently zoned as a Planned Development District A site location map is provided for reference in Exhibit 1. The purpose of this report is to summarize the findings of the TIA for use by the Owner in a request for an amendment to the existing PD zoning to facilitate the Project. The TIC,will be provided to the Town of Westlake staff ("the Staff") for technical review to fulfill the associated requirements of the local approval process. C*,7--1r Canftremrr Cenlor Traffic ImpaclAnalysis Page I Page 31 of 50 DRAFT-DeS)wo,TanS&Asw6afts,Inc. April 21,2008 This TIA analyzes the anticipated impact, if any, of background traffic growth and site- related traffic at specified buildout conditions. Based upon the results of this analysis, DT&A has recommended traffic-related measures considered commensurate and appropriate to mitigate excessive or undue projected impacts. It is intended that the findings and recommendations presented herein be considered a credible basis to determine the traffic-related improvements essential for the Project to operate safely and efficiently, 'Me proposed development will initially include a conference center with 800 guest rooms and 94,000 square feet of assembly space The proposed zoning request would allow an expansion to up to 1,200 guest rooms. For purposes of this analysis, occupancy of the jKq riAvima _sij _�3,_Fsw tVej?rp*- .3 c�W Gensler is provided in Exhibit 2. Study Parameters This TIA will analyze the day-to-day traffic operational conditions that are anticipated to be the most critically impacted by the proposed Project at buildout conditions. Based upon the traffic generation characteristics of the Project and the prevailing background traffic conditions,the following periods shall be analyzed. various weekday peak hours of adjacent street and site-generated trip generation o at existing conditions o at site buildout year 2009 with site-generated traffic The following technical assumptions were also made in this analysis. ® Background traffic volumes were obtained from DT&A's Traffic Impact Analysis for Phase 11 construction of the Fidelity Investments corporate campus (i.e.,background traffic volumes include the projected volurnes from Fidelity Investments) - base traffic volumes were collected in March 2007. UMN=1 Based upon the scale of the proposed Project, the TIA study area was defined in order to assess the most relevant traffic impacts to the local area. The following locations are included in the study area. Intersections: (a) SH-114 interchange with Westlake Parkway: (b) Westlake Parkway at Capital Parkway: STOP-controlled on Capital Parkuny(Westlake Parktivy curprntly terininaics of Ilse bilerseclion) (c) Ottinger Road at Secondary Driveway(future): STOP-conlrolled air drivomy C00710rale C001firm"re Qrsarr Traffic impywt Analysis Page 2 Page 32 of 50 DRAFT-DeShazo,Tang&AssoriNes,hir. Apkil 21,2008 In accordance with the requirements for site plan approval in the Town of Westlake, submittal of a Traffic Impact Analysis is required for the Project The study is provided to the Staff for review of the projected traffic impact;and,Staff review comments are provided to the Town of Westlake Planning and Zoning Con-u-nission and Town Council for consideration. The TIA presented in this report will analyze the operational conditions for the peak hours and study area as defined above using standardized analytical methodologies where applicable- Current traffic volume data were collected throughout the study area to represent existing traffic conditions. Growth factors were applied to the existing volumes to project future background traffic at the site buildout year conditions. Then,traffic generated by the proposed development was projected using the standard four-step approach: Trip Generation, Mode Split, Trip Distribution, and Traffic Assignment By adding the site- generated traffic to the background traffic,the resulting site-plus-background traffic impact to operational conditions may be assessed from which approach mitigation measures may be recommended. Traffic volumes derived in the 2007 Traffic Impact Analysis for Fidelity Investments Phase 11 (conducted by DT&A) were used to reflect the current peak period traffic volumes on Westlake Parkway and Dave Road (base data collected by DT&A on March 20,21, and 27, 2007) and are sun-anarized in Exhibit 3. Current daily roadway link volumes on Ottinger Road were collected by DT&A (subcontractor) on April 17-18, 2008. Detailed data are provided in Appendix C. Trip Generation and Mode 5 i The proposed development does not operate like a traditional hotel or other land uses,so no standardized trip generation characteristics are available for this analysis. Hence, trip generation projections for the Project were calculated by a trip generation model developed by DT&A based upon estimated information provided by the Owner and from DT&A's own assumptions based upon professional judgment. Descripgon of Use The proposed development will host corporate employees from local,regional,and national offices. Various corporate programs will be held for guests during their stay. The duration of programs will range from one day to two weeks; the number of attendees of programs Ca,p6rnfe Canfreprm Center Tmjfic finparl AaRlysis Alge 3 Page 33 of 50 DRAFr-DeShnzo,Tang&AssodaK hic. App 21,2= will range from 50 to 1,000. Start and end times for programs also vary -8-00 AM-0o PM for one day programs,and mid-day start and end for other programs- For purposes of this analysis,it is estimated that approximately 65% of guests will arrive by private shuttle or coach;10% by private auto (local/regional traffic);10% by taxi; 15% by rental car. It is also estimated that the site will employ up to 460"operator" staff(in three work shifts),100"Owner"staff;and 12 data center staff. Additional detailed assumptions and detailed hip generation and parking assumptions are summarized in Appendix A. An overview of the hourly site-related trip generation is summarized in Table 1. Table I- Weekday Site Tfip Generation Summary (from DT&A Tr47 GeneraVon Model) • ff-TUITM, E Trip Distribution and Assignment Traffic generated by the proposed development was assigned to the study area roadway network based upon a subjective interpretation of the geographic distribution of population and by DT&A's professional judgment and understanding of the available roadway network, (NOTE: This analysis only considers the existing roadway network Future roadway improvements,extensions,and/or expansions are not considered in this analysis and may require further consideration as those projects are implemented.] For purposes of this analysis,two traffic assignment scenarios were considered-. Cosporair Camft #Jrecrvter Traffic Impart Ajanlysis Pagc 4 Page 34 of 50 DRAFT-De,51jazo,Tang&Assacidm Mr. April 21,2008 Scenario 1 -All traffic(except service vehicles)accesses the site through the main entry via Westlake Parkway. Scenario 2 - All guests traffic accesses the site through the main entry via Westlake Parkway, while all staff traffic access the site through a secondary driveway located on Ottinger Road. For both scenarios,service traffic is assumed to access the site through the secondary access point on Ottinger Road. An illustration of traffic assignment assumptions for each Scenario is summarized in Exhibit 4. Though this may include larger service vehicles,including WB-50 trucks(approximately 14 per week), those service trips are relatively low in number and can be scheduled at the discretion of the Owner. The volumes of service vehicles were not considered high enough to merit an independent analysis of intersection capacity, though the impacts should be considered subjectively- Site-Generated Traffic Volumes Site-generated traffic is calculated by multiplying the trip generation value(from Table 1) by the corresponding traffic assignments(from Exhibit 4). The resulting cumulative(for all uses) peak period site-generated traffic volumes at buildout of the Project are summarized in Exhibit 5. =MM ' F Traffic operational conditions for traffic-signal-controlled ("signalized") roadway intersections are quantitatively measured in terms of average delay per vehicle through the intersection as a function of roadway capacity and operational characteristics of the traffic signal. The standardized methodology applied herein was developed by the Transportation Research Board as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM; HCM also qualitatively rates the overall delay conditions in terms of "Level-of-Service- (LOS) ranging from -A" (free-flowing conditions) to "I" (over-capacity conditions). Generally, LOS D or better is considered an acceptable condition for signalized intersections in urban and suburban conditions, while rural locations may demand better level-of-service- A detailed description of HCM LOS for signalized intersections is provided in Appendix E. The standard methodology for measuring the operational conditions of STOP-controlled ("unsignalized") intersection capacity was also developed by the Transportation Research Board and presented in the HCM. These operational conditions are also qualitatively defined in terms of LOS ranging from"A' to"F and are quantitatively measured in terms of average delay per vehicle—but as a function of acceptable gaps in the opposing traffic stream(s). LOS for unsignalized locations are not measured for the entire intersection; C6?710"It C011feFelICC Q-1tter ?}aft ImpacI.Analysis Page 5 Page 35 of 50 DRAFT-DeShaw,Tang&Assodaks,Isic Alvil 2L 2009 of-way (traffic movements that do not stop or yield have no effective delay). A detailed description of LOS for unsignalized intersections is also provided in Appendix E. NOTE: The HCM methodology for unsignalized intersections was originally designed to analyze low- to maderate-volume locations where the traffic is,generally,evenly distributed throughout the intersection(e.g.,an intersection of two local streets). However,for unsignalized intersections located onmidor thoroughfares(where traffic volume or roadway capacity is very high and/or vastly disproporticaat4 or "unbalanced), the methoiMogy is deficienL Although LOS D or better is desirable, LOS F (cakulaW)commonly results and cannot be operationally mitigated unless a traffic signal is installed (subject to the findings of a Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis and subsequent approved of traffic signal installation by the responsible transportation agency). External factors such as gaps in the traffic stream created by nearby traffic signals are not sufficiently accounted for in the methodology but may, in fact, provide better-than-calculated conditions. Since no alternative analysis methodology exists,the results directly obtained from the calculated values are presented herein. It is recommended that analysis results for such locations be taken in the context of day to-day experience rather than as an absolute determination of inadequacy. Analysis Traffic Volumes Determination of the Projects traffic impact is measured by comparing the incremental change in operational conditions with and without siL-related traffic. Exhibit 6 summarizes the background-plus-site peak period traffic volumes at the analysis period. Summa!y of Results Intersection capacity analyses presented in this study were performed using the Synchro 7 software package. Table 2 and Table 3 provide a summary of the intersection operational conditions for traffic-signal-controlled intersections and unsignalized intersections, respectively during the peak periods under the analysis conditions presented previously. Detailed software output is provided in Appendix F. NOTE Signalized intersection results were obtained directly from the optirnized soft-are output based upon signal phasing and cycle lengths observed in the field and may differ slightly from actual signal opera ffixns, Corjs rale Caftforesim Center Traffic linpad Anatysis Page 6 Page 36 of 50 v r1 cl tS cu Cz R9 z CL C13 U cz dS IZ ri Q Z ED (D vi ID R di l< fl: At id 0a^» m CD q;i _rj C, 5 Irz %�ab cb VI di > ea eC vi ID XI 2 and .69 S Z.9 N E 3,2 Page 37 of 50 Vy g o z o:z Z IV - XI 2 and .69 S Z.9 N E 3,2 Page 37 of 50 DRAFT-DeShaza Twig&Assixinks,trio. April 21.2008 As noted in the results,the capacity analysis indicates that existing operational conditions at traffic-signal controlled interchange of SH-114 and Westlake Parkway generally operate efficiently and at acceptable Levels of Service. Acceptable conditions are expected to be maintained through the addition of site-related traffic. Under Scenario Z where staff traffic accesses the site via the secondary driveway, the intersection operations are expected to operate at acceptable Level-of-Service conditions with the addition of site-related traffic. Since background traffic is very light,delays at the intersection are expected to be nominal. ;;V;KtAili Vil 4 iNal-Al L91 Z NCJTF— Recommendations for public improvements within the study area presented in this report reflect the opinion of DT&A based solely upon technical analysis and professional judgment and are not inteo&-d to define,imply,or allocate funding sources nor required improvements. Applicable legal precedent indicates that the Owner of a Project should only be requbed to proportionately fund necessary infrastructure improvements that are directly attributable to implementation of the Project. Such requirements will depend ulxm the individual circumstances of each project that may be viewed differently by each particular agency/municipality. 1. For Scenario 1 (all traffic accessing the site via Westlake Parkway), configure the intersection of the Westlake Parkway-Capital Parkway intersection as illustrated in Exhibit 7. Installation of an all-way STOP is reconunended in order to maintain a traditional traffic control. [NOTE: Once Westlake Parkway is extended in the future, a new driveway location for the subject site may be required in order to maintain proper intersection spacing from the existing location of Capital Parkway] 2. For Scenario 2 (guest traffic accessing the site via Westlake Parkway, staff traffic accessing the site via secondary driveway on Ottinger Road), also configure the intersection of the site driveway on Westlake Parkway-Capital Parkway intersection as illustrated in Exhibit 7. 3. Owner should attempt to schedule service trips to minimize impact on surrounding community. Corporate Conferesseecenter Tmffic Impact Aadysis Page 8 Page 38 of 50 DRAFT-DeShazo,Tang&AssodAirs,lric. April 27,2008 CONCLUSIONS Development of the subject property to an 800-guest room corporate conference center is proposed on currently undeveloped property. The proposed development will generate very unique traffic generation patters, much of which will arrive/depart by private shuttle or coach. Since most of the property immediately surrounding the site is currently rural in nature,the roadway network serving the site is commensurately rural in character and/or is only partially constructed to the ultimately-planned cross-section. Due to the intermittent nature of site traffic and the extensive use of private transit,the traffic impact to the Iocal roadway network will be moderate. Depending upon the decision of whether to designate staff traffic through the main entrance or a side entrance on Ottinger Road, traffic to roadways other than Westlake Parkway may be negligible. As future development occurs and the local thoroughfare network is expanded, reconfiguration of the site driveways may be appropriate in order to achieve proper intersection spacing and traffic capacity. END OF MEMO CarFromtc Caufcrrrrrr Griller Traffic Impact Analysis page 9 Page 39 of 50 of 15 Outbound 50 F1550-N, z WeWake PArkwuy Secondary Driveway 10 D Exhibit 4A _-traffic Assigrinxtia for Staff Site Traffic Assignment (Scenario 1) =Traffic Assilpirrient.ray Gucst� Corporate Conference Center Tm,Me Impact Analysis Westlake Paegmy Page 40 of 50 M m m (8:03 /j r Wesdakc Parkway m to 90% '' 4 FI-o-%-1 100 WcAlake PjAway A' Fio-o-N u Exhibit 4B Site Traffic Assignment (Scenario 2) Corporate Conference Center Traffic Impact Analysis Traffic A-sisnrntw for Stair Traffic A%Mgmnent fur Guesm L .41 F14", Page 41 of 50 Existing Condition 11 a8 Z Recommended Condition 00 Future Site Driveway ---7 (Conceptual) Exhibit 7 Westlake Parkway-Driveway Intersection Configuration Corporate Conference Center Traffic Impact Analysis Page Page 42 of 50 cn ma r O Page 50 of 50 > E 4" Q R rat 1:64 u un o 4) 00 mL 4 4A u u d I �= IV CD G CD go �T %dD 49 cr 5 q-0 ma r O Page 50 of 50 A Civil 3 ngin=Wg Practice Thomas E Brymer,Town Manager Eddie Edwards, Director of Planning and Development 3 Village Circle, Suite 202 Westlake,Texas 76262 Re: Traffic Impact Analysis M)far the proposed Corporate Conference Center I have reviewed the traffic study and city's comprehensive plan. I offer the following general and technical comments: General Review ■ The separation of the service vehicles from the main traffic is confusing to some extent due to the lengthy route being proposed for service vehicles. If there was a more direct route for service vehicles, it would seem reasonable. Consideration and planning for a more direct route should be incorporated into the final plan. One option is to extend a new collector from the service entrance on Ottinger westward to Roanoke Road. A second option is to extend Westlake Pkwy westward and bring a service entrance off that extension running in a southerly direction along the west side of the Deloitte property- * The volume of traffic being generated by this site is not being developed using standard trip generation analysis. This is clearly stated up front in the report. The report indicates that this type of facility does not operate like a traditional hotel; therefore,the standard trip generation methods would not apply. The developer is indicating there are several conditions in which guests will be brought to the hotel_ These assumed conditions significantly reduce the potential traffic impacts and have significant influence on the results of this study.If the Town determined it was comfortable with these assumed conditions, the applicant should be required to incorporate these conditions into the actual site plan during that process of the development such that they can be measured and enforced by the Town. The conditions are 65%of the guests will arrive by shuttle or coach; 100/0 by private auto; 10% by taxi; and 15% by rental car. While this methodology seems reasonable, it has are overwhelming impact to the TIA results and volume of traffic being generated. ■ Methods of measuring the amount of guests and service vehicles should be incorporated into the site design to ensure the site functions as proposed and that it is enforceable as proposed. Examples of ways to do this are video tracking or gated entry with codes far the different types of vehicles. The applicant should provide a method of tracldng the number and types of vehicles using the service entrance. The applicant could also commit to a specific route to be used by service and employee vehicles to access the service entrance. Technical Review 2109 Franklin Dave Cell (817)945-8648 Arlington,Texas 76011 3den9@sbC31oba1.ne Fax(817)462-82172 Page 43 of 50 3-q W004W xP Y..-FIR. A Civil Engines Practice o A more detailed analysis of the traffic and impact should be considered during the detailed site plan process. A detailed modeling of the signalized intersections, existing traffic counts, and the actual timings plans is necessary to establish the existing conditions. o Proposed changes to the timing plans or new timing plans should be developed to minimize the flow of traffic during the peak hours for the signalized intersections. o Table 3 should include the existing conditions for all times of day for comparison to Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. Improvements should be proposed and incorporated into the plan to eliminate the`D' and `F levels of service. o The traffic report should be revised and resubmitted with the detailed site plan. Considerations for improvements and new timing plans could be proposed at that time. Given the assumed conditions in the applicant's TIA the development of this site does not propose to have any substantial negative impacts to the traffic in Westlake. However, a number of issues need to be examined and agreed to: • Improvements should be considered to offset the impact to southbound movement for Westlake Pkwy at Capital Pkwy. • The existing traffic conditions of Dove Road should be studied to identify the volume and type of traffic. What type of increase to the traffic on Dove Road is being proposed? • The existing structure of Dove Road(pavement thickness and sub-grade)should be analyzed to ensure the additional service vehicles will not cause or accelerate the deterioration of Dove Road. • If on an interim basis that service is allowed off dttinger,a new route could be extended westward to Roanoke Road in 3 years and then further extended to Hwy 377 within 6 years. If that is not palatable to the applicant,then Westlake could consider allowing the use of Dove/Ottingea far a period of 3 years(or what ever period the Town sets)at which time the service traffic could be re-routed to a service entrance coming off the extension of Westlake Pkwy with a service drive that extends in a southerly direction along the west side of the Deloitte property. These are my findings from the report submitted. Sincerely, 0,,L L T7 Charles F. Dibrell,III, PE 2109 Franklin Ome Cell(817)995-864B Arlmgtan,Texas 76011 Fax(817)462-8202 Page 44 of 50 � - STAUBACH A World of Real .Estate Knowledge May 2,2008 Mr. Thomas E.Brymer Town Manager Town of Westlake 3 Village Circle, Suite 202 Westlake,TX 76262 RE: Potential Deloitte Project Dear Mr.Brymer: As a follow-up to our meeting on April 29th, I-want to first thank you again for the time you and Eddie Edwards spent with us and the valuable input you provided. As requested,I am providing you with a summary of the issues we discussed as well as our concerns and proposed operating solutions. During our meeting,we collectively identified the following three Operating/Transportation Scenarios identifying how Guests,Employees and Service vehicles would access the site: Scenario 1: All Guests arrive via Westlake Parkway and a private drive from the north. All Employees arrive via a drive off of Ottinger Rd.. All Service vehicles arrive via the drive off of Ottinger Rd. by way of Dove Rd. Scenario 2: All Guests,Employees and Service vehicles arrive via Westlake Parkway and the private drive from the north,with Service and Employees splitting off at some point and taking a different route to the loading dock and employee parking located on the western and southern portion of the site. Scenario 3: All Guests and Service vehicles arrive via Westlake Parkway,with Service vehicles splitting off'at some point and taking a different route to the loading docks. All Employees arrive via the drive off of Ottinger Rd. We fully understand and appreciate the Town's desire to maintain its"rural nature". That nature is one of the characteristics that drew Deloitte to the site. Both the Town and Deloitte are aligned in that desire. We also understand that the Westlake Charter School is located north of our proposed Ottinger Rd. service drive, and there is a concern with traffic or trucks mixing with school traffic during school zone hours. It's not surprising that the Town has had concerns and reservations about this access and potential impact on traffic without having the benefit of a thorough understanding of the actual operations. Now that we can present you the actual operating information below and Deloitte's willingness to work with the Town to minimize the impact on the surrounding area, we hope your concerns will be mitigated and that we can work together going forward. 15601 Dallas Parkway,Suite 400 Addison,Texas 75001 The Staubach Company (972)361-5000 Fax(972)361-5910 provides global coverage three 45 of 50 www.staubach.com DTZ Staubach Tie Leung. As we discussed,Deloitte and their consultant team believe Scenario 1 above is the only functional and practical approach to access this site. We were quite taken back when it was suggested this option might not be approved by the Town, and this suggestion has raised serious reservations about the site in Deloitte's mind. However, we are confident that,once the true character and quantity of the vehicular access to the site is evaluated and understood,the Town will see that this impact would be very minimal. To summarize the options and issues: Scenario 1 —Deloitte and their design team have gone to great lengths to create a site layout that preserves the nature of this special site, and that allows for a scripted entry into the facility for arriving guests. A private"rural-type"entry drive will wind through the site and trees to create a unique arrival and decompression zone for Deloitte's guests. Our programmed arrival provides for the segregation of the arriving guests from other traffic into the site. This arrangement meets each of those desires, and keeps guest and service traffic separated,which allows us to meet one of our major programming requirements. It is also important to note that this option is the only scenario that is consistent with the current"long-term" thoroughfare plan which would eventually take all service traffic due west from the site and away from both Dove and Ottinger. Scenario 2—While it keeps all traffic off of Dove Rd. and Otttinger Rd.,this scenario creates major hurdles for the site design. First,we would greatly diminish the entry experience for arriving guests. Second,bringing large trucks in this way would cause us to have to build a more substantial road, losing the scripted rural feel, and more importantly, at the crossing of the creek, a more"commercial"bridge would have to be constructed, at great expense and further diminishing the country feel. Upon splitting off from guest entrance,the service and employee drive would have to go through adjacent prime sites to the north of the proposed Deloitte site, greatly damaging the developability of those sites. You will recall that Deloitte is as concerned with the development character and use of these sites as the proposed Deloitte site itself. Finally, a separate service drive would have to cross through the heavily treed area to the north and west of the facility,most likely traveling adjacent to or near the Town of Westlake's future"Hill" park site thus degrading those views and, again,the rural feel. Deloitte is trying to develop the site in a manner that preserves most trees on the property. Scenarios 3—This scenario basically presents the same issues for Deloitte as Scenario 2 and does not work for Deloitte. We have provided you with a Traffic Impact Analysis that has been prepared by DeShazo Tang &Associates,a recognized leading traffic engineering consultant. Their report is based on information provided by the two finalist facility operators that Deloitte is considering. These operators operate some of the finest similar conference centers in the U.S. In summary,the report is based on the following traffic data: = Estimated number of"18-wheeler"vehicles serving the site— 14 per week ■ Estimated number of"bobtail" "single unit"trucks serving the site--- 15-25 per week ■ Estimated number of employees: o Operator employees—460 in 3 shifts Page 46 of 50 o Owner employees— 100 in 1 shift Consequently, you can see that we will only average 2 18-wheelers per day, a negligible number. The bobtail trucks would average 2-4 per day, and are basically no more than large vans and very common on collector streets such as Dove Road. DeShazo Tang's report indicates that the automobile traffic on Dove Rd. and Ottinger Rd. would not create a traffic problem. Based on DeShazo Tang's findings,including current background traffic and added traffic due to employees,the Level of Service(as defined by Transportation Research Board as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual—(HCM)) for Ottinger Road at the emergency/service/employee entrance on Ottinger is rated"A"or"B"at peak traffic hours. The HCM rating system,A—F, generally provides that a level"D"or better indicates an acceptable level of performance for intersections in urban or surburban locations,while rural locations may demand a better level of service. While we do not believe that the minimal number of trucks above will create any sort of negative to the surrounding streets,we have reached out to our operator candidates to determine potential operational arrangements to mitigate any concerns about these trucks. They have indicated that they could dictate to the providers that no 18-wheeler deliveries could occur during school zone hours. Additionally they can dictate that arriving service deliveries come from Dove as opposed to from the north. This would ensure that a truck never went past the school, as our Ottinger service entry is around 800 feet south of the school. Of course,you cannot control or predict nature,breakdowns and the like,but this should allay any fears of large trucks presenting a danger to school traffic or creating a traffic problem along our proposed Dove Rd./Ottinger Rd. service entry. Regarding automobile traffic, although the Traffic Impact Analysis indicates that Ottinger Road should be only minimally affected by the added traffic,the operators and Deloitte have indicated the ability to lj adjust shift change times to help avoid peak school hours, and 2)stagger shift changes to spread traffic over a longer period of time. I hope this summary helps dispel any concern that Deloitte wants to be anything other than a good neighbor, and has the same desire as the Town in preserving the rural nature of the area. Sincerely, THE STAUBA HC PANY To y M. arrett AiA Exec ' e V e President Design & Construction Consulting Services Cc: Deloitte Hillwood Page 47 of 50 HILLWOOD A PEROT COMPANYO May 2, 2008 Mr. Thomas E. Brymer Town Manager Town of Westlake 3 Village Circle, Suite 202 Westlake,TX 76262 Re: DU Project Rezoning Proposed PD 3-12 Westlake, Texas Dear Mr.Brymer, As a follow-up to our April 29 meeting, I would like to thank you and the Town Staff for all of your time and effort in assisting us through the rezoning process for the proposed Deloitte University Project at the Circle T Ranch. We know the Town is as excited as we are about bringing a world class facility such as the Deloitte University to Westlake, and we greatly appreciate your continued efforts. Pursuant to your request, we are providing you with a summary of the effect of the proposed PD 3-12 rezoning and the remaining portion PD 3-3 land use allocations. The PD 3-12 consists of approximately 107 acres which is proposed to be rezoned to provide for the specific uses(s) required to facilitate development of the Deloitte University Conference and Training Facility currently not allowed in PD 3-3. The currently zoned PD 3-3 encompasses 365 acres and includes 117 acres of single family residential leaving 248 net acres of resort hotel and office.The 248 acres provides for 500,004 sf of resort hotel and 164,700 sf. of office space. We understand that the Town's primary concern is the impact of residential development on the school and maintaining open space throughout the Circle T Ranch. As part of the original PD 3-3 rezoning in March of 2004 (which was combined with a rezoning for areas 3-4 and 3-5) a total of approximately 275 single family residential units were deleted from the overall development plan on the Circle T. This reduction was agreed upon by Hillwood in order to alleviate some of the Town's concerns regarding overcrowding of the school. We remain committed to the overall zoning on the Circle T Ranch, and maintaining open space(particularly on the southern portion of the Ranch). 13600Ymwge Parkway Suite 200 I;iT Wmh,Ttxz 76177 Phvne 817224 6000 Fiuv$17 224 6060 or 6061 hz&,w dcom Page 48 of 50 Letter-Mr.Thomas E.Brymer May 2,2008 Page 2 PD 3-12 consists of approximately 107 acres that will be removed from the existing PD 3-3 which was approved on the Town via Ordinance of 453 on March 22, 2004. When PD 3-3 was approved it was anticipated that the office and resort hotel buildings would be one (1) story in height, resulting in a "building site coverage" in those zones of approximately 6.15%. The building footprints and building coverage for the residential areas would be dictated by lot layouts, terrain, roadway layouts and other items that would normally affect the development of a single family residential project. With the rezoning of PD 3-12 there will be a gross acreage remaining in PD 3-3 of approximately 258 acres, Netting out the 117 acres of single family residential, the resort hotel and office components will have a total building coverage of 3.61% assuming that these buildings will be three (3) stories in height. The increase in height on the buildings is allowed in the zoning, allows for better utilization of the property, and maintains open space. When the DU Project, and the office and resort hotel are built, we calculate overall composite building site coverage of approximately 4.8% resulting in a decrease in building coverage of approximately of 1.28% or 3.7 acres. This assumes that 117 acres of single family residential,which is currently allowed in PD 3-3,remains and the associated building foot prints open space and other items are constant given the normal constraints for development of single family residential property. I have attached a spreadsheet showing these calculations for clarity and ease of presentation to the Planning&Zoning Commission and the Board of Alderman. Once again, we appreciate all the Town's assistance and cooperation in this rezoning case. We look forward to our presentations at both the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Board Alderman coming up in the month of May. Please feel free to call if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely oseph C. Schneider Vice President JCSIkk Enclosure cc: Russell Laughlin,Hillwood Bill Burton,Hillwood Mike Berry,Hillwood Page 49 of 50