Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-29-08 ZBA Agenda PacketTOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Niay 29, 2008 7:00 pm TOWN HALL OFFICES — COURT ROOM 3 VILLAGE CIRCLE, SUITE 207 1. CALL TO ORDER. 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); (THIS CASE IS BEING CONTINUED FROM THE MAY 22, 2008, MEETING) 3. ADJOURNMENT. CERTIFICATION I certify that the above notice was posted at the Town Hall of the Town of Westlake, 3 Village Circle, Suite 202, Westlake, Texas, 76262, on Friday, May 23, 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. Hillwood and Deloitte will cause a 2 -lane private or public road (public or private at Hillwood's discretion) to be built from the proposed "Ottinger Road" emergency /service entrance, west and north to the Parish Lane interchange, and Deloitte will provide service vehicle and employee access via this new road. Segments of this road will be in a permanent configuration, and portions will be subject to relocation as future development plans are developed for the property, and consistent with the Town's master thoroughfare plan (substantially in accordance with the plan laid out at our meeting on Friday May 16'h with Don, Laura, Bill and the town staff). While private, this road and may or may not be gated. This road may be dedicated to the public at Hillwood's option, including.. (1) if adjacent property development requires it be made public, and (2) if the Town improves Dove Rd from JT Ottinger easterly to the to the Vaquero property. Direct access to and from Dove Road from property within the remaining portion of PD 3 -3 will be limited to emergency use only. Hillwood will agree to increased building and paving setbacks (an open space "buffer ") along Dove Road between the Fidelity property and the Deloitte property. This buffer will be a minimum of 200 feet in depth from the Dove Road right of way. The Town, Hillwood and Deloitte will enter into a development agreement outlining the terms and conditions of a non - commercial access agreement regarding the use of Dove Road. This agreement will set forth the types of direct access to be allowed by the town in the future and release Deloitte from all improvement obligations for future Dove Road, if any, between the western boundary of the Fidelity campus and the westerly property line of the Hillwood's Property ownership, west of the Deloitte property. Deloitte will not have any current or future obligation(s) for any improvements to Dove Road. As part of the development agreement outlined above, Hillwood will agree to participate in improvements to Dove Road (between the western boundary of Fidelity and the western boundary of the Deloitte property), provided it is built to a minimum standard of a Minor or Major Collector (minimum of one lane in each direction with a continuous left turn lane). Hillwood's participation in the improvements to Dove Road will be limited to 50% of the cost OR $1,500.000 (whichever is lower). This participation will be for the initial construction of this segment of Dove Road at the time it is improved by the "Down. The Town will acknowledge that Hillwood had dedicated all necessary Right of Way for Dove Road and no additional ROW dedications will be required of Hillwood. Hillwood will relocate the overhead electric along Dove Road (between the western boundary of Fidelity and the western boundary of the Deloitte prop-,rty) to underground. This work will be completed prior to the CO being issued =or the Deloitte campus. Hillwood will agree to amend PD 3 -3 to change the 117 acres ( + / -) of resid;:ntial acreage in the remainder of PD 3 -3 to an Office category. The maximum building area for office and corporate campus uses will be 1,200,000 square feet. r?'! other uses will remain as they currently exist in PD 3 -3. With the exception of th2 setback/open space buffer mentioned above, there will be no geographic restrictions as to the location of office development within the remaining PC1-tion of PD 3 -3. All commercial and /or office traffic will be accessed from Westlake Parkway or other roadways, and not directly on Dove Road. There will be ;to geographic restrictions as to the location of the office development. 6"79 (a Viecioniety --_�— `r-- wo ik lb lb lb. let dp Concept Plan '1 4 y. a }s PD 3 Amendment PID 3 - 12 newly created planning area PD 3 -3 planning area boundary amendment From: Planning area 3 (PD3 -3 ) removing 107+ acres. To : Planning area 12 (PD3 - 12) Creating an Education and Conference Center Planning Area Comparison of Permitted Uses r� • Office • Retail • Residential • Hotel / Motel • Golf • Restaurant PD 3 - 12 • Office • Retail -Accessory Use • Conference / Education Center • Golf • Restaurant • Data Center Impact on Planning Area 3 (PD 3 - 3 ) Although the area of planning area 3 (PD 3-3) will be reduced by approximately 107 acres, the number of houses, and the square feet of resort hotel and office use are not being reduced. Staff R Approval Reasons : • Conformance with Comprehensive Plan • Zoning Districts/Uses Permitted • Access/Streets • Site Design/Drainage • Pedestrian Circulation/Trails/Open Space TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TX ZONING CHANGE REQUEST STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION /BOARD OF ALDERMEN I. CASE INFORMATION Case No. Date: 5 -29 -08 Request: Approval of a rezoning from PD 3 -3 to PD 3 -12 Development Name: Deloitte University Location: Subject property is generally located at north of Dove Road and east of JT Ottinger Road Owner: Hillwood Developer: Deloitte LLP Acres: 107 acres (approx.) Proposed Use: Conference /Educational Center and Data Center II. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS 1. General: PD 3 -3 consists of 365 acres. PD 3 -12 for the Deloitte University project, if approved, would remove 107 acres from PD 3 -3 and leave PD 3 -3 with 258 acres. Remaining densities in the parent zoning tract for PD 3 -12, which is PD 3 -3, would remain the same. The height requested for this proposed PD 3 -12 district is an increase to those recently approved for PD -1 (Maguire - Solana). Residential slope requirements are being proposed to be changed from 5:1 to 4:1. The applicant has submitted a detailed concept plan which exceeds the minimum legllllelllCnls for a l.Ulll.ept plan IVI aLOl llllg case. T his IJ Jo that IIIUI.II of Wlldl the site will contain will be worked through early in the development review process. However, it should be pointed out that many of the details shown on this detailed concept plan, such as building location as an example, will be finally determined at the time of site plan submittal and approval. Although much of this 1 detailed concept plan may not differ from the upcoming site plan submittal, there may be changes that occur between this concept plan and the site plan. This is permitted under the Town's development ordinances since this is a concept plan and not the site plan. 2. Conformance with Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use is consistent with the Town's comprehensive plan as amended. 3. Utilities: Water and sewer utilities are provided by the Town and service is available to the site subject. Any dedication of water and sewer easements for public lines will be dealt with at the time of site plan and /or preliminary plat submission. As a condition of platting, this property will be required to be de- annexed from the municipal utility district (MUD). 4. Access /Streets /Thoroughfare Plan: Streets internal to the proposed PD 3 -12 district (Deloitte University) will all be private access and provide internal circulation to the site only, thus requiring no dedication to the Town. Streets external to the site are: JT Ottinger (to the west), Dove Road (to the south), and Westlake Parkway (to the north). Dove Road is classified as a minor collector, Ottinger as a local street, and Westlake Parkway as a major boulevard arterial. The developer, Deloitte, will require that within seven (7) years that Westlake Parkway is extended by the applicant (Hillwood) to a point west of where it currently terminates to a point roughly near the northeast corner of subject PD 3- 12 tract. The applicant and developer have identified public, guest, employee, and service access points on this detailed concept plan, as opposed to dealing with that issue with the site plan which will be submitted latter in the development review process. The applicant and developer show, per their detailed concept plan, all public /guest access to the site will be via Westlake Parkway and a north private drive. The applicant and developer are showing, per their concept plan, that all service and employee access to the site will be from an ingress /egress point located on the west side of their site on JT Ottinger Road. 5. Site Design /Drainage: The applicant and developer have submitted a concept plan for the proposed use on the proposed PD 3 -12 site which is attached to their zoning change application. The concept plan shows placement of an approximate 1.2 million square foot of buildings and parking on a fairly sloped site for the conference center /educational center and data center uses. The developer has indicated that they wish to make use of the site's natural beauty with its extensive trees, topographical variation (i.e. - rolling terrain), and the creek running through the subject tract to create a unique "decompression" learning environment for Deloitte employees attending Deloitte University. The submitted concept plan contemplates extensive use of water features. 6. Pedestrian Circulation: The applicant's and developer's concept plan indicates that the subject site is to be totally self- contained. There will be no public access connection to adjacent tracts, trails, or pubic rights -of -way. Thus, all internal pedestrian circulation will be handled by a private trail and /or private sidewalk network. 7. Trails /Open Space. No connectivity of this zoning district and site to the Town's public hike /bike trail is contemplated by the applicant or the developer in their concept plan. The Town's open space plan shows a hike /bike trail running along Dove Road and turning north along Ottinger Road. This public hike /bike trail would be contiguous to those portions of the applicant's and developer's site that adjoins Dove Road. The developer will construction the portion of this hike /bike trail that runs along the Dove Road portion of PD 3 -12. The site will have an approximate 20 acre off -site private open space site adjacent to it on its northwest side. This private open space is on Hillwood property, but is reserved as open space in an agreement between Hillwood and Deloitte. Ill. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of this zoning change request for the following reasons and with the following stipulations: 1. Conformance with Comprehensive Plan: This application is consistent with the Town's comprehensive plan as amended, its goal and objectives, and its policies as it relates to land use and site development. 2. Zoning Districts /Uses Permitted: The proposed use fits and compliments the uses permitted in the parent zoning district for this request (PD 3 -3). The proposed use also meets the Town's desire to encourage commercial land use that is a corporate office campus use, minimizes building footprint size, minimizes building height, preserves and integrates this use into the existing topography, preserves trees and vegetation, as well as makes extensive use of open space. 3. Access /Streets: The detailed concept plan for this district shows the primary public /guest ingress and egress will be from the north via a private drive extended from Westlake Parkway which is shown as a major boulevard arterial roadway on the Town's thoroughfare plan. Service and employee access to the site will be from an ingress /egress point (conveyed by easement from Hillwood to Deloitte) located off of JT Ottinger Road. This is on the west side of this proposed PD 3 -12 district per the applicant's and developer's detailed concept plan submitted with this zoning change application. 4. Site Design /Drainage: The applicant and developer have submitted a concept plan for the proposed use on the proposed PD 3 -12 site which shows placement of an approximate 1.2 million square foot of buildings and parking on a fairly sloped site for the conference center /educational center and data center uses. The developer's concept plan indicates their desire to make effective use of the site's natural beauty with its extensive trees, topographical variation (i.e. - rolling terrain), and the creek running through the subject tract. The parking shown on the concept plan will be screened from public view. The concept plan design criteria are in concert with the policies, goals and objectives of the Town's comprehensive plan. The creek that flows through middle of the subject tract is a major topographic feature on this site along with additional water features shown on the concept plan. 5. Pedestrian Circulation /Trails /Open Space: No connectivity of this zoning district and site to the Town's public hike /bike trail is contemplated by the applicant or the developer in their concept plan. The site will have a private open space site adjacent to it on its northwest side on Hillwood property per an agreement between Hillwood and Deloitte. The portion of the hike /bike trail shown on the Town's open space /trail plan that parallels Dove Road and is adjacent to PD 3 -12 will be constructed by the developer. 4 Deloitte University Westlake Board of Aldermen/Planning & Zoning Commission Workshop May 29, 2008 Developer /Applicant Attendees: Deloitte Jon Eisele, Partner (1,14" Mock) Staubach Bradley Selner, Executive Vice President Tommy Parrett, Executive Vice President Hillwood Russell Laughlin, Senior Vice President Joe Schneider, Vice President n TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS BOARD OF ALDERMEN AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JOINT WORKSHOP AGENDA May 29, 2008 5:00 pm TOWN HALL OFFICES — COURT ROOM 3 VILLAGE CIRCLE, SUITE 207 1. CALL TO ORDER. A. BOARD OF ALDERMEN B. PLANNING & ZONING COMIVIISSION 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE 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). 3. DISCUSS POSSIBLE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT RELATED TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3 — PLANNING AREA 3 (PD3 -3) AND PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3 PLANNING AREA 12 (3 -12). 4. ADJOURNMENT. A. BOARD OF ALDERMEN B. PLANNING & ZONITING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION I certify that the above notice was posted at the Town Hall of the Town of Westlake, 3 Village Circle, Suite 202, Westlake, Texas, 76262, on Friday, May 23, 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. CIRCLE T PLANNING AREA 3-12.. CONFERENCE AND. EDUCATIONAL CENTER ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS BY REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 107 ACRES FROM THE PD 3 -3 PLANNING AREA AND REZONING THAT ACREAGE TO BE CALLED 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 AND BUILDING LINES, TOTAL FLOOR AREA, PARKING, LOADING AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LANDSCAPING, FLOOD PLAIN, AND DRAINAGE; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING AIAP; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 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 ftom 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 kno«n 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 Nee 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 OF ALDERMEN OF THE TOWN OF VI'ESTLAKE, TEXAS: PART I That the recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated herein, adopted by the Town and declared to be true and correct. PART 11 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 1 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 "PD 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 he 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 To,N?n without the incorporation in this Ordinance of anv such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. .2009 PA 1 -12 Conference and Educational Center Page 2 ORDINANCE Page 2 of 50 PART V This Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE TO)ArN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS, ON THIS . DAY OF , ,MAYOR ATTEST: , Town Secretary , Town Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stan Lowry_ Torn Attorney .'OOR PA 3 -12 Conference arid Educational Center Pale 3 ORDINANCE ` Page 3 of 5D CIRCLE T PLANNING AREA 3 -12 CONFERENCE AND EDUCATIONAL CENTER ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PRON71SIONS SECTION I SHORT TITLE ............. SECTION2 PURPOSES ................................................................................ ..............................1 SECTION 3 GENERAL DEFINITIONS ....................................................... ..............................1 Section3.1 Usage .............................................................................. ..............................1 Section 3.2 Words and Terms Defined ............................................. ..............................1 SECTION 4 PD SUPPLEMENT ........................................... ............................... I SECTION 5 APPLICABILITY OF EXISTING REGULATIONS ................ ..............................2 Section 5.1 Applicable Town Ordinance e.......................................................... Section 5.2 General Approval Criteria ......................................................... � SECTION 6 CONCEPT PLAN, DEVELOPMENT PLANS. AND SITE PLANS .....................3 Section6.1 PD Concept Plan ............................................................ ..............................3 Section 6.2 PD Development Plans .................................................. ..............................3 Section6.3 PD Site Plans ................................................................. ..............................3 ARTICLE11. USES ........................................................................................ ..............................4 SECTION 1 LAND USE SCHEDULE .......................................................... ..............................4 SECTION 2 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES ............................. ..............................8 ARTICLE 111. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ........................................ ..............................9 SECTION1 DENSITY ................................................................................... ..............................9 Section 1.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center .... ..............................9 SECTION 2 MINIMUM LOT SIZE ............................................................... ..............................9 Section 2.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center .... ..............................9 SECTION 3 MINIMUM LOT' A' 1DTH .......................................................... ..............................9 Section3.1 Office ............................................................................. ..............................9 SECTION 4 MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT ........................................... ..............................9 Section 4.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center .... ..............................9 Section 4.2 Exceptions to Height Requirements ............................... ..............................9 SECTION 5 MINIMUM BUILDING SIZE ................................................... ..............................9 Table of Contents 2009 PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Cemer Page i ORDINANCE Page 4 of 50 Section 5.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center .... ..............................9 SECTION 6 FRONT YARD SETBACKS ..................................................... ..............................9 Section 6.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center .... ..............................9 Section6.2 General .......................................................................... .............................10 SECTION 7 REAR YARD SETBACKS ...................................................... .............................10 Section 7.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center ... .............................10 Section7.2 General .......................................................................... .............................10 SECTION 8 SIDE YARD SETBACKS ........................................................ .............................1l Section 8.1 Conference and Educational Center and Data Center .. ..............................I Section8.2 General ......................................................................... ..............................1 SECTION 9 SLOPE REQUIREMENTS ....................................................... .............................11 Section 9.1 Residential Slope ......................................................... ..............................I I Section 9.2 Roadway Slope ............................................................. .............................11 SECTION 10 MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS. Section 10.1 Hiking and/or Biking Trails .......................................... Section 10.2 .............................12 Landscape Irrigation ...................................................... .............................12 Section10.3 Fencing .......................................................................... .............................12 Section10.4 Lighting ......................................................................... .............................12 Section 10.5 Tree Requirement .......................................................... .............................12 ARTICLEIV. EXHIBITS ............................................................................ .............................13 EXHIBIT I Legal Description of Planning Area 3 -12 EXHIBIT 2 PD Concept Plan Table of Contents 20�R PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Center Page ii ORDINANCE Page 5 of 50 ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION 1 SHORT TITLE 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 ". SECTION 2 PURPOSES 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 GENERAL DEFINITIONS 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 terns 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. Section 3.2 NVords and Terms Defined. 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 -race 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 I. General Provisions .2009 PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Center Page I ORDINANCE Page 6 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 APPLICABILITY OF EXISTING REGULATIONS 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 To,.vn Ordinances. In the event of any conflict between (i) the PD Concept Plan, this PD Ordinance and the PD Supplement and (ii) the Applicable Torn 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 pennits 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 I. General Provisions ORDINANCE 2009 PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Center Page? Page 7 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 CONCEPT PLAN, DEVELOPMENT PLANS, AND SITE PLANS. 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 1. General Provisions .2008 PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Center Page 3 ORDINANCE Page 8 of 50 ARTICLE IL USES SECTION 1 LAND USE SCHEDULE Buildings, structures, and land within the sub -areas identified on the PD Concept Plan shall be used only in accordance with the uses permitted in the following "Land Use Schedule ". The symbol "X" shall mean that the use is permitted as a principal use by right. The spnbol "S" shall mean that the principal use is penmitted only after first obtaining a -'Specific Use Pen-nit- 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 allo"'ed as a principal use. CIRCLE T PLANNING AREA 3 -3 -B CONFERENCE AND EDUCATIONAL CENTER AND DATA CENTER LAND USE SCHEDULE ORDINANC[ PERMITTED Permitted "X" USES Special Use "S" Accessory "A" AGRICULTURAL USES Orchard x Plant Nunsm. ( Grow ing) X Plant Nurser ( Retail Sales) X Fanm General (Crops) X Farm: General lLi%eslcxA.Ranch) X Veterinarian (lnd(xx Kenncls) Vocrinaiian I Outdcx-r Kennels) Stahks (Private Use) $ Stable~ ( As a Busine.s ) RESIDENTIAL USES Single Family Detached Single Family Zero LnI Line Single Family Altachcd Duplex Homc Occupation So- %ants Caretakers Quarters Accommodation liar E rnploym'Cu siomcT- /Visit ors A Swimming Pool(Pmate) A Detached Garage (Ptivare) A Spon rcnnis Cnuns (Private) A Article 11. Uses __1008 PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Censer- Pave Page 9 of 50 PERMITTED I Ptrmitted "X" USES Special Use "S" Accessory "A" INSTF IJTIONAL and I I GOVERNMENTAL USES Emergency AmbulanceSenice I x Post Otrce(Govenm mul) x Mailing Semice(Private) Heliport Hclistop'Vrni -slop S Telephone. Electric. Cable. and Fiber Optic Switching S(alion x Elecincal Substation S Uuliry Distribution Lines' x Utility Shop and Storage A Wata and Sewage Pumping Station (below grdde) X Water and Sewage Pumping Station (above grade) S Water Storage Tank and Pumping System ( Elevated or Ahovc Grade) S Water. Sewer. Electric, and Gas Metes x Electric Transfortners x Prvate Su ec1%!Al levs'Drives x Retirement Home Nursing Com alescem Home Hospice Hospital Ps)cftianic Hospital Clinic A Child Daycare I Public. 7 or more) Child Daycare (Private. 7 or morel A` School. K -12 (Public or Pri%are) School ( \'ocat ionat 1 College or Unncnity x Commwnit) Center (Public) Civic Club x Church or Place of Worship Use .Assm -iated to a Religious Ina. x Government Building x Police Station x Library x LD,ta Centel x Article 11. Uses WOOS PA 3-I2 Conference and Educational Censer - Pa2e 5 ORDINANCE Page 10 of 50 PERMITTED USES Permitted `•X" Special Use "S" Accessory "A" A COMMERCIAL USES A Multifamily (Apartnnnts) OIl ices t General) X Studio X Banks and Financial Institutions X Informalicm Proccssing X Hotel Motel X Hotel Motel with Conferencing Facility X Laundry Dry Cleaning (<3,000 ST 1 A Lnundry Dry Cleaning (Drop Pick) 'A Shoe Repair A Beauty Parka. Bart+crshop ,q Chxhing Storr A Article 11. Uses ORDIN.4 NC 2009 PA 3 -1' Conference and Educational Center - Page 6 Page 11 of 50 Quick Copy, Duplicating Services A Personal Sen ica A Liquor Store Micro- brewer} and Hine Production and S❑lm (<30.(" S.F.) S Grm en' Comcnience Stye A Sen ice Slat ion Drug Store q Varicly Slore A Bakcry Sales q Stationery and or Birk Slore q Antique Shop An Gallen• Muscums A Hardware Store Sp, x1 ing Goods A Paint and Wallpaper Cloth Store Retail glove;- General (Excluding Second HandGlKxhl A Re,taurant. Cafe Pr Dining Facility X Auto Truck Pans and Accessories Houschofd Furniture Appliances (including Salesand Service) m Farer's Market Feed Sion: Parking Structure X CafeterialPn% ale) A Article 11. Uses ORDIN.4 NC 2009 PA 3 -1' Conference and Educational Center - Page 6 Page 11 of 50 PERMITTED USES Permitted "X" Special Use "S" Accessory "A" Job Pnming, Lithography, Priming, or Blueprinting A VcHcic Display and Sales (inside) x Medical Laboratory x R -D laboratory Af, Ccmfercncc Center x Live Theater A Motion Picture Theatre A Custom Business Services x Electronic Appliances Store and Computer Sales and Seri ice A Tavern. Bar or Lounge S Dance HaIWNightclubs S Equestrian Center A A NtU SEMENT/RECREATI ON A Golf Course ( Public or Prisate) x Park or Playground ( Public or Pmaie) x Satellite Dish x Non - Commercial Radio Tower Kacc i rack Operat ion Recreation Facility. Health Studio (Puhlic) x Country Club ( Private Metnbcnhip) x Golf Clubhouse (Public or Pricatc) x Community Center (Priiale) x Rccreatiiw Center (Ptivalc) x Hike. Bike, and Equestrian Trails I Public of PriNwell .( GVIf Ma in Facility A G(lf Pro Shop A Health'Spa Facilities (Private) A Athletic Fields iPrivaie) A Athletic Coons (Pm ale) A Equestrian Center A Athletic Cuwts (Puhlic) A Commercial Amusement (Inside) A Lake Cruise"A'aler Taxi I AUTO' "'C' Truck Tiailci Rental Auto, Body Repair Auto Mclhanical RcNir A Article H. Uses 2009 PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Center- page ORDINANCE Page 12 of 50 PERAIMED USES Permitted "X" Special Use "S" Accessory "A" Quick Lithe Oil Change Vehicle Maintenance (Private) A Vehicle Fueling (Private) A WHOLESALE TRADE Warehouse -Storage(Inside) WarrhouseStorage (Outside) Scrap: Wa.te Recycling Collection and'or sionve GavCheinical Bulk Storage Light Manufacturing. Assembly Apparel Manufacturing Packaging and or Distribution Printing. Engraving and related Rrpn)ducti%c Smiccs Distribution of &)oks Other Printed Material Machine Shop Welding Shop Tcmporar) Batching Plant S Temporary Comwction OlTice M. X' Temporary Construction Matrriak Storage Temporary Salts Ol)ice Ya VOTES: 1. Individual retail occupants (except grocery store and drug store) cannot exceed 25,000 square feet. 2. Including mater, sewer, electric, gas, cable, telephone, fiber optic. and other public and private utility distribution lines. 3. Limited to period of construction. 3. Limited to "build-out— period. 5. "Private" shall be deemed to include a daycare that is made available to any emplovee on the property. k. Limited to white collar research and development (i.e., non -indu- final, non - chemical. and non -water processing). SECTION 2 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES An accessory use or structure ik-hich is customarily incidental to the principal use or structure, and which is located on the same lot or tract of land, shall be permitted as an accessory use Avithout being separately listed as a penmitted use_ Article 11. Uses 2009 PA 3 -1'_ Conference and Educational Center - ORDINANCE Page R Page 13 of 50 ARTICLE 111. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SECTION 1 DENSITY 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 MINIMUM LOT SIZE 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. SECTION 3 MINI;LIUM LOT WIDTH 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 MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT 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. SECTION 5 MINIMUM BUILDING SIZE 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 FRONT YARD SETBACKS 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 M. Development Standards 2009 PA 3 -12 - Conference and Educational Center Paee 9 ORORJANCE 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 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 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 froth the required right-of-way, whichever creates the greater setback. C. If a lot runs from 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 2oN -erned by the rear yard regulations: swimming pools; game courts; fences. garages: and other accessory buildings. D. If a corner lot has two street frontages of equal distance, one frontage is goN-emed by the front yard regulations and the other frontage by the side yard regulations. If the corner 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 REAR YARD SETBACKS 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 from the rear lot line. Article 111. Development Standards ORDINANCE' 2008 PA 3-12 - Conference and Educational Center Pate 10 Page 15 of 50 SECTION 8 SIDE WARD 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. Section 8.2 General A. Required side 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 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 front 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 SLOPE REQUIREMENTS 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 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 MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 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 trail(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. Dewlopment Standards 2009 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 xvater or Xeriscaping plantings, the inclusion of an 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 'F-om adjacent sites and public rights of Article M. Development Standards ORDINANCE' 2008 PA 3 -12 - Conference and Educational Center Page 12 Page 17 of 50 ARTICLE IV. EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 1 Legal Description of Planning Area 3 -12 EXHIBIT 2 PD Concept Plan Article IN'. Exhibits ORDINANCE PA 3 -12 Conference and Educational Center - Pace 13 _ Page 18 of 50 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PD 3 -12 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 518 inch iron rod with plastic cap stamped "Caner & Burgess" set being an ell comer in the southerly property line of said AIL Tract 2, said point also being the northeast property corner 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 89 049'56 "W, 787.23 feet along the common property line of the southerly property line of said AIL Tract 2 and the north property line of said Lakeway Land tract; THENCE N 00 045'29 'W, 357.87 feet; THENCE N 20 032' l 0 "E, 243.20 feet; THENCE N 24 °21'01 'E, 227.62 feet; THENCE N 26 047'41 "E, 340.17 feet; THENCE N 58 007'29 "E, 281.95 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve to the left; THENCE with said non - tangent curve to the left, an arc distance of 504.70 feet, through a central angle of 23 133'27" having a radius of 1227.50 feet, the Iong chord of wbich bears N 98"50'1 9"E, 501.15 feet; THENCE N 77 003'35 "E, 1563.23 feet; THENCE S 00 032'43 "E, 762.66 feet; THENCE S 40 002'39 "W, 871.03 feet; THENCE S 01 °05'24 "E, 1442.77 feet to north right -of -way line of Dove Road, as shown in that certain tract of land described by deed to the Town of Westlake, as recorded in Volume 16798, Page 279, County Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE S 88 054'36 "W, 1153.05 feet along the north line of said Dove Road, C &B Job No. 015007.094 ACF 92412 CTR ]:VOB\ 01500701' 094,SUR\WP\LEGIPD3- l2ZONING.doc April 15,2M8 Page l of 2 Page 19 of 50 THENCE S 87 036'29 "W, 138.19 feet continuing along the north line of said Dove Road to the east property line of that certain tract of land (Tract 1) described by deed to AIL Investment, L.P., as recorded in Volume 13883, Page 335, County Records, Tarrant County, Texas, THENCE N 00031'56 "E, 1296.32 feet along the east property line of said AIL Tract I and then along the east property line of the aforementioned Lakeway Land tract to the POINT OF BEGINN, ING and containing 4,677,277 square feet or 107.375 acres of land more or less. NOTE: THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED UNDER 22 TAC S663.21. AND DOES NOT REFLECT THE RESULTS OF AN ON THE GROUND SURVEY, AND IS NOT TO BE USED TO CONVEY OR ESTABLISH INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY, EXCEPT THOSE RIGHTS AND rNTERESTS IMPLIED OR ESTABLISHED BY THE CREATION OR RECON'FIGUR.ATION OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED. P E 'O�F rF �. �1STE;q�;.•• 9 Lr JAMES F. KASSON 4500 C &B Job No. 015007.094 CTR ACF #2412 J:VOB\ 01500701 \094\SUR \WPTEG\PD3- 12ZONING.doc April 15, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Page 20 of 50 04 -c r-i -T , a nom, 0 'o "-E cocoa Dc-- C"2 2 El&Ug,2 0 TV -0 CL) (1) (D CHARLIES AfEDLIP6 sUotle(Er cr, ABSTRACT MUNNIER 1084 VIOCHARD. EADS SURVE-1 i ABITNAtT NUIARCM A&* ------ 5CALE s 11-l000, AG PC) 3-12 ZONING OF THE PO 3-3 ZONING TARW4T COUNTY, TEXAS 7L. ...... ... .................. . JAMES F. KASSO'N' --- 4500 ... . ..... DOT94z 1. cgri *0— 1 J94-ADI A O z -4 Lo uj cc O ��•r o 0 GENERAL SITE CONCEPT PLAID NOTES:CurnM Zur np �~ }_.I �ona� �mn.:es iurnrrr lnkr. OO°a <a Uarelopn.n ` nwux��.u.uesma.umra mnr mru -.an ]an ep'pYr•Ml aa >W men! �: � d � - " /b(�� O �' l �Q ___ ,woes om.. To Q tlo \ (OJQO load Plain d• a .: c © °c?�CJ 2 olr�aT J •P;;l,",'��•�( �` c:ml.c .� ,.�....�. � �1�J r �o Q; l ;o bo `� � � � oU•; CYo°�C� as�o 00OJ9 f��* 6 , G:aSC�7` i 5� 4O 0 b r O 1 Ir I o r 1 .t_' � I, �/ ' S DO 4 0 - ` �O O; •ob' ��q , a ✓ '�` / i o i"d'6 1 Gr_ b 4 _ d I M„n Emryl Reo,pno o p� O cif a -�`\ , 1 p - { 1 f��, j -.•�, \ \� y Prop sea Primar� O Entry Road i 3 %d^ Qp Gage St-1— T,p G e I oon Bu Is ng _ I I ]a 6\, nom}" 'O v 0 43 ioo .lHa .`0OQ d ` ':b�Fa,° I Y R,e.y ional Cza_.n "1 r ,,, ¢S 0 O 0 � opu ad Sey ,a > / i i i,4nnen svece r6i/Qr _y�� j { '1 1 ©Ul fl, ' _ � � ,_��' � •v v ((O ply xr � I r O� O ,� j� � ei ob IfN S.•e cc,ban ) .. .9 0 , 4�1 :..00 9� / ,. •�' Pllm.ryoa.e.el.r �,•pQO ; `/% ,... (^� f( 5 �~ `r r� Oo Sory a I. � A� D ©ar(A I Entry i CD CD � n N N O -ar O z , Wp go �lq te -j � fQ cil ° I RCLE (D RANCH' to (D 0 cyl C) $6 0, 0. 4► A A w A a. 41 OIL F; 44 -So 40 v I" is lio 44 04 lg41r CIRCLE (z RANCHO) 00 I Summary of Relevant Findings — Traffic Impact Analysis Service Vehicle Traffic Service vehicles would enter the site via Ottinger Road. Based on the estimates of service vehicles from our two finalist operators, DeShazo, Tang & Associates has indicated that service trips to the site are considered relatively low in number, and not considered high enough to impact normal traffic flows. While not impacting traffic significantly, it is understood that the town may wish to minimize potential Impact on active school zone timeframes. Both operators have indicated that service vehicle traffic/deliveries can be scheduled at times that would have no material conflicts with school zone hours. Guest Traffic V All guests arriving at the facility would enter and exit the site from \Aieso-,v, par^ „ay. Guests would arrive via shuttle/van/coach, private or rental automobile, or taxi. Employee Traffic All employee traffic is expected to normally access the site via Ottinger Road. Two groups of employees will need access to thee site: operator employees and owner employees. 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 Manua! — (HC”) for Ott nger Road at the emergency /service/employee entrance on OtdNer 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. Although the Traffic Impact Analysis indicates that Ottinaer Road should be only minimally affected by the added traffic, the Operators and Owner have indicated the ability to 1) adjust shift change times to avoid peak school hours, and 2) sfao ershi`t changes to spread traffic over a longer period of time. Pose 3 of 3 Prinlyd on:4M/W Page 25 of 50 Summary of Traffic/Transportation Assumptions for Project X Used by De_Shazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. for Trip Generation /Parking Demand Models Based Upom Phone Interview w/ Owner, Gensler, DT&A; plus, DT&A assumptions All information pertains to original construction phase, unless other -wise stated. (PREUMINARY, subject to review and revision) GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Number of Guest Rooms: 800 2 Assembly Area: 94,000 SF PROGRAM INFORMATION 3. Typical range of duration 1 day to 2 weeks 4. Typical Start/ end time of other programs: a. 8:00 AM -6:00 PM (one day) b. mid -day to mid -day (varies) 5. Attendance: a. >75% of capacity from June through mid- 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 progmrm NUMBER OF GUESTS 6. Typical range in number of guests: 50-10W per program 7. Maximum number of guests on site at one time, when considering overlap of multiple programs: 1,5W (not all guests stay overnight) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 8. "Operator 460 employees in three shifts a. 65% on Shift 1: 7:00 AM -3:00 PM b. 32% on Shift 2 3:00 PM -11:00 PM c- 3% on Shift3: 11:00 PM -7:00 AM 9. "Owner ": 100 employees on one shift (8.00 AM -5:00 PM) 10. Da to Center employees: 12 employees on one shift (8:00 AM -5:00 Ph1) ASSUMEDTRAVEL MODE 11. Guests: a. Shuttle Bus /Coach - 65% (assumed average vehicle occupancy: 20 persons per vehicle) b. Drive Alone (Personal Auto, Local /Regional origin) -10% (assumed average vehicle occupancy: 1.2 persons per vehicle) c. Drive Alone (Rental Car) -10% (assumed average vehicle occupancy. 1.5 persons per vehicle) d. Taxi /Other Drop -off- 15% (assumed average vehicle occupancy. 1,0 persons per vehicle) e. If off -site activities are included in program, travel will most likely be arranged by private coach. Page 1 of 2 Prinlyd on: 4P—W8 Page 26 of 50 12. Stafh a. "Operator" -Drive Alone (Personal Auto) -100% (assumed average vehicle occupancy: 1.1 persons per vehicle) INOTE. "Operator" innuld consider arranging private transportation to reduce traffic, if rrguired.] b. "Owner" -Drive Alone (Personal Auto) -100% (assumed average vehicle occupancy: 1.1 persons per vehicle) c- "Data Center" -Drive Alone (Personal Auto) -100% (assumed average vehicle occupancy: 1.0 persons per vehicle) ESTIMATED SERVICE VEHICLE NEEDS 13. Estimated number of "18- wheeler" vehicles serving the site: 14 per week 14. Estimated number of "Single Unit" trucks service the site: 15-25 per week 15. Deliveries can be scheduled by the Owner, as needed END OF DOCUMENT Pop 2of2 Prniird on:4,IW Page 27 of 50 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR CORPORATE CONFERENCE CENTER IN WESTLAKE, TEXAS Fmpred for Gensler 711 Lou isiana,SUte300 Houson, Texas 77002 Prepared DeShazo, Tang tit Associates, Inc. Engi►ne,crs • Pimners 400 South Houston5treet Suite 330 • Union Station Dallas, Texas 95202 Phone 214/748 -6740 Fax 214/748.7037 April 21, 2008 VT&A WZ52 Page 28 of 50 DRAFT- aShaz; Ting & Assoeia!s, lie. A1as721, 200! Traffic Impact Analysis for Corporate Conference Center — DT&A Projrd Na VM2 — Table Of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................... INTRODUCTION............. ...............».......»................................ ............................... t Purpose» ..............» . ». »......._......... ».. ».. »..» » »» _.. »,................... »...._. ._.1 ProjectDescr iption ........ ...................................... ........................................... StudyPar ameters..._ ... .. ..................... _ ........................ ................. -- _ Study, Arvea.. .......................................... _... .....- ___.._................_._ _............ ..1 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ............................ _.................................................. Approach»............_.»_._.. ....._.......__.._.. - -•-- --. ..--- ........... .. ... _ ... ...._. Background Traffic Volume Data . ............. _ ...... _......._.. Site-Related TralYlc » ._........ . .. _ ........................................................ .._ ............ ............_..........._.....3 .................... Trip Generation and Mode Split ...............................-- ............................._ ..................... Trip Distribution and Assignment .......................................... .......... Silo-Generated Traffic Volumes ......................... 5 Traffic Operational Analysis— Roadway Intersections ..................................... _ ...... 5 Analysis Methodology ................................ ............................... .. Analysis Traffic Vol=es ..............................._..._._........... ..._..._._..._..._._..._....... Summaryof Results ............................... _ ..................................................................... 6 RECOMMENDATIONS .......__... - .._... CONCLUSIONS _.. ..................... . Corm. ate Goukrrucr Gofer Traffic Ity net Am,4y5is Table of Cadrnts Page 29 of 50 DRAFT- L rS&r -% Ting & Associ*s,1„. Apn]n nroe EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The services of DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. (DT&A) were retained by Gensler on behalf of the Owner to conduct a Traffic Impact Analysis (T1A) for developrnerg of a Corporate Conference Center in the Town of Westlake, Texas ( "the Project "). TheIX9- acre site is part of the Cirde T Ranch and is currently zoned as a Planned Development District The purpose of this report is to summarize the findings of the rlA for use b 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 DRA'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 Wesdake Parkway. Scenario 2 — All guests traffic accesses the site through the main entry via 6Yesdake 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, trzdfic to roa&ays 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 r— '7v'n1e COI fiw,c Gxrn Traffic 11,1[wd Au*ysd P'gr i Page 30 of 50 DeShazo,Tang & Associates, Inc. E»gineers Plmlricrs 40o Sould Houston Strut Suite W Daltw6 TX 75202 -i899 214.748.6740 • FAX 214.7,8.7D .17 r.wwAcstu iong.corn Technical Memorandum TO: Mr. David Alderete— Gensler Front: DeShazo, Tang & Associates, Inc. Date: April 21, 2008 Re Traffic Impact Analysis for Corporate Conference Center in VVestlake, Texas DMA Project t k. 07252 INTRODUCTION The services of DeShazc, Tang & Associates, Inc. (DT &A) were retained by Gensler on behalf of the Owner to conduct a Traffic Impact Analysis (EA) for development of a Corporate Conference Center in the Tofam 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. Purpose 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 TIA Trill 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-mom o„k-, Traffic lwpacl A.1yais Ple1 Page 31 of 50 DRAFT- DrShozq Tang & Assoaks lac Apr12l, 201 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 wilysis, 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. Project Description The 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 project is anticipated to occur in 2009. A preliminary site plan for the Project as provided by Gensler is provided in Exhibit 2 Study Parameters This TIA will analyze the day -to-day traffic operational conditions that are anticipatedto 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 genera tion 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 II construction of the Fidelity Investments corporate campus (i.e.. background traffic volumes include the projected volumes from Fidelity Investments) -1•ase traffic volumes were collected in March 2007. SludyArea 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 follor•ing locations are included in the study area. Intersections: (a) SHA 14 interchange with Westlake Parkway: Iraffic- cigniar- controlled (b) Westlake Parkway at Capital Parkway. STOP -conlrolk•d or Capilrrl Parkzrtry (lVcsllike Parkway curmnity imminates at lire inlerseclion) (c) Ottinger Road at Secondary Driveway (future). STOP- corrlrolk•d cn drivo ry COTOMh Co„1,rrntr Cr■kr Traffic Irnpnct A,wlysrs Pear 2 Page 32 of 50 DRAFT- t3c51wM Tang &Ass"Wm 11r. April 21, 200E TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 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 Conunission and Town Council for consideration. Approach The TIA presented in this report wOl analyze the operational conditions for the peak hours and study area as defined above using standardized analytical methodologies There 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. There, traffic generated by the proposed development was projected using Lhe 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. Background Traffic Volume Data Traffic volumes derived in the 2007 Traffic Impact Analysis for Fidelity Investments Phase Il (conducted by DT &A) were used to reflect the current peak period traffic volumes on Westlake Parkway and Dove Road (base data collected by DT&A on lvlarch 20, 21, and 27, 2007) and are summarized in Exhibit 3. Current daily roadway link volumes on Ovinger Road were collected by DT&A (subcontractor) on April 17 -18, 2008. Detailed data are provided in Appendix C. Site - Related Traffic Trio Generation and Mode Sahl TheproPosed development does not operate like a traditional hotel or other land uses,sono standardized trip generation characteristics are available for this analysis. Hence, trip generation projections for the Project were calculated by a trip generation model deve!oN { by DT&A based upon estimated information provided by the Owner and from DT &A's uw•n assumptions based upon professional judgment Dcscriplion of Use The proposed development rill 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 hvo weeks; the number of attendees of programs C6"F —.le Ca f,-,, r Gr1" rrnT1r 111'rtrl Analysis Pop• 3 Page 33 of 50 DRAFT- Or51vr4 Twig &Asses tJ tc. Apr!! 11, .VW will range from 50 to 1,000. Start and end times for programs also vary - 8:00 AM -6:00 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 gUestr will arrive by private shuttle or coach; 10% by private auto {local /regional traffic); lo% by taxi; 151 by rental car. It is also estimated that the site will employ up to 460 "operator" staff (in three work shifts), I00 "Owner" staff; and 12 data center staff. Additional detailed assumptions and detailed trip generation and parking assumptions are summarized in Appendix A- An overview of the hourly site - related trip generation is summarized in Table L Table 1. Weekday Site Trip Generation Summary (from DTdA Trip Generafion Mode; One -Hour Period TOTAL IN OUT 6.00 AM 216 276 0 7 :00AM 110 98 13 8:00 AM 3 8 0 9:00 AM 0 0 0 10.00 AM 33 33 0 71 :010 AM 33 33 p 12-00 PM 40 33 7 1.-Do PM 47 33 13 2:00 PM 280 167 113 3.00 PM 305 0 305 4 :00 PM 3 0 s 5 :00 PM 74 13 61 6 :00 PM 147 20 127 7.00 PM 67 33 33 8:00 PM 47 33 13 9 :00 FM 20 20 0 10:00 PM 26 26 4 I ]:00 PM 134 0 134 72:o0AM 0 0 n 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 net-work- Future roadway improvements, extensions, and /or expansions are not considered in this anal -sis and may require further consideration as those projects are implemented.) For purposes of this analysis, two traffic assignmentsce!»ri -s _••e -e cosidcred_ Corpo —fe Co ft—Ce Cr -ter Trnfsc trnpnrI A141) -is !3g 4 Page 34 of 50 DRAT - DrSb4:4 Tray &Assocuh Inc. April 21, XM 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 Iocaled on Ottinger Road. For both scenarios, service traffic is assumed to access the site through the secondary access pointon Ottinger Road. An illustration of traffic assignment assumptions for each scenario is summarized in Exhibit 4. Though this may include larger service vehicles, including W3-50 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 i) by the corresponding traffic assignments (from Exhibit i) The resulting cumulative (for all uses) peak period site - generated traffic volumes at buildout of the Project are sunumrized in Exhibit 5. Traffic Operational Analysis — Roadway Intersections Analysis Melhodoloav Traffic operational conditions for t':.cfic sigr•.aI- control!ed ( "signzlized'7 roa; s,ay 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 tra!fic signal. The standardized methodology applied herein was developed by the Transportation Research Board as presented in the HiSinvey Caliacity M,rllrlal (HC,'l4) HCM also qualitatively rates the overall delay conditions in terms of 'Levefof- Service" (LOS) ranging from "A' (free - flowing conditions) to "F' (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 Tire standard methodology for measuring the operational conditions of STOP - controlled ( "unsignalized ") intersection capacity was also developed by the Transportation Rese ;rch 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; C6'7 , It Corr /rrrnrt G,trr 7'ra),rAC rrsl »N Arulysis N r5 Page 35 of 50 DeShazo, Tang &Awc" h Irtc April 11. 2008 rather, LOS is only calculated for individual traffic movements that must stop or yield right - 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 enethodotogy for tutsigmlized intersections was originally designed to anat),ze bw- b moduatrvoturne locations where the traffic is,, genernlly, e+'enly distributed throughmI the intersection (eg, an rnttrseetiort of two lout streets} Hoe. ever, far nncipwlized intersections located cnmaior tLo hfares(*,here traffic vdume OF roadway capacity is very high and /or vastly dispropextic atp or `unbaluxe4 the rnethoddogy is deficient. Although LOS D or bet" is desirable, LOS F (calculated) commonly rrsailts and cannot be operatiarnally ertibga�ed unless a traffic signal is installed (subject to the findings of a Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis and subsequent approved of traffic signal installation by llx rrsporuible Irar>spertaticn agate). External !actors such as gaps in the traffic stream Qeated by nearby traffic signals are not su(Goently accourstrd for in the methodology but may, in fact, provide betier•tltan- calculafed con.litiocts. Sure no alternatiye analysis rethodology exists, the results directly obtained from the calculated values are presented herein It is recvrnrnended that analysis results for such locations he taken in the context of darb -day experience rather than as an absolule deierminationof inadequacy. AreiysfS Traffic VolL'►r1e5 Determination of the Project's traffic impact is measured by comparing the incremental change in operational conditions with and without site-related traffic. Exhibit 6 summarizes the background -plus -site peak period traffic volumes at the analysis period. Summary of Results Intersection capacity analyses presented in this study were performed using the Syn6ro 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 prevRclusly. Detailed software output is provided in Appendix F. DOTE: Signalized intersection results were obtained directly from the optimized softy -are output t.-se! upon signal phasing" cycle irngtlrsobservej in Lhe f;uM and may differ slightly from actual signal nrrrzti, ru. Corr.orak C-I�P r,rrr &mfer ♦'raffir llalncr 1txrY57 P,tc 6 Page 36 of 50 DRAFT • DeSba_o, Tang & Aiwiates, Inc. April 21, 2004 Table 2. Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Results (Signalized Intersections) Table 3. Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Results (Unsignalized Intersections) EYdsling Scenario 1 (All Accra via Westlake Scrrlario 2 (Access via Westlake Scowrio 2 ( Access via Westlake Cauliliorl5 Parkrun) Parkahit ondSeconda Drier) P(drkdva 7,•00 S.,N 700 5:00 6:00 6.00 2.00 3:00 7 :00 S:00 7:00 5:00 7:00 5.00 5.00 AM !'M AM PM AM PM PM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM 8:00 6:00 8.00 6:00 7.00 7.-00 3.00 4:00 8:00 6.00 8:00 6:00 8:00 6:00 6:00 AM PM AM PM AM PM PM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Wc60ake (rark%vAy PAf AM PM AM PM ��estlalrParkwn we r✓rt r ✓a A C r✓a 4/a r ✓w At WO SH 114 FR B C B C wa wo /✓a 1 ✓a B D ►✓a Iva 1 ✓a ►✓a Wesllale l�arktiav r ✓a A A r ✓a IV, 1 ✓a !✓I SB r ✓a 1441 F A r ✓a At E B SH 114 FR B H B EP ' ✓'' c ✓w Iva r ✓w B b r✓w Wa r ✓n I,/.. Table 3. Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Results (Unsignalized Intersections) ••••• � . • — pr— oawu upon 4411,61 condilk s. A, D, DE,F -Love► of service for fnlrryeclwn approach rnovvment, PAD, S8, £B, WB - Nort}r, South. E .5r -, Wcmbound approach; I. T. a - Arr-1, r....+.nX ....w....�nr. n� Codl+orare Conferrnce Caner oTraffic Impoa A pwl� 7 C+ 0 EmsNns Scenario 1 (All Accesa iaa Wesnake Scowrio 2 ( Access via Westlake Conditions P(drkdva Parkwav and Sccowlee Drive) 7,00 5;00 7:00 5:00 6.00 6.00 200 300 7.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 7.00 5:00 AM PM AM PM AM PM PM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 8:00 6:00 8;00 6 :00 7:00 700 3;W q1:00 8:00 6:00 8.'00 6:00 8:00 6:00 AAf PAf AAf PAT AAI PM PM PM AM PAf AM PM AM PM ��estlalrParkwn we r✓rt r ✓a A C r✓a 4/a r ✓w n/w A C r ✓a r ✓n r ✓a r ✓a at Capital Pkw ,. Pd0 )Vie r✓il A A I r ✓a e✓a 1 ✓4 r ✓a A A r ✓a IV, 1 ✓a !✓I SB r ✓a 1441 F A r ✓a 4/0 r ✓a ► ✓a r A A r✓a A A ► ✓a A r ✓a A ►✓a B 011ie cr Rai WEttR ►✓a r✓a 1 ✓a 1 ✓a �Va a ✓i1 d✓a r ✓a A A a1 S�h'cui.�ar Drive IaT r✓o rr/•r r ✓a r ✓n rd/n r ✓n r ✓w Kry. I✓a t ✓n rl I ✓a ••••• � . • — pr— oawu upon 4411,61 condilk s. A, D, DE,F -Love► of service for fnlrryeclwn approach rnovvment, PAD, S8, £B, WB - Nort}r, South. E .5r -, Wcmbound approach; I. T. a - Arr-1, r....+.nX ....w....�nr. n� Codl+orare Conferrnce Caner oTraffic Impoa A pwl� 7 C+ 0 DfiAFT- DcSl -zq TAnt &ii"Wak; IHC. April A 2008 As noted in the results, the capacity analysis indicates that existing opera tional conditions at traffic- signal controlled interchange of SH-114 and Westlake Parkway generally operate effidentiy and at acceptable Levels of Service. Acceptable conditions are expected to be maintained through the addition of site - related traffic. For the unsignalized intersection of Westlake Parkway at Capital Parkway, it is recommended to add STOP - control to each approach in order to maintain a conventional traffic control at the intersection (as opposed to create an unusual two-way configuration not anticipated by motorists). By introducing the southbound STOP control, the southbound approach results in a Level -of- Service F during the AM peak hour due to the heavy background traffic volume. However, this condition is only expected to dissipate at once the AM peak hour traffic normalizes. Other intersection approaches will operate at satisfactory conditions before and with the addition of site traffic under both site access scenarios (1 and 4 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- RECOMMENDATIONS NOTE Recoaunendation s for public improvernents within the study area ]presented in this report refk l It'e opinion of DT&A based so* upon lechrocal analysis and professional judgment and are not inte744 to defum, imply, or allocate funding sources nor required improvements. Applicable legal precedent indicates Thal the Owner of a Project stxuld only be requited b proportionatety find necessary infrastructure improvemmhts that are dirray altributable to impleaientatim of the Project Such requirernents Mill depend upca Use individual circumstances of each project that may he viewed differently by each pa- 6mlar agency /munic�liy. 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 recommended in order to maintain a traditional traffic control. (NOTE: Once Westlake Parkway is extended in the future, a new driveway location for the sulject site may be required in order to maintain proper intersection spacing from the existing location of Capital Parkhh-ay.l 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. Colro orr Co.Jc e)'rrG'#fCr TmA rrr parr A.dpQ Yagr 8 Page 38 of 50 DRAFT -,^ 5 ha:A Tang &Azw;dq lnc. Aprr111, MS CONCLUSIONS Developnnent 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 dw 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 designatt 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 oper intmection spacing and traffic capacity. END OF MEMO Corjromk CoufcrrrraCnih Trf?ffi [ 1-pact A�Al y, rn r,:r 9 Page 39 of 50 Inbound 'al CeI O� Outbound E K Sccbcdar� Dnrway i � Sccro�dvr - ' WQ n V Wmitatc Parkway / r I . I t�e..il:.ke trrl.ral I s•� io j �t I, 71 ORD / ,R . -,, ,t Pyl•• a) 4 L eyc nd: Exhibit 4A o . TralTcA.%6gnnwnj ror Staff Site Traffic Assignment (Scenario I) o _ �� � �fJfIIC .ACV �O11 Y1� fut GU�at CorporatcConrcrcncc Center Trafriic Impac I A nalysi s r�e� Page 40 of 50 Inbound 8a° 'a Y L7 Outbound c• Q ' Ii 1 1 00' Unve.ay 20 °.6 907L ,0% � / EBSHrNf ,00 j w esdake Park+my f � T�kwaY W r, tax � Ro,o 4 1 o%6 i W"LdcPi,kray 100' ,� ulTx4 °a7 c � � 3 i Exhibit 4B Site Traffic Assignment (Scenario 2) Corporalc Conrcrencc Ccnicr Traffic Lnracl /analysis Lefcn4: TraTfc A.�ignrncm for sufr Tr]rsc APligmvk!m fm Guc>u P,}c Page 41 of 50 Existing Condition =� % �► -� Recommended Condition i 1 i 1 i i i 1 1 1 • �1 1 Future Site Driveway ` (ConccpttaI) i 0 0 0 ` n l ,` o �- j- r � � w y 1, A ` r .1 •• i '1 Exhibit 7 Westlake Parkway- Driveway Intersection Configuration Corporatc Conrcrcncc Ccrler Traffic Impact /analysis rtes.• Page 42 of 50 3 -0 X8 0"M� Y.T. r8. A Civil E"iri=ittg l're kC Thomas E Brymer, Town Manager Eddie Edwards, Director of Planning and Development 3 Village Circle, Suite 202 Westlake, Texas 76262 Re: Traffic Impact Analysis (171A) for the proposed Corporate Corrference Center I have reviewed the traffic study and city's comprehensive plan I offer the following general aril technical comments. General Review The separation of the ser`.ice vehicles from the main t:€FFc is corn.Fusirg 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 P"-f westward and bring a service entrance on that extension running in a southerly direction along the west side of the Deloiitte 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 here are several conditions in which guests mill be brought to the hotel. These assumed conditions significantly reduce the potential traffic impacts and have significant influence on the resuhs of this s~wdy. If the To:v,t determined it was comfortable with these assumed conditions, the applicant shotJd be requucd 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; IN, by private auto; It?% by taxi; and 15% by rental car. Ntrhile this methodology seems reasonable, it has an everwWrning impact to the TLA 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 dial it is enforceable as proposed. Examples of ways to do this are video tracking or gated entry with codes for the different types of vehicles. The applicant should provide a method of tracking 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 a riployee Vehicles to access the Service entrance. Technical Review 2109 Fmnklin Drive Cell (817) 995 -8548 Arlington, Texas 76011 3denoe hcglobcl.-g't Fax (817) 462 -8202 Page 43 of 50 3 -!Z 2-V IK A Ceti] Er4ineair4 Practice • 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. • Proposed changes to the tinting plans or new timing plans should be developed to minimize the flow of traffic during the peak hours for the signalized intersections. • Table 3 should include the existing conditions for all times of day for comparison to Scenario I and Scenario 2. Improvements should be proposed and incorporated info the plan to eliminate the `D' and `E' levels of service. • 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 tr� c 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 Ploy at Capital Pkwy. • The existing traffic conditions of Trove Ro: d should be studies 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. • l.f on an i.-zterirt basis that s.°n1ice is !allowed O -TOtmnage r, a new route could be extended westward to Roznoke RD&d in 3 ye---,s and then `urther extended to Hwy 377 within 5 years. If that is not potable to the applicant, then Westlake could consider allowing the use of Dove/Otting 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 enhance coming off the exiension of Westlake Pk-uy with a wvice drive that extends ;n a southerly direction along the west side of the Deloitte property. These are my findings from the report subnutted. Sincerely, Q. J�� Olj— - Charles F. Dibrell, IIl, PE 2109 Franklin Dave Arlington, Texas 76011 ?deno` sbcc!cbalnet Cell (5 17) 995 -864B Fax (817) 462 -8202 Page 44 of 50 STAUBACH 4 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 rorth. 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 sorne point and taking a different route to the loading dock and employee parking located on the westem and southern portion of the site. Scenario 3: All Guests and Service vehicles arrive via Westlake Parkway, with Service vehicles splitting ofd' at some point and taking a different route to the loading docks. All Employees arrive via the drive off 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 tale 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 concems 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 concems will be mitigated and that we can work together going forward. 15601 Dallas Nrlw2y, Suicc 400 Addison, Texas 75001 The Saubach Company (972) 361 -5000 Fax ( 972) 361 -5910 provides global coverage t� of 50 ww w.staubach -com DTZ Scauba:h T icc ng. As we discussed, Deloitte and their consultant team believe Scenario i 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 Ottinger Rd., this scenario creates major hurdles for the site design. First, we would greatly diminish the entry exper1Pnce 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 concemed 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. Scenario 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 —140 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 Ri 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. YvNle we do not believe that the „animal 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 lile, 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 1) adjust shift change times to help avoid peak school hours, and 2) stagger shift changes to spread traffic over a Ionger 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 C MPANY 0 r ExeculWve Vice President Design & Construction Consulting Services Cc: Deloitte Hillwood Page 47 of 50 I H H I LUTOOD A PEROT COMPANY* 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 500,000 sf. of resort notel and 164,700 sf. of office space. We understand that the Tow'n'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). 1360014r+iwir Pori way Suitr 200 Fart W nh, 72rar 7611-7 Nl v 817224 6000 Far 817 224 6" or 6061 htl6.w d cv n Page 48 of 50 Letter - Mr. Thomas E. Br}Tner 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 tlw Town's assigLa ce and coope:atieri in u.is rezotirg 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 ad3itional information. Sincerely oseph C. Schneider Vice President JCS/kk Enclosure cc: Russell Laughlin, Hillwood Bill Burton, Hillwood Mike Berry, Hillwood Page 49 of 50 CT PD 3 -3 Rezoning Comparison Table May 2, 2008 n� m cn 0 0 cn One Story Option DU rennin` open spnoe analysis.xlsx 0 Printed: 515!2008 12:12 PM PD 3-3 PD 3 -12 PD 3 -3 Composite of Remainder 3 -3 and 3 -12 ORD 453 DU Project Remainder Gross AC4,e 365 AC 107 AC 258 AC Net Resort/Office Acreage 248 AC 107 AC 141 AC 248 AC Building Types Squarc Footage Stories Square Footage Stories Square Footage Stories Square Footage Stories Confcrcnco Center and Educational Facility - 0 1,230,000 4.10 0 1,250,000 4.10 Resort Hotel 500,000 1.00 - 0.00 500,000 3.00 500,000 3 Office 164,700 1.00 - 0.00 164,700 3.00 164,700 3 Total "Foot Print" 664,700 304,878 221,367 526,443 hers= (Dcacasc) in Bldg. Covaagc Change from 3 -3 - Ord 453 "Building Coverage" 6.15% 6.54% 3.61% 4.87% - 1.28.0. (3.17) Acres (Building Coverage is reduced) Residenlisl Acreavel 117 - 117 n� m cn 0 0 cn One Story Option DU rennin` open spnoe analysis.xlsx 0 Printed: 515!2008 12:12 PM