Loading...
Minutes P&Z 01/16/2014Thursday, January 16, 2014 Trophy Club Entities Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission 100 Municipal Drive Trophy Club, Texas 76262 7:00 PM Svore Municipal Building Boardroom CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM Chairman Senelly called the January 16, 2014, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at 7.03 p.m. and announced a quorum present (6 members). Present: 6- Chairman Richard Senelly, Commissioner Mark Sadley, Commissioner Dennis Sheridan, Commissioner Garrett Reed, Commissioner Brent Card, and Vice Chair Larry Vowell Absent: 1 - Commissioner Fred Allen STAFF PRESENT.- Carolyn Huggins, Community Development Director Danny Thomas, Fire Chief Pat Cooke, Building Oficial Robbie Killingsworth, Reporting Secretary GUESTS PRESENT. Scott Beck, Applicant Mike Pacillio, Partner, North American Properties Mike Twichell, Architect Chairman Senelly: l am going to say a few things about comments and testimony. The Commissioners are here to listen to you. And, this meeting tonight is being videotaped_ Each person will have three (3) minutes in which to say things on his/her mind. We have a timer. We have an order of testimony based on your registration with Robbie. You will be called to the podium in that order. 1 ask that you state who you are and what your address is when you do get up here. And finally, because t know many of you may have similar if not the some comments to give, if you heard a comment, or a question that you also would like to say, please don't. We are going to try to give everyone a chance to speak tonight so if the question and the comment has been made, then try to go an to what is new, something that you have that is new and different. Now that means you have to pay attention. It also means that the last person up may not have much to say. But that's ok because we are going to take every comment that we hear to heart with the same value as if if were said more than once. The number of times that a comment is said does not add weight. It just makes everyone tired. We are going to start this session tonight, this public hearing, with a presentation by the applicant. We are going to ask him to come forward and tell us what he has in mind and why. We are going fo all listen to that. l ask you to please refrain from comments or things you may want to do or say while that's going on. And the same is true for yourselves when you stand up and comment. PUBLIC HEARING 2014-838-T Public Hearing regarding a request for approval of amendments to Planned Development No. 30. Applicant: JSB Properties, LP represented by Bill Planning and Zoning Commission Page 1 of 30 Meeting Dale: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2094 Dahlstrom, Jackson Walker L.L.P. Attachments: Staff Report - PD -30 Amendment Request.pdf EXHIBIT B - REDLINE.pdf Exhibit H - Concept Plan.odf Exhibit I - Prelimina Site Pfau. df Exhibit H - Proposed New Concept Plan.vdf Exhibit I - Proposed New Preliminary Site Plan.pdf Scott Beck, representing Beck Properties and Midtown Development introduced himself, Mike Pacillio, a Partner with North American Properties, and Mike Twitchel, the architect of the project. He then gave a PowerPoint presentation of the amendment request, the preliminary site plan, designs and renderings, Weitzman Group and North American Properties. The five concepts for the PD -30 amendment request are things that we believe are necessary when talking to the banks in terms of the ability to get this project financed. 1. Allow 30 town houseltown homes as a permitted use in Area I of Preliminary Site Plan; 3 -story (50 -ft. maximum height) building. Eliminated 20 Condos from the Site Plan. 2. Increase maximum number of urban residential units from 250 units to 350 units. Permitted use under existing PD -30 with SUP. Flexibility from 310 - 350 Max based on retail market demand. 3. Permit urban residential units on the first floor of Buildings B4, B5, and B7, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan, provided the first floors are "retail ready" allowing these floors to be converted to residential uses. Allows for flexibility based on market demand. 4. Permit municipal facilities to be located within the property fronting on Indian Creek Drive. Create a site for a New Town Hall within the Town Center. 5. Changes to other sections of PD -30 necessitated by, associated with, or resulting from the requested amendments. Mr. Back discussed the PD -30 amendment and Site Plan, designs and renderings were shown, and he concluded his presentation with an overview of the Weitzman Group. Mike Pacillio, a Partner at North American Properties introduced himself and presented an overview of North American Properties. They are a partner with Beck Properties on this project on a go -forward basis. Mr. Beck: So in closing, I want to say the time is now. We have been involved in developing here in Trophy Club for 22 years. The biggest concern that I would have as it relates to this development, this 26 acres, Trophy Club Town Center, is to not become the "center of the donut". There have been a number of announcements of things that are going on up and down 114. We have the new theater being built right outside our front door, which is going to command retail pad sites in front of it. These will be restaurants. They will take away from restaurants that would want to be in Trophy Club. It was just announced that Mehrdad will be building Entrada in Westlake. It will be roughly 7 times the size of the parcel that we are talking about here at the front of Trophy Club. The reality is — the time for action and to get something done .- would be during this next economic cycle in terms of actually having a large scale mixed-use development. What we could do was on the drawing boards originally before we were convinced to go down a path of creating a town center. We wanted to build during a cycle that will be 2 or 3 cycles from now, Planning and Zoning Commission gage 2 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 with some type of a grocery store anchor. My concern is that ultimately to be able to create the type of density that we would want to command will be sucked away effectively across the street. Getting out in front of Entrada across the street and leasing retail now as the Cinemark is being built is pivotal in terms of getting something done. In closing, I encourage you guys to take a strong look at this. We certainly are shovel -ready in terms of the amendments that we are asking for. The way that we are asking for them have now been vetted by the banks, have been vetted by our institutional partners and our development partners, as well as our retailers. l appreciate your time this evening. Chairman Seneliy: Thank you. Now, a brief staff report. C. Huggins: Thank you Chairman. The PD -30 amendments are: (1) Allow 30 town houseltownhomes as a permitted use in Area I of Preliminary Site Plan; 3 -story (50 -ft. maximum height) building. Eliminated 20 Condos from the Site Plan. There is not a definition for "townhome" in the PD -30 document. But, there is a definition for "townhomes" in the town's zoning ordinance, which does pertain to this property. It requires that each townhome is separately platted, although the units can be joined to each other by abutting walls. So, the 30 townhomes would be for individual platting and for sale to buyers. I wanted to make it clear that the zoning ordinance does have a definition for "townhomes" and does required individual platting. The applicant would be required to do that, and is aware of that. (2) Increase maximum number of urban residential units from 250 units to 350 units. This is a permitted use under existing PD -30 with SUP; flexibility from 310 - 350 Max based on retail market demand. The existing PD -30 zoning allows for 250 apartments with an additional 100 allowed if an SUP is approved, which would require P&Z and Council approval as well as a public hearing and property owner notification. This PD amendment request, if approved, increases that total of apartments to 350 and removes the SUP request for any additional units. (3) Permit urban residential units on the first floor of Buildings B4, B5, and B7, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan, provided the first floors are "retail ready" allowing these floors to be converted to residential uses. Allows for flexibility based on market demand. As already stated, of those additional 100 units, some could be located on the first floor of buildings B4, B5, and 137, provided the first floors of those three buildings are retail ready. (4) Permit municipal facilities to be located within the property fronting on Indian Creek Drive. Create a site for a New Town Hall within the Town Center. The Town Hall building is a place holder to allow council to have options for a Police Station and/or a Town Hall as there are limited property opportunities and sites in the town. The property is PD -30 zoning. Whether or not this amendment is approved that PD -30 zoning, as it exists today, stays. Also whether or not this amendment is approved, a final site plan is required for this property. As noted on page 7 of your packet, a final site plan will require a water model study, sewer study, drainage study, engineering feasibility study, traffic impact analysis, and tree survey reviewed by the town engineer and town staff, and then submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation and council for approval. So, there is a final site plan requirement with PD -30 whether these amendments are approved or not. Finally, this item does require a public hearing as we are having tonight. A notice was placed in the Star Telegram on January 5, 2013. Property owners Planning and Zoning Contmissian Page 3 of 30 Meeting Dale: January 15, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 within 200 feet of this site were notified of the request. You have been given a list of the property owners within 200 feet. You have also been given a copy of the Public Hearing Notice placed in the paper as well as what was sent to property owners within 200 feet. Three residents did send e-mails to me. You were provided those as well this evening. Thank you. Chairman Serially: Thank you. One last item. Would you please reiterate what is available on-line for folks to see including what's on the Trophy Club Exchange Site. C. Huggins: The property owner notification, the public hearing notice, the red line, and the list of PD amendments Mr. Beck and I just went over. All of that is available on-line. Chairman Senelly: We are now going to move into the meat of this meeting which is a Public Hearing. PUBLIC HEARING BEQUESTS TO SPEAK: 1. Jim Farrow: 8 Brookfield Ct. 2. Larry Hoover: 1116 Berkshire Ct. 3. Pete Reincke: 3 Colonial Ct. 4. Peggy Sweeney: 51 Meadowbrook Ln. 5. Ralph Reed: 19 Hanna Ct. 6. Michelle Reed: 3 Greenhill TH. 7. Nick Sanders: 7 Hayes Ct. 8. Sharon Sheridan: 1 Hillcrest Ct. 9. Susan Edstrom: 269 Oak Hill Ln. 10. Mike Buck: 2401 Lilyfield Dr. 11. Colleene Raymundo: 42 Cypress Ct. 12. Mike Lewis: 2550 Kensington Ln. As I said earlier, those of you who have registered to provide testimony or comments will be called up one at a time in the order in which you have registered. Secondly, as 1 mentioned earlier if you hear a comment, and you have the same comment you'd like to make, please don't, because it has been heard. We will hear each comment. Saying it more than once will not necessarily convince us of its significance more than hearing it that first time. Don't waste your opportunity to say something. Especially if you think of something new that you'd like to say. You are welcome to do it and will have three minutes. You will be tinned. Robbie, who do we have first? Commissioner Reed: 1'd like to make a quick comment. i understand your desire not to hear things over and over again. But, if you have a comment and somebody else has already made it, I would like to hear you make it again. If you are passionate about it, I'd like to hear your voice. Chairman Serially- I am saying that as your Chairman, I want to make sure that everybody here has a chance to speak. If somebody wants to speak for somebody else, sorry, you are here to speak for yourself. Make sure you say who you are and where you live. State your comments as clearly as you can. There are no bad comments. There are no wrong comments. Jim Parrow. Good evening. My name is Jim Parrow. I live at 8 Brookfield Court here in Trophy Club. First of all I would like to say we have received some very good presentations this evening for Frisco, for Grapevine, and for Atlanta. The fact of the matter is this is Trophy Club. We don't have the Planning and Zoning Commission Page 4 of 30 Meeting Dale, January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 infrastructure that those communities have. And so my concern is if we add another 100 residential units above the 250 that have been approved that is going to put an additional strain on the police, the Fre, and the educational resources available to our existing residents. There will also be a loss of sales tax revenue if we put residential where retail is supposed to have been. So, I am opposed to adding 100 additional units. I also see adding a municipal office as more of a carrot to dangle in front of the city council to get their approval to concede to the additional 100 residential units. As you may recall, the original P&Z unanimously rejected PD -30. The Council that was sitting at that time chose to ignore the P&Z as they did the more than 2,000 residents who signed a petition in opposition to PD -30 as written. We all want development on that corner. We all want increased revenues from that location. The more retail and the more commercial that goes in that location the more revenues we will generate and the better we as citizens will be. I also noticed there was a change from stucco to EIFS and I have to wonder why that was made. As a residential real estate broker, we have had numerous residential properties that have EIFS that have caused numerous problems. And I don't know that EIFS has been so developed, since I am not a builder, that we can avoid the problems that EIFS has presented in the residential market. The townhome issue, I would make sure that we know what those townhomes will look like, what they'll be priced at, and if they're going to be reasonable and appropriate for this community, and will they attract townhome purchasers. The last thing l would Iike to say, Mr. Beck during his presentation seemed to affirm, based on what his banks told him, that putting residential over retail is a kind of iffy proposition and yet he is proposing doing exactly that. So that seemed to be somewhat contradictory. And with that I will turn it over to someone else. Thank you. Larry Hoover: I am Larry Hoover, 1118 Berkshire Court. First off, I would like the Planning & Zoning Board to understand that the council I was on at the time did not ignore your decision, nor did the council ignore the petition. We used it as leverage successfully to reduce the request of the apartments from 1000 to 250 phased in two pieces of 125 units each. I'm not here to say one thing or another about the amendments. I would encourage you as an appointed board who doesn't have to sit up here as an elected board subject to the political machinations of this town, that you make the decision that is best for this town long term. Long term, this town needs a vibrant center to stay alive. A hotel will give you the opportunity to make Trophy Club a destination in conjunction with the golf course, where a hotel could possibly offer packages that would include golf with the room. Deloitte has requested in the past to Mr. Beck that the hotel be built. They currently outsource 400 rooms a week that they can't fill in their own facility. They would help fill up this place. There is also a big market of young single people working over there at Deloitte and Fidelity who are making over $90,000 a year that would fill up these apartments. I've heard some people complain about the retail over at 925 Main Street in Grapevine. The average income of a resident in 325 Main Street is $160,000 a year. Also we had the superintendent state last year that there would be no overloading of our school district. We are growing so fast and we have so much capacity that this school district does not even request that people from outside the district pay a transfer fee. If you live in Grapevine you can come to Northwest for free. So, please do what's right long term. Thank you. Chairman Senelly: If you happen to be a public official and you speak tonight please let us know that. Thank you. Planning and Zoning Commission Page 5 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16. 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 Pete Reincke: Pete Reincke. 3 Colonial Court. I'm having a little trouble; 1.) I'm concerned about the additional apartments with this retail -ready concept. Are there restrictions about how long it would be before you would open those up to apartments? What experience have you had with actually turning the apartments back into retail space? What's the probability of that? Once it is apartments how often does it turn into something else? Also we talked about finishes and the different requirements. It looked real nice. Is there anything inside the PD that cads out specific requirements of those apartments in a level of finish that we can rely on so it will attract the right kind of folks in whatever apartments we are subject to? I thought the townhomes were a really nice change from the multi -family that was there. Same questions that the other raised about how they are platted and is it appropriate for the town? That's all I've got. Thank you. Peggy Sweeney: Peggy Sweeney. 51 Meadowbrook Lane_ l am sure probably all or most of us remember when the first proposal came forth. The developer was asking for a whole lot more apartments than he got. And I see this latest proposal as trying to creep the number of apartments back up. Based on his comments there is not going to be enough foot traffic with the existing number of 250 for the apartments. The difference between 250 and 350 is 100. Nice round number. Now as previously mentioned, they are aiming for occupants of these apartments to be the young professionals over at Deloitte or single airline pilots as the developer mentioned previously. So that means that 100 extra apartments, 100 extra people. I don't see 100 extra people making or breaking our retail development that sits on 114 with gridlock every night at 5:00 p.m. That gridlock at 5:00 p -m. is either going to make or break the Financing on this, not those extra 100 people living in those apartments. And to finish I will repeat a comment that someone else did mention because it is very important to me. Thank you Mr. Reed. I see the Town Hall as a carrot. There's nothing in there about a commitment to actually do anything. He is not going to give up any revenue producing acreage to give the city the property to do a town hall. Thank you. Ralph Reed: I'm Ralph Reed. I live at 19 Hanna Court which you might know are similar to the townhomes, which are small lot houses. I heard something about this being a vibrant town center. This is what we need and l agree with that. I just wonder how a CVS on the corner is going to make this a vibrant town center. I look at the new plat. It shows a 12,008 sq. ft. building right on the corner with one drive-in which is CVS, Walgreens, some kind of drug store. I didn't see that in Atlantic Station or any of the other. They talked about Dillard's, they talked about movie theaters, they talked about a lot of things but not as a CVS as your main anchor. Just a thought for the Council. A hundred extra apartments, that doesn't affect the amount of retail. l agree with a prior comment. But we have in this new plan 100,000 sq. ft. less retail space. Now that's less sales tax revenue for this city and one thing this city does need is sales tax revenue. So, again, a comment, that that's something that I see as very negative to this. I understand Weitzman is a great group. They do a wonderful job of leasing. Maybe they can't lease that much. That may be the reality of it. But all we've heard here is about all these additional apartments and all the good things that are there and not about the things that were taken away from the original plan. Maybe 1 was wrong. But in looking at the plan it looked like the retail that was overlooking the lake, I just wonder, I didn't see any way for vehicles to get down there, and I just wonder realistically, once it's apartments it'll never be retail again. The townhomes facing the garage, the townhomes they have are on a lake, are on the river, but they face the garage. Now I can tell you I moved into our subdivision because Planning and Zoning Commission Page 6 or 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 our house faces a small little park. If 1 had to look at the back of a 5 or 6 story parking garage. I don't want to be the realtor who is trying to sell that space. I just wonder whether that would ever happen. And then city hall, the plat there, I would just remind the members here and 1 don't know how many.of you remember but about 2 years ago the Beck's they have a piece of property behind the Tom Thumb Shopping Center that's in the flood plain that floods. We used to have baseball fields there and they kept flooding and flooding and so they told the baseball association they couldn't use those fields and they came to the city council and offered a swap. We'll give you that land if you put up 3 electronic billboards in Trophy Club. Someone who is willing to put up 3 electronic billboards along 114, 1 wonder, whose interest they have at heart, their interest or the city of Trophy Club. Michelle Reed: Michelle Reed. 3 Greenhill Trail. Good evening. Just a couple of things that I wanted to make a point of is whenever I was going through the red line document on page 51 to 52 there is a paragraph that has been marked out and is a paragraph that I was very excited about the night whenever I walked out at Byron Nelson High School whenever this document was discussed years ago. And it was a ratio of how things were going to be built. A ratio of retail to residential and how that was going to happen, and maybe I misread the red line but it's just something that I would ask that you guys please read again. I think that benefited us and was good for us to have that ratio in there. So be mindful of that. And I also want to remind the residents, like the previous speaker said, you know, our anchor is not going to be a movie theater or some of these glitzy things. That's not what's going to happen unfortunately in our town. And so I don't want the residents to be deceived by pictures that are shown about other developments around the country or even around this state. The last thing that 1 want to mention is that I do not want to be the supplier of apartments for Southlake and Westlake. That's not why t brought my family here. ThaVs not why we moved here. That's not what our purpose was to be a part of a community of apartments. And so, I thank you for your time and thank you for your service. Nick Sanders: Hi, 1 am Nick Sanders at 7 Hayes Court. I do want to let you know that I do live in Hogan's Glenn but I am outside the 200 foot notice area. Also I want to let you know that I am an elected official on the MUD Board. I also would recognize that this is a zoning issue tonight and not a site plan. Lots of detail questions I might have if we were on a different subject. I like the idea of the townhomes. 1 think that's a value to this town. I actually would like to see more of those around the town or in this development. And I like how that softened the issue for the residents that live closest to that area or at least I think it does. Having heard the presentation about retail ready, I am not totally opposed to retail ready. However, as I expressed in my email to each of you, I don't see how me as an apartment dweller living on the ground floor would like very much that all of a sudden something converted to retail next to me, if that were to happen. And so I'm not sure conversion back and forth would happen too often. But it might happen in the early stages. if they were leasing more retail and the opportunity was there then they might do it, but you might also lease it as apartments very quickly because people might prefer that ground floor option. I am not in favor of increasing the maximum number of multi -family units. Whether they're called apartments or whatever they might be. I am not in favor of raising it above the 250. And it looked like that 310 to 350 which was in the presentation is a broad area and I'm not sure you'll have the broad thing in the final PD document. l am sure it would probably end with 350_ So you can probably make that as a decision. I like the idea of a municipal complex. Not thinking that the police department is a good place to Planning and Zoning Commission Page 7 of 30 Meeting ©ate: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 have patrol cars running back and forth through there. But we as a town have that as an issue. It needs to be addressed. There's limited space available. think it adds to the picture of having a retail or mixed-use development to have a municipal complex there if it's built appropriately. It will cost a lot of money - So whether its rent that you're paying and the developer builds the building or you somehow work out some arrangement where you own the land. That would remain to be seen. But it seems like to me that it complicates the issue for the citizens if you don't own the land. I'm not opposed to the balconies in apartments. I realize people are concerned about that because of some experience that we have currently. But it seems like to me if they overlook the area that was the water feature or whatever that might be in the town it would be an ok thing. Maybe ordinances could address the issues. Thank you very much. Sheridan: Hi_ I'm Sandra Sheridan. I live at 1 Hillcrest Court. I've been here for 1 B years. Mr. Serially, you started out the meeting today saying that you were interested in wanting to know what the folks here have to think. Well, we're the folks. There's a lot of politics in this town. There's a lot of political agendas. All I'm asking you guys to do is to don't listen to those, listen to the people. We pay the bills here. We elect the officials. It's our town. Mr. Beck, we started out with you a couple of years ago on a very cold rainy winter night talking about how this was going to be a lot like The Shops at Legacy, maybe an Angelika Theater, maybe a ZaZa Hotel. Now we're down to apartments. And really, retailers aren't interested in coming here which puts another opening for maybe more apartments. So where's our tax money going to come from? Who's going to want us? Who are we going to have to go into hock with around here to keep alive and to keep going? We are living here because we like it. It's pretty. It's safe. It's quiet. It's peaceful. We are near enough a big city to go there. But we can come home and hide and be safe and be peaceful. Let's think about that. It's a quality of life issue. Think about it. Susan Edstrom: Good evening Commissioners and residents. Susan Edstrom. 269 Oak Hill Drive. I didn't come here tonight with any prepared remarks because I wanted to hear the proposal and what other residents had to say. First, in regard to some of the opening comments, the aging gender of this commission for me is irrelevant. What I care about is that like the last commission this one keeps the best interests of the residents in mind. You would have had to live under a rock during the last process to know that apartments were unanimously viewed as a negative and we don't wish to be the provider of apartments for Southlake or Westlake either. They can build their own. 1'd like to know how long before retail ready is marketed as residential and what controls you can secure for us should that go forward. I wonder if this is just another flavor of the day request. We were told 2 years ago now is the time. We told the commission and the council that the developer would be back for more apartments it was just a matter of time. That time is certainly here. I work for the world's leading travel technology company and I can tell you the majority of young single professionals with whom I work live in the Dallas Greenville area and commute to Southlake. We do not have the night life nor the lifestyle they desire. I doubt the professionals at Deloitte or Fidelity would be any different. There's been a lot of talk about this within the Facebook groups for Trophy Club. And while there are differing areas of concern and desires and things that people like I can tell you unanimously nobody wants more apartments. That is the one thing that you can take out of the threads on Facebook that beyond a shadow of a doubt there are some aspects that people like, there is not a single group on Facebook that is for or in favor of more apartments. During the presentations Planning and Zoning Commission Page 8 of 30 Meeling Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 last year it was mentioned that the Beck Trust had a requirement for this center that was revenue generating. How is a town hall revenue generating? Or like others have said, it is a dangling carrot. Thank you. Chairman Senelly; Ms. Edstrom, l believe you are a public official, is that not correct? Susan Edstrom: No Sir. I'm on the Shelter Board, but I'm not an elected official. Chairman Senelly: Thank you. And who do we have next? Robbie: Mike Buck. Mike Stick: Good evening everybody. My name is Mike Buck. i live at 2401 Liiyfield Drive in Trophy Club here. In full disclosure, 1 am the chairman of the Citizens Financial Advisory Board. I also sit on the M.U.D. Citizens Board as well, too. So my comments are going to be somewhat rhetorical to you fine folks up here. Because 1 realize you are not going to address them or answer them. And that is, I want to paint a picture for the people that are behind here. You guys know what 2016 looks like? 2016 in this town all the building is going to stop. The people that are coming in to this town from a residential standpoint in The Highlands, the PID, and the people that are going to occupy the homes on the other side of Trophy Club by Harmony Park that building will at that point cease. What we are going to have as a town from a revenue standpoint is the ongoing evaluations of our property values that, hopefully throughout the years, will increase in value. That Is going to be our base to determine our revenue because it is property tax. Now putting a development at PD -30 we are going to get property tax from the developer but what we really need here is sales tax revenue. That is something our committee looks at. We look at it hard. We look at ways in which we can partner with the town and EDC413 to look at opportunity for sales tax revenue. That's what we really need. There's a map in the public service conference room. It's a map of the town of Trophy Club. It has the borders, and it has Lake Grapevine, and it has other areas. And one of the things it has is a red -out area that shows where we can actually put sales tax revenue generating properties. We have hotels there right now. We have a dentist office going in there. We have PD -30 as well too. What I'm in favor of is asking you guys to do the right thing here and look at what's best for the town of Trophy Club. Adding 100 additional apartments is probably not best for the town of Trophy Club. Looking for ways to maximize sales tax revenue in the future when this town is eventually going to level out and we're not going to realize revenues from new housing starts and we're going to have to rely on the revenues from increasing property values. That is what is going to be our basic taxation from a tax payer's standpoint. What it looks like to me, if we don't bring in the sales tax revenue, our taxes are going to go up. Also I would ask you to consider one final thing. Putting apartments in this town, additional apartments that are not currently here, could potentially lower the property value of certain people in this town as well too because people might not find that attractive. As has been stated before a couple of different times why should we build apartments for people in Southlake and Westlake when those towns clearly do not want them there. Thank you. Chairman Senelly: That was the last person registered. Is there anyone else here who would like to make any comments on the proposed amendment. You are welcome to do it. If you don't do it in the next few minutes we will prepare to close the Public Hearing. As you know the next step, besides the Planning and Zoning Commission Page 9 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January16, 2014 discussion that will go on with the Commissioners, will be the potential of action on this project. And we would urge you to be prepared to attend that as well if it doesn't happen tonight. Again, if anybody has anything else they would like to add, now is the time. Just raise your hand and we'll have you to come forth. Step forward please. Thank you. State who you are and where you live. Next speaker: Yes, my name is Colleene Raymundo. And l live at, in Hogan's Glenn on Cypress Court. My husband and I moved here about 4 years ago from California. We escaped California because what is happening here tonight is what happened in California. I just pray that you all make the right decision. And as so many of the people who touched my heart tonight speaking they spoke from their heart and they spoke for what they want from Trophy Club emotionally, educationally, physically, everything. Their life depends on what happens here. And 1 can only tell you that I just pray that what happened in California does not happen in Trophy Club. Thank you. Chairman Senelly. Thank you very much. I'm going to ask our Commissioners to think for a moment if they wish to continue with the Action Item this evening or if they wish to continue the meeting to another date. Would you consider that Commissioners? Yes, Commissioner Sheridan. Commissioner Sheridan: [was going to recommend a 5 or 10 minute break and let's keep on going. It's only 8:30. Chairman Senelly: Any other thoughts? If, yes, from the back, please. Next speaker: I have one comment I wanted to make. Chairman Senelly; Yes. Come forward. Thank you very much. Commissioner Sheridan: While he's coming up here, Mr. Chairman, you had previously stated that there'll be another time that people can talk which would not be Open Public Hearing but would be to the Agenda Item. Chairman Senelly: Yes, that's correct. Once we start the Action [tem anyone will have an opportunity, for another 3 minutes, to state other things if they have thought of them or wish to bring home the thought that they originally had. Go ahead please. Who are you and where do you live. Next speaker: Mike Lewis. 2550 Kensington Lane. My wife and I met in the downtown Fort Worth area. We lived in a retail and a multi -tenant establishment there at West 7th and University. heal nice up -coming area. After the first wave of tenants moved out and other tenants were moving in everything started declining really quickly so we moved here to get some peace and I have a lot of concern about that. I'm against increasing additional apartments in this area. I've seen how quickly they decline. So, those are my thoughts. Chairman Senelly closed the Public Hearing at 8:20 p.m. REGULAR SESSION 2. 2014-839-T Discussion and recommendation regarding a request for approval of amendments to Planned Development No. 30. Applicant: JSB Properties, LP represented by Sill Dahlstrom, Jackson Walker L.L.P. Planning and Zoning Commission Page 10 or 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 Chairman Senelly called the meeting back to order at 8:47 p.m. Chairman Senelly: Our planner would like to make a clarification before we proceed with the next portion of our agenda. C. Huggins: On a final site plan, staff does have the ability to approve a final site plan. But what t stated earlier was that with a final site plan there are models that are required. I'll repeat those again: water model study for this entire 26 -acre site, sewer study, drainage study, engineering feasibility study, traffic impact analysis, tree survey. All of these are required for approval of a final site plan, which, by the PD -30 regulations, staff can approve. However, if staff finds that any of this is in non-compliance and we notify the applicant of that, the applicant can appeal Town Staff decision to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation which would then go to the Council for a final decision. 1 just wanted to clarify that. Chairman Senelly: I'm going to ask our Commissioners to start with a discussion. At the end of our discussion and before we undertake any action 1 want it to be clear that you will all have an opportunity to have one more shot at questions or comments concerning these amendments. We will start with our Commissioners. May 1 ask, do any of our Commissioners have any questions or comments for the applicant? Commissioner Reed: l have a question for Carolyn. 1 might have missed this and if 1 did then 1 apologize. Don't we usually get a staff recommendation? What was the staff recommendation? Did that happen at the beginning and 1 missed it? C. Huggins: There is not a recommendation on this PD amendment. The staff is neutral on this. We would support a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and whatever action is taken by Council. Commissioner Reed: Mr Beck, You said that the banking financial lending institutions required a couple of things, retail ready as well as some additional apartments. Is what you're representing to us is if you didn't have those things financing would not be attainable for this project and it would not go forward, is that what you are saying? Scott Beck: More than likely, that's correct. Certainly, depending on the discussions as we go through this process,/ am happy to negotiate any of these pieces. Weare in the banking business ourselves_ Our family has owned a bank for the past 31 years in Dallas, so we have lots of banking connections. We've had discussions with over a dozen financial institutions as it relates to the financing of this project. More importantly, is what the retail community has told us as it relates to working with the Weitzman Group. We feel confident otherwise we wouldn't go forward with this with the kind of plan that we've recommended. One of the most important things to recognize is having put into the foundation the grease traps and make a few things actually retail ready means basically that we'll make zero profit if we actually convert it to a multi -family on the ground floor. But we feet confident enough that we can get the retail there that we're willing to move forward on that basis. The problem is that the banks add a 70% loan to value effective to construction cost they need to know that in the event that they foreclosed they could convert those and then exit the actual loan because they were burned in this fast economic crisis in terms of taking things back. We have a fairly high degree of confidence that we can fill it up with retail otherwise we wouldn't be doing the project. As far as getting the financing, we know that it'll get approved (his way because we've had the discussions and we've gone through that process with the banks. We do not know depending on which pieces of the puzzle you strike what they're going to say. Commissioner Reed then had a discussion with Mr. Beck regarding grease traps with Planning and Zoning Commission Page 11 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 Commissioner Sheridan asking, "To make it clear, are you talking about all retail or just the restaurant portion?" Scoff Beck: More than likely we would be isolating the end caps where the restaurants will be. We haven't figured out exactly where all those places are going to be. The center portions will be for businesses that don't require those types of things, maybe like a yogurt shop, a clothing store, or things like that. Commissioner Reed. What brokers at Weitzman have specifically been marketing the site? Scott Beck: Blake Shipp is the main one. I think his name is on the sign. Commissioner Reed: Who's working with Blake on that? Scott Beck: Herb Weitzman. We have a forty -year relationship with Herb. Blake works directly for Herb and so we are working directly with Blake and Herb. Commissioner Reed: So Blake is doing the marketing. Can you expand a little bit on what has been done to date to market this particular piece of property? Retailers, not the multi -family. Scott Beck: We've had several meetings, drive-throughs with retailers. It's happened over the past year, discussions while I was out at ICSC in Las Vegas, ICSC in Dallas. i've had probably 100 different meetings with retailers. Commissioner Reed: Can you mention 25 of them that you have talked to? If you have talked to 100, give me 25. Scott Beck: No, 1 don't think I can. Commissioner Reed: Why not? Scott Beck: Because some of them we're under NDA's with. I cant mention who's coming to the location in terms of that. Commissioner Reed: Mr. Beck, a retailer made you sign an NDA to go on a real estate four? Mr Beck.. I said some of them have signed NDA's. And I am working on a project right now in Dallas. Commissioner Reed: I'm talking about Trophy Club Mr. Beck. Mr. Beck: 1 understand that but the reason I got them to come... Commissioner Reed., You are telling me a retailer made you sign a nondisclosure agreement to tour our city? Mr. Beck: Yes. There are three of them that have_ Commissioner Reed. Okay, so tell me, so then we've got 97 other ones, give me 25 of them just real quick. Mr. Beck. I can't do that. Chairman Senelly: Commissioner, are you asking for some kind of validation of their marketing plan? Mr. Beck, can you say any more about your marketing that you Planning and Zoning Commission Page 12 of 30 Meeting Date: January 1$, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes .January 16, 2014 have gone forward with that would give us some comfort of faith in what you... Mr. Beck. No, other than the fact that we have been working with the Weitzman Group for the past year and had many meetings with tots of different retailers. That's what we've done. Chairman Senelly. What will it take for you to have something signed in your hand with a retailer for this project? What has to happen? Mr. Beck: We have to have an approved amendment that shows a retailer that we intend to take forward the project. Commissioner Reed. So the 100 retailers you've talked to have unanimously said that we need to see an approved amendment before we will enter a letter of intent with.... Mr. Beck: The problem that we have as it relates to retail, from a national perspective, is that the population density specifically within a 2 to 3 mile radius of Trophy Club is not large enough to physically have anything here. And they look at the comps as it relates to what's going on with the Tom Thumb, which are the lowest sales pretty much in the country as it relates to that Tom Thumb here at Trophy Club. We can't convince anyone to even go on a drive. So most of the people that 1 have been able to get to come out here to do the drives with Blake and Herb are going at the bequest because they want to be in the Dallas Midtown Project. So fortunately we are working on that project and we were able to get them to drive out here. They certainly aren't willing to come out here and commit to something because they usually look on a 14 to 18 month window in terms of making commitments on anything. We're not at a point yet in terms of getting something approved that i can make an honest representation that we are starting construction. And 1 have other projects, a significantly large project going on in Dallas that 1 can't lose credibility with these retailers by telling them that we are doing something out in Trophy Club then wasting their time and their attorney's time on drafting a fetter of intent when ultimately we are not doing anything out here. Chairman Senelly: Ok. Thank you for that. I am going to ask you a question now from the chair concerning your timing. What can you tell us about your timing and your phasing for this project should these amendments be approved? Mr. Beck Basically we would probably start some time towards the end of third quarter. What we've written in terms of an amendment is that we would start simultaneously on Block A and Block B. That would basically take us somewhere between 80,000 sq. ft. and 115,000 sq. ft. of retail and somewhere between 310 and 350 multi -family units that would get built at/ at the same time_ Chairman Senelly.• !'m going to have a detail question for you concerning the term E.1.F.S. [exterior insulation rinishing system]. Will you please clarify that for everyone, what you're proposing instead of conventional stucco? Tell us what EF1S is. Mr. Beck: EIFS is a building material that basically looks like stucco but it's made out of plastic. It is very malleable. The problems that someone was articulating as it relates to the residential building materials is improper installation. There was a lot of that that went on prior The techniques as it relates to installation especially on commercial buildings is significantly different in terms of having better trained people doing the installation as well as the components of where we would be installing it is in the parapets, towards the top, not the entire side of a building. I'm going to let Mike Twichell, our architect, talk specifically about the building material. Mike Twichell: Previously, regular plaster was approved_ EFTS is metal lathe with a Planning and Zoning Commission Page 13 of 30 Meeting Dale: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2094 concrete material scratched on. That material can crack very easily. When you put it on wall surfaces and cornices you have a tendency with expansion on bigger buildings and it will crack a lot. So you have a problem there. The other one is environmental also. With the new energy code, the EIFS has styrofoam that goes on the outside of the building- The new energy codes now require that you have continuous insulation on the outside of the building not the inside, which almost makes paramount the EFTS system. it makes a much better system especially commercially. We would be using it from the second floor on up. Commissioner Reed: I still have a few more questions for Mr. Beck, please_ Commissioner Reed: 1 need to understand this. This is the reason that I'm asking these questions. Without the retail we have an apartment complex. What we need is retail. So I am trying to ask you some very direct questions to rind out where we're at with that. And you are scooting around a little bit. So tet me drift down a little bit more. You and Herb Weitzman have actually been with a tenant in a car in Trophy Club, Texas? Yes or no. Mr. Beck: No. Commissioner Reed. You fust said a second ago that you did drive the market with Mr Herb Weitzman in a car with a tenant. Mr. Beck: i said Blake Shipp. Commissioner Reed: And Herb Weitzman_ 1 wrote it down. Mr. Beck: Herb was not in the car. Commissioner Reed. !'m just saying you misrepresented yourself. So, let's be right up front a second_ Mr. Beck. I think what I said is that... Commissioner Reed: 1 can read it back. I'm just saying_ I wrote it down. Maybe l was wrong. You said that we needed to get out in front of retail before the theater and before Entrada. You said that now is the time. My question is, do you think now's the time or are we too tate? Mr. Beck: We're going to find out. Commissioner Reed: Let me ask you again. Mr. Beck: l think my question to you would be, when is the time going to happen? Commissioner Reed: Fair question. i don't know- Mr. nowMr. Beck: The timing as it relates to the project has a /of to do with Planning and Zoning and City Council. The time could have been three years ago when we started the process but that process took 18 months. Now we're starling the next process. It kind of becomes a perpetual self-fulfilling prophecy. Commissioner Reed. Fair, but what was it, two years ago, when you first got this done. What significant progress have you made in one year to get one single tenant to sign an L.O.1. to go on this piece of land? Mr. Beck: We don't have any L.O.i.'s Commissioner Reed: You have none. So you're proposing an apartment complex right now, correct? Mr. Heck: No. Commissioner Reed. What are you proposing? Mr. Beck: In the document, we are proposing building all ofArea A and all of Area B simultaneously. That would be somewhere between 80,000 sq. ft. and 120,000 sq. ft. of retail. Commissioner Reed. Who are you going to put in that retail? Who is interested? Mr. Beck: Retailers. We have a number of interested parties but nobody is at the point of an L.O.1. at this point. Commissioner Reed: i've been going to ICSC since '99, '98. Mr. Beck. I've been going there since '93. 1 agree, a long time. Commissioner Reed: I'm not sure i know 100 retailers. i am intrigued to hear about one of these meetings you've had with one of these 100 retailers. I know you've signed these Non [Disclosure Agreements which I've been in the business for umpteen years and never heard of that in my life. So forgive me if I sound a little Planning and Zoning Commission Page 14 of 30 Meeting ©ate- January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 upset but I feel like you're misrepresenting some stuff to us and I would just love for you to tell me who's going into the retail, but you're telling me you cannot. Correct? Chairman Senelly_ Commissioner, may I ask that you clarify the intent of your question with respect to the amendments that we are considering? Commissioner Reed. You know. lin done. That's good. 19I ask a question later. Chairman Senelly.• Commissioner Sheridan. Commissioner Sheridan: Ok. My comments are towards the Commission. I have two thoughts. I have the major issues, outlined, at which time I have a comment that we vote now, today, within five minutes and vote it down. If the Commission is open to hearing these issues, then I want to go through it line by line, item by item. The reason I say that is I'm going to use townhomes. I favor townhomes. i wish you would build them. The issue is, the townhomes as mentioned in the PD is a word, that because of the wording in the PD, talking about Chapter 13 of our Zoning Ordinances it would make the town's definition of a townhome applicable to this, but that's it. 1=very other type of building usage in PD -30 has standards has restrictions and guidelines except for townhomes_ If I'm prepared and would like to recommend that we go through this line by line and talk about the favorable things and the unfavorable things and the things that may get by, like townhomes. I can only vote for townhomes if we do outline and create some of the same type of guidelines that we have for the residential and the retail. i want to thank all the citizens for sending me the emails. I'm sorry I haven't responded to you. I've gotten over 40 of them. I will consider them. i thank you and I ask for that one person who emailed me about the Chick -til -A, i wanted to make a comment, that we also lost the Taco Cabana. God bless America that we can meet here tonight and discuss this. This is a Destination Site. This is not a Drive -By, this is not a Golly -Gee -Wiz -l -Just -Saw -The -Dry -Cleaner -in -There And-I've-Got-To-Stop-In-lt. i understand the financial problems that are within the last few years over a multi -mix -use project. The bankers that I've talked to said that if you were building in downtown Dallas, if you were building in Greenville, if you were building in West 7th, no problem financially But when you get to the suburban area they have a problem. It is because of the high risk. So I understand when Mr. Beck talks about the financing. This is a suburb. We are not an urban situation. I've got to keep that in mind. Several of the comments of the citizens have been towards sales tax. Granted, sales tax would be the most desirable result of this development. The second thing in my mind is that commercial office, which has a higher ad valorem tax, would be the second desirable one. The multi -family residential would be the third desirable one_ The last would be a public facility. So this is how I'm developing. If we can't have retail, I would like to throw the conversation towards office versus multi -family. The other comment that i heard was the theatre. i've been in this from the beginning and the large multiplex cinematic theatre was never thought of or was not discussed in my presence. It's always been a boutique theatre like the Angelika, which would be highly desirable if we could get it. The idea that there is one coming in down the road, so what. it does take away some of the restaurants from us. Just this week i drove the Legacy. I think I lost count of how many restaurants there are up there in a thousand -foot perimeter. So, from hearing from the citizens, I understand their need for sales tax but there's other avenues of having a good commercial destination center that's viable for the city My mind is on suburban not urban and that this is a destination site. Sheridan: Carolyn, I'd like you to describe a vote. Who knows how this Commissions going to vote, yes, no, maybe, in between. But if there was a vote of the Commission, it does go to the Town Council and the Town Council can do anything they want. They can override, they can change, they don't have to follow our lead at all. But there is something called "denied with prejudice" If the P&Z Planning and Zoning Commission Page 15 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 denied this and didn't say a word and the Council denied it and didn't say anything else, it's automatically with prejudice. And with prejudice, to my mind, means they can't come back to us for a year. Does that also apply to the allowed PD changes and alterations with staff approval? They can still do that, so they can still apply for changes. So if we were to deny it, we're only denying this. We are not denying their right to process within their current PD. C. Huggins: That's correct. Commissioner Sheridan: 1 would not want to shut the developer off if I was against this. So 1 would request if there is any denial that it is without prejudice so that they can come back at any other time and talk to us. Thank you, sir. Commissioner Sadley. We don't have a definition specific to Trophy Club for public service facilities. So, in my mind, the public service facility is anything you hide behind a strip mall because you don't want people to see it. So I am wondering if we should have a definition of public service facility or if you can describe what you intend by the term public service facility. Mr. Beck: This was a discussion that was had with staff. And the idea was to give the Town Council flexibility related to public service facility. t would have to defer to the town staff for a definition. We have to ask Carolyn, but the intention of that was to be able to have facilities like a police station or a town hall. Other than that, I don't really know. Carolyn, maybe you can assist. C. Huggins: That was the intent. And I'm looking through the town's Code of Ordinances very quickly to see if there is a definition for public service facility and there doesn't appear to be. We could add a definition for public service facility to the PD as part of this PD amendment. Chairman Sadley: I did a web search and the general definition of that according to the infallible internet is that it could be an electrical transformer, it could be a garbage dumpster, anything that serves a public need is a public service facility. i think we do need to clarify that. Mr. Beck: My recommendation would be you could simply eliminate it. It's not anything that we were requesting. It was something that staff` wanted to be able to give Council the ability to do something with. C. Huggins: Again, the intention of the town hall building and the public services facilities was to give the Council options. We do need a police facility. We do need some new facilities for the town hall and/or police. It was a way to give us an option in the future on that site_ There is nothing concrete whatsoever with that building in PD -80. Chairman Senelly. Thank you. It is my understanding that a town hall and/orpolice facility an this property is a cost item for Trophy Club. So while it may be characterized as a carrot, it's got a stick in it as well. It's something that we'd have to pay for. Example given was Southlake's Town Square. The city hall, the library, and the other facilities that are in that building were not free. They are paid for by the City of Southlake. Other questions? Commissioner Vowell? Commissioner Vowell: I have some questions about the apartments. What would the size and square footage be for the minimum apartment there? Mike Paciflio: Generally our typical product would be about 550 sq. ft. to 600 sq. ft. at the very minimum. On average you are looking about 850 sq. ft. to 900 sq. ft. And at the high end you're looking at about 1, 200 sq. ft. Planning and Zoning Commission Page 16 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 Commissioner Vowelt: So at $1.57 a foot, 550 sq. ft., we'd be looking at $750 - $800 dollars a month. Mike Pacillio: $800, if we had a unit that was that small. But at 600 sq. ft., $1.50 gets you to $900. Commissioner Vowell: 1 like the townhomes in this new proposal. 1 think we have a lot of senior adults who are moving to Trophy Club. 1 did„ because my daughter and family Eve here. There's a lot of other senior adults that 1 know of who have moved here who would like the townhome idea. I would be interested to know if some of these apartments could be big enough that it would sutfrce for a senior adult couple to live in and be able to do some entertaining in, that sort of thing. So, as you develop that plan 1 think that would be a good focus to have to take into consideration senior adults. Mike Pacillio: It is my understanding that we've got to bring the final plan back for approval. t would only say that as an example you are welcome logo over to Grapevine and look at the property there. Our residents range in age from early 20's to 75 - 80 years old. it is a variety of people. It's not geared toward anyone group. 1 know one of the questions or comments earlier was about school and impact on schools. At Grapevine right now we are about 70% leased at 274 units. We have three children that are in school in those approximately 180-190 units that are leased. We will be paying somewhere about $150,000 in property tax to the school district for three kids. If you compare that to a single-family house that will probably pay $1000 for as many as five kids going to a school. The school districts end up liking this urban -style apartment because we don't have any 3- and 4 -bedroom apartments and aren't geared toward that type of occupancy. As you all know, we don't restrict age or children to live in any apartment. Families generally gravitate to where the kids can play outside and not play inside a shopping center. Commissioner Vowell: One question that was asked by several people who spoke tonight_ How long would you go before you would determine you can't rent retail units that would be apartment ready and convert it into apartments? What's the time frame on something like that? How long do they sit there before they become apartments? Mike Pacillio: No one has proven that yet because this is a fairly new process. As the planners know, for probably the last 10 - 15 years it's been very desirable to try to make retail work on the first floor with residential above it. There's examples all over the country where that retail's empty. And it's been very challenging to lease it all. Some has been converted back to apartments and some of it sits today depending upon how the zoning was written. When we went to Frisco with this issue, they recognized that right now there is a significant amount of retail that is sitting empty and it actually looks worse to have a completed building with empty space all over the downstairs units. They encouraged us and we did build the apartments into that space when we were framing the upper portion of the building. From an economic or liming standpoint, our preference would be to do it sooner rather than later. Checking the barometer of feasibility from a retailer's standpoint you can put some other time limit on that. it's going to be more expensive the longer you wait to convert it one way or the other if you're building it for retail. Commissioner Sheridan: Mike, if you've got a second So, I'm clear on what you said, this retail ready is a relatively new process? Mike Paciltio: Yes. Commissioner Sheridan: It's being built as an apartment that could go retail, but Planning and Zoning Commission Page 17 of 30 Meeting pate: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 you're going to market it as retail to begin with but it can go both ways and you are going to have a specific period of trying to market it for retail. There's no guidelines from other places that says that the town ordinance could say you have to take six months, you have to take a year, you can have one month. The question was "how long are you going to sit on retail before you make your decision on the option?" Can the town come in and say we will go with your retail ready but we want to see a particular period of time. Mike Pacilifo: Yes, and I think that's really what Scott is talking about, that there is some negotiation available for that particular issue. What we don't want to end up with is vacant space that never gets leased on the ground floor. Commissioner Sheridan: Right, i understand that. One of my problems with understanding everything is there's always been a lot of comparisons to other towns and when we talked about downtown Dallas or we talked about the West 7th area of Fort Worth. It is far from here. When I think of Frisco and somebody mentions retail, they've got a million square foot of retail. So if 10, 15, 20 thousand square feet of it sits empty in a building its minute compared to the problem_ Here, if something like that happens it's going to be a gigantic issue because we don't have the broad spectrum of retail Thank you. I appreciate your answer on that one. Chairman Senelly: May l ask a question? It's a question again about the apartments which has come up as a consistently opposed item from the community, the additional apartments. i think one of the underlying questions that is involved in that without getting into the nuances of it, concerns what we call ownership, Owner occupants versus renter occupants, for whatever that's worth. We understand that townhomes are likely to be sold to individuals. There's no guarantee. It's our understanding that all of the apartments are to be rented. Is there any consideration for the ownership of those units by individuals? Since there is an on-going trend, to my understanding, throughout our country that not only apartments but also hotel units are being sold to individuals. Is there any prospect for the sale of any of these apartments to individuals? Mike Pacillio: I think because of the general concept that all developers are greedy, if it made economic sense to convert them to condominiums then somebody would. I will say with that I think the chances of converting to condominiums in the future will be very minimal. The reason for that is the insurance companies have virtually stopped insuring condominiums that have been converted from apartments because of law suits that have erupted all over the country has festered into huge loses for that industry. They will not insure that process of undertaking an apartment into a condominium. Chairman Senelly: You have no prospect of building condo -ready units. Is that what I'm hearing? Mike Pacillio: I've got a project in Los Colinas in Irving that 1 started six years ago that's still not completed because the sales have been stow. Scott Beck: I want to draw your attention to this slide. This is BlockA right here and this is Block a The language in the new document pursuant to what we're looking at today, which is the amendment, we've suggested that we will build this entire section at the same time. It has to be built at the same time. We can't build what in theory we're calling a mufti -family building. I wanted to clarify what is really at hand here in terms of retail in actual numerics_ i think that's important. Block A, we're not talking that being retail ready at all. That has to be 100% retail And that number is 38,300 sq. ft. of retail. Block B, we're saying can be somewhere between 35, 000 sq. ft. of retail and 78,000, or more specifically, 35,385 and 78,162. So when you take the minimum as it relates to what we would be constructing at the same time, starting in Planning and Zoning Commission Page 16 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 2094 with completion sometime in 2016, the minimum amount of retail that would be on the ground at the same time as there are no more permits for home construction in the Town of Trophy Club would be 73,685 sq, ff. of retail. That would be the minimum amount that can't ever be converted to multi -family. The maximum amount could be 116,462. The real question we're struggling with and certainly the banks are struggling with is what happens if the alternative wasn't approved in terms of making the conversion is that the difference between those two numbers is 42, 000 sq. ft. i think Commissioner Sheridan pointed out appropriately that's a real big problem if you have 42,000 sq. ft of completed buildings that are vacant retail space. Because if you have 42,000 sq. it. of vacant retail space on the ground floor, that's 73,685 sq. ft. which you did fill will no longer be full. They'll start moving out because people don't like to go to mixed-use retail areas where half of the space is vacant. But when all of its full and you're walking around this area that is a mixed use community and you go with some retail then you've got some apartments then you've got some retail and it's much more of a neighborhood -type of feel. Again, I think to some degree were losing sight of the fact that we're still talking about over 70,000 sq. ft. of retail at a minimum from this first project. 1 wanted to point that out in terms of real numerics. Commissioner Sadley: There's a whole series of red lines related to page 46 about changing graphics and percentage of fagade, etc. Could somebody explain that? C. Huggins: That's changing wording in the PD to help make that ground floor retail ready more compatible with residential. Your first floor is going to have a tot of store front Windows. it's minimizing the windows on that first floor. In order for it to be either/or, to be flexible, there is not much window space for the retail on the first floor. Whereas it was a minimum before, now it's a maximum for the windows on the ground floor retail ready. Commissioner Sadley: So it's a 40% maximum now? Would the minimum be zero? Chairman Senelly: A minimum would be covered by code. Commissioner Reed: This to the Commissioners, this is the way 1 see this going_ l agree with Dennis 100%. There are some things in this that I like and there are some things in this I do not like. i've asked a series of questions now that get me to this. If they don't get the apartments, this project is not moving forward_ It sounds like it's just going to sit here for awhile. So they've got to have the apartments to move forward. l agree with Dennis. i want to go through this fine byline and negotiate with them. Were going to have to believe that that's going to be here. So whydon1 we take a vote right now. We're going to make a motion that we deny this. Chairman Senelly: Procedurally. Commissioner Reed: You're telling me procedurally, but I'm just saying that before we spend all night negotiating this and then we get to the end where I'd like to at least have a chance to, otherwise I do want to go line by line. Chairman Senelly: Before we take a vote l want to give people a chance to ask any other questions or make any other comments from the public. Commissioner Reed: I will wait to make a motion then. Commissioner Sheridan: i don't know whether to bring up the site plan which I had issues with first or to bring_ up townhomes which I favor which I have issues with or to deal with the apartments. If I'm hearing correctly everything has to hinge on block A and B. A is retail according to the new versus the old. Bis mixed-use. If it would help facilitate my agreeing to the sequence of construction then I would say fine. But i want you to take the apartments from someplace else and build them here. If, on Planning and Zoning Commission Page 1g of 30 Meeting Dale: January 16, 2014 Planning & zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 87, we were going to say they could put apartments on the first floor then 1 don't want to go to 350, I'll stay at 200-250. i'll go with the first floor retail ready but the numbers have to come out from someplace else. Therefore if I was going to say something like that then I want to discuss the preliminary site plan first. This schematic of a site plan is so much better than to the approved one. I like it. I like the coloring. I like to identify the buildings. But there are significant changes that are different than the originally negotiated plan. One of them goes back to even before the town Council approved it. One of the key issues of the P&Z at the time was cut-throughs, meaning traffic avoiding Trophy Club Drive and cutting through here to get from Indian Creek to 114 or back. The approved site plan doesn't allow that. This new site pian does it in two different places. It does it in the A & B road that backs up to the townhomes. It does it with the main entry that goes through the two traffic circles. Philosophically, what's helped create the first design is totally different here. The street entrance at the townhomes looks like an easy cut -through unless we put speed bumps in the middle of the road. t object to that. The other reason l would object to that entrance way is there is going to be a traffic problem exiting 114 and trying to get over to the right to get to that entrance. We have already experienced problems of merging traffic from one Lane to the other on the new freeway opening on Trophy Club Drive on the new 114. There's already a big merging problem. I see that entrance as a negative. i see that road there to go through. These are going to be traffic problems. The other is on building A the first corner it shows a drive through. Now I realize I've heard tonight that there could be a specific tenant for that building. We can't make decisions on that. until somebody signs the dolled fine it could change. As it stands now that could be a McDonald's. i've been looking through this PD -30 as it currently exists and I can't find any restrictions on restaurants. Drive throughs are approved with certain restrictions. I don't like that up at the front of the neighborhood right there on 114 at the corner. if we went with this site plan I need to see some changes or restrictions. The hotel is significantly different than what was originally thought out. The hotel had parking integral to it and next to it and under it. Now we have a stand-alone underground parking garage and surface parking that's new to the concept. The other parking has storage area in it. Since I haven't seen it I have questions on what the storage area is. The original lagoon was thought of as a "let's walk around it", On the approved preliminary site plan on the North side we had a very wide pedestrian strand. On the Southwest side we had a very wide bicycle path. By the way, I'm talking about the site plan that's approved February 7, 2012, There was a minor road on the East side. The idea was that it was 100% surrounding pedestrians. There was also a cascading falls_ I don't see that on the new site plan. I see a building butting up to the water. 1 see something that could be a cascading fountain or fountain -type thing there. There is now a road in the place of the pedestrian strand. That bothers me. The garage went from a 5 -story garage to a 4 -story garage_ That's a positive. Where are the hotel service entrances? Are they visible from 114? Building B6 and B7 originally had a covered vehicle passage. That is gone. is Building A double sided upfront? Where is the service entrance? A garage door is needed if they are talking about big - use retail. l do not see trash service facilities to them. That has visibility to Trophy Club Drive and 114. We've already talked about the public service facility. The public service facility does take taxable land from us. Even if it was just ad valorem tax, that's still a higher tax use. 1 do think we have places in town for a town hall. There is land behind Tom Thumb that's currently flood plain that could be reclaimed. Recently the country club tennis courts were for sale or they were discussing it. Park land could be used. Trophy Wood Drive has vacant land and the builder has pulled out of town. Coming to the site plan and the town center, my questions are, whether or not the town, either staff and/or Council, could commit to purchase this without a citizen vote. I'm assuming that in order to build it they'd need to have a bond issue which would require a citizen vote. I guess it's immaterial to us a far as zoning goes who builds it. Those are just a few of my question on the site plan. 1 have significant issues with it versus what's approved. The layout is a big issue for nae because of the cut -through and some of the basic philosophies of what we started with. Thank Planning and Zoning Commission Page 20 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 you sir. Chairman Senelly. Thank you. Just a point of clarification for all of us, the plan that was approved for this PD -30 was not a site plan. C. Huggins: With the current PD -30 there is a preliminary site plan that was approved and is part of the document. This is the preliminary site plan that would replace that if the amendments are approved. A final site plan would then be required. A lot of what you just discussed would be required with the final site plan. The details of where the dumpsters are, where the service entrances are, like the drive-through for Building A would be required. Now is that going to work? What type of building are we talking about? A McDonald's in this PD is considered a quick -service restaurant. And that is allowed, but with an SUP. A quick -service restaurant by definition in the existing PD is a fast food type establishment and would have to be approved by SUP. Some of the things you brought up would have to be addressed with a final site plan. All of those studies 1 mentioned before would be required to show that it will work. Commissioner Sheridan: You did make a comment earlier that the final site plan does not come through P & Z unless there are significant changes. C. Huggins: If the town staff had denied something then the applicant can appeal it to the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council. Commissioner Sheridan: The town staff has a significant leeway in approving it. t can't count on this coming back. That's going to make me stiffer in making sure it gets done the way I'd like to see it and of course the way the Commission would vote on it, each Commissioner having their own vote. Scott Beck: Mr. Chairman, 1 thought Commissioner Sheridan had a lot of excellent points and 1 think we can clarify some of them. This is a preliminary site plan. Curb cuts as they would be oriented towards 114 would require TxDOTapprovel. These are preliminary entrances because we do not have approval to put any of these onto 114 right now. To the extent that they gave us both of these curb cuts which is s probably a stretch. We would certainly like to have those. In the event that this one area that you're talking about near the townhomes, which would obviously provide a nice way for people to get into their single family residential townhomes, created a traffic problem within the site or a cut through. You would certainly see road humps in that area_ One of the main things that l think though that needs to be pointed out is that the traffic study analysis hasn't been done. So as it relates to cut throughs as it relates to all of those things. Those are going to be impacted specifically by a traffic study analysis. Which is something of course that we will do pursuant to the ordinance as well as just as developers we would do it anyways. Hopefully that assuages some of the concerns as it relates to that. l think Carolyn answered your question as it related to the Building A in terms of a drive through in terms of a quick service restaurant and although staff, as 1 think she pointed out, does have some leeway as it relates to approving some things, specifically quick service restaurants are required to come back through Planning and Zoning and City Council so in the event that it was a McDonald's instead of Five Guys Burgers you would see it. You noticed and pointed out at the lagoon there is a road on one side of the properly. The intention of putting that road there is in the event that you did not put a road there you will 100% have no retail there. And that is what we determined in talking to all of the different retailers that we've had conversations with over the past year and in consultation with Weitzman because Number 1, those retailers are not visible from 114. So you are not going to get any passer-bys. It would have to be destination based. Number Z they want to be able to do head -in parking to go into those retail establishments, and/or valet in front. So that was the intention in putting the road on the side that would include retail_ As it relates to hike and bike, the intention is that Planning and Zoning Commission Page 21 of 30 Meeting Dale: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 that would still be there. Clearly this is a preliminary site plan. Its not blown up for you to be able to see exactly all the different things within it. Of course we would have hike and bike. In fact, on one end of it you've seen in that picture, we're putting a children's play area. So certainly wed want kids from the neighborhood and all of Trophy Club to be able to bike into this area and hang out- That's pretty much the idea of the town center. The concept of walking around the lagoon, although it looks to be extremely close, if you will, Building C which is the office building closest to the lagoon, the intention is to have enough space between that area where you can walk around the entire lagoon as well as you can see that even on the side where there is a street. The intention is to be able to again walk around the entire lagoon. Between the hotel and the lagoon you can see kind of little circles. Those circles are intended to be kind of an amphitheatre type area so people can get married outside of the hotel and be in front of the lagoon as well as to have different types of outdoor events and/or festivals and other thing in that space. That's the intention of what the drawing is showing. The hotel where the service area is visible from 994, haven't been drawn. That's a preliminary site plan. Certainly we will not make those things visible to any side when the hotel is ultimately designed_ This is a foot print and intended to be such. It's not drawn with those details in mind at this point. B6 and B7, your question was how do you get to the covered parking?" The intention is that white area between B6 and B7, between BI and B7, between B3 and B2, between 83 and B4, and between B5 and 84 are all entrance areas to get into the parking garage. So those are aft vestibules. They were not eliminated. In fact, f think we have more of them now than we did before. The footprint itself, you can see is in terms of the parking garage is made to be almost a complete rectangle which is the most efficient way to build it. That's how it was constructed. Is Building A a double -loaded or double -sided retail. That is truly the intention. The concept of that street that's between Building A and Building B is certainly to make that walkable pedestrian and obviously vehicular. Building A would open to both sides. That's the intention of what Building A would be. Wed get the visibility from 194 and then also get the benefit of having the other side of the street of Building B having retail on it which would encourage people to walk up and down which would give us a greater degree of probability of being able to lease B7 facing Block A as retail. The public service thing which was the last thing that you mentioned, it's a place holder. That's the bottom line. Commissioner Sheridan: My comments sir were not mentioned. You used other people's comments, but t appreciate that. Scott Beck. Absolutely. It is certainly a place holder. Clearly there has been no negotiation at this point in terms of how or what might happen. We'd love to see there if we can work out a deal or transaction and make that happen. if it's not in the document then there's no chance of it happening but at least this gives the opportunity from a placeholder perspective. There would be more taxable Ad Valorem tax if it was an office building. But that's kind of up to the citizens to decide whether they want something like that there. Commissioner Reed: I have a quick question for the Fire Chief. Do we have the equipment to service a 6 -story office building and hotel? Is the Fire Department prepared for this? Fire Chief Danny Thomas: The buildings are built to International Fire Code standards with the alarm systems and sprinkler systems. Yes we have two pumpers that pump 1,500 g.p.m. [gallons per minute] with one being an aerial device that reaches four stories. A building above 4 stories is a high-rise. That's why we have a 75 -foot ladder. That's what we would do today. Commissioner Reed: So you have up to four stories today? So if we did do six stories would we have to make a change in your equipment? Planning and Zoning Commission Page 22 of 30 Meeting pate: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 Fire Chief Danny Thomas: No, we would not have to make a change Commissioner Sheridan: Townhomes. Fire Chief Danny Thomas, do you want to comment on the fire codes for this building? Fire Chief Danny Thomas: The fire codes are defined in our international Fire Codes as far as the sprinkler systems, alarm systems, what they have to put and where they have to put fire breaks between the units. Commissioner Sheridan: This is preliminary site plan, but this is showing a contiguous 675 ft. building. The building would have to be broken with a significant separation. Fire Chief Danny Thomas: It would need to be broken somewhere. Mike Twichell: ThereW be tire walls between each unit. Commissioner Sheridan: 1 understand. t know the code. t build townhomes. The two hour, the four hour codes, on the plan that's a 675 ft. long contiguous building. Scott Beck: It won't be a 675 fr. long contiguous building. Its merely a depiction, a place holder for where the townhomes will be. There's up to 30 townhomes. So depending specifically once those townhomes are designed and platted, maybe itW be 26, maybe It'll be 26_ Commissioner Sheridan: It will be individual plats? Scott Beck. Correct. Commissioner Sheridan: Our definition includes the word "selling unit" so we're not talking about for apartments or rental townhomes. Do you understand what t mean by we need to come up with some description of the development standards for the townhomes? Even if it was 100% lot coverage, setbacks still need to be defined. t think it needs to be part of this document. Scott Beck: Arent those defined though in the existing city code? C. Huggins: We do not have design standards for townhomes. Chairman Senelly: What about setbacks and all that? C. Huggins: No sir, we have a definition for townhomes but we do not have anything beyond that in our codes. Scott Beck: It's a fairpoint. Commissioner Sheridan., For example, in other places for your other buildings, Mr. Twichell, you talk about differential facades. 1 would like to see that as part of this, setbacks, minimum lot sizes, percent of masonry. Fifty foot high for three stories seemed kind of high to me. Scott Beck: It is significantly shorter than the multi -family that was going to be there. Commissioner Sheridan: i understand and I'm positive towards the lownhomes. That's why I want to see these come to fruition. The other thing is I would typically want to see minimum floor area for 1st, 2nd, 3rd floor, the elevation variables for breaking up the fagade. Fire Chief Thomas has already clarified that they will need to Planning and Zoning Commission Page 23 of 30 Meeting Date: January i6, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 be sprinkled because the code is not per house or per unit it's per under roof. So it would be natural to have more than 6, 000 sq_ it. under roof in one of these so I'm assuming they're going to be. Older folks were mentioned by some citizens and by some commissioners. I'm sorry stairways get to me. in several places elevators are optional. I think in Southlake they're optional. i don't know if were going to trend towards older folks, whether or not we want to put elevators into code. There's something that's been used in PD -27, which is The Highlands, and is called Gifts to the Street. That's basically designer garage doors, facades, and breaking up the different pitches of the roof and gables. Are you thinking of two car garages throughout or single car? Is it the bottom floor that is going to be all garage and then the houses above it? Where are you coming up with the third floor -9 Chairman Senefly: May 1 ask a question Commissioner. You want to see some details on all those things regarding townhomes before they're permitted. Commissioner Sheridan: If you take a vote right now towards townhomes, I can't go with it. Chairman Senelly. Even if we stipulate that those details need to be provided. Commissioner Sheridan: Well, no, I want to see what they are. I don't want to vote on something and say ok, Ill approve it subject to that coming up in the future. Let's pin it down. Chairman Senelly: An approval subject to something conditional upon something can be very specific. And you have some idea of what you'd like? Commissioner Sheridan: i have some ideas but I'm also open because we have an architect in front of us who's done some very nice work and has an idea of what he wants build. Chairman Senelly. As an architect with over 50 years of experience, I can tell you that as a commissioner i don't want to design these buildings. 1 W just put it that way to you. 1 think it's important that we do, as you say, allow our applicant to provide the designs. Commissioner Sheridan: Oh yeah, he's already done it for every other type of use and then he just follows those same type of guidelines, The other thing is when it comes down to voting, with the restrictions l just mentioned, I'm in favor of townhomes. But 1 may not be in favor of another part of this change. If you're going to have seven votes, or you're going to have one vote, it may not be tonight. We're going on 10 o'clock. That's why I was thinking we're going to continue this for another conversation. Scott Beck: Which is fine, since we are talking about this subject right now, I'd like to bring up Mike Twichell. Because what Mr. Chairman just articulated in terms of designing the townhomes, that's subject to the developer and ourselves, assuming we end up being the ones that actually develop the townhomes, to go through a process to figure out what the markel is going to demand at the point in time that those get done. iW bring up Mike to tell you that in the past the different developments that he has done as it relates to townhomes. The Degree of latitude as if relates to how those townhomes are constructed in terms of whether there's one garage, or two garages, or how many floors you build, and all of the different things are typically usually very flexible from a town home perspective. Chairman Senelly: With a/I due respect to your architect's experience and what you're saying, we accept that there are those latitudes and that there are those variables that will need to be decided at the proper time. Thank you. Other Planning and Zoning Commission Page 24 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 questions or comments? Commissioner Card. 1 have a question. t wasn't involved at the beginning and i didn't see anything related to open space requirements. Were there open space requirements and were they met under this plan, since this preliminary could change_ C. Huggins: There were no open space requirements. There are no parkland requirements_ What you see are the open spaces like the lagoon_ They are provided on this preliminary site plan. We do have a comment back to the applicant right now stating that we would like to see trail connectivity through here_ We've tried to incorporate some open spaces and common areas in this, but it is pretty much what you see there on that preliminary site plan. Commissioner Card: If all the retail ready units went retail, would the minimum number of apartment units be 310. Would that be correct? Scott Beck: That is correct. The maximum of 310, It could be less. Commissioner Card. What would be the reason why that would be less? ScottBeck: The building is not designed. There's a high probability it will be less than 310, but it could be up to 310. Commissioner Card. You think it's a high probability that it could be less. Scott Beck: Yes. Commissioner Card: Apartments seem to be the major issue tonight. We seem to be spending a lot of time on other things. If the apartments are struck down everything else seems academic and we're possibly wasting time. If they're approved, then 1 agree with a lot of our Commissioners saying there is so much in here I'd like to get detailed about what units are where, what townhomes, what restrictions might be put on them, or allowances. A bypass might be out of the question. if the developer says they cant move forward without the extra apartments, and again I dont know how any of us are going to vote, but if we vote that we are not going to give any more apartments, 1 don't know, unless they're willing to still move forward, 1 don't know how much of this is relevant I did have a question on Building A in respect to finance_ in your estimation, how much of that needs to be preleased before you can get a construction loan? Can you start without any preleasing on A & S. Do you need 50% of that space preleased? What are rinanciers requiring? Scott Beck: Usually its 20 to 30%. Commissioner Card. 20 to 30% preleased? Scott Beck: Yes. Commissioner Card: As you said before, you are confident that could... Scott Beck. I'm confident we could get 20% to 30% right now based on the groups we are talking to. Commissioner Vowelt: if we do not approve the 100 additional apartments, which seems to be the biggest problem with the people sitting here; they want retail; they are ok with the townhomes; could you do the same plan that you have right now with 250 and make a percentage of those retail ready that would bring you down to 210 if all retail was sold? Planning and Zoning Commission Page 25 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 Scott Beck: It doesn't economically work anymore in terms of the construction costs. Commissioner Reed: That's what i asked him earlier. It's kind of an all or nothing thing. Chairman Senelly. • Ok Commissioner Reed: That's why t think we should hear the citizens and then decide. Chairman Senelly. Thank you very much. Before we undertake any decision we want to hear any further comments or questions from you all. If anybody has anything like that, step up, introduce yourselves again, and we'll give you another 3 minutes. PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST TO SPEAK [second]: 1. Sharon Sheridan: 1 Hillcrest Ct. 2. Jim Parrow., 8 Brookfield Ct. 3. Ann Came: 4 Brook Hollow Ln. 4. Peggy Sweeney: 51 Meadowbrook Ln. 5. Scott Folley. 2407 Lilyfreld Dr. 6. Julie Folley. 2407 Lilyfield Dr. Sharon Sheridan: A 500, 600, 800, 900 sq. ft_ apartment is small. How long are they going to stay in there? Enough to pay one month's rent and then leave? We may get S1, 700 a month for 1, 250 sq. ft. We may get the security deposit. We may get last month's rent. They may not pay their electric. They may not come back but maybe they will. So you've got to hope for that. Are we going to go short term leases or long term leases? What's the square footage going to be on townhomes ? Are we going to have little ones? Are we going to have big ones? if they are three-story, are the garages underneath? Are they going to face towards the creek? Are they going to look at the parking building? What kind of drive up, drive out facility are you going to have? We have a problem in that area with water, Everything flows into Hagan's Glenn and floods. So we're going to takeout more trees and put in more cement and we're going to have more water going into Hogan's Glenn. We have something there that we need to worry about. Building A & B seem to be the preliminary area that we're focused on and concerned with building right now tells me maybe you have somebody pretty interested in doing something over there. If you do, and you feel like you can get something going by third quarter, you must know what kind of retails are going to go in there. Are we getting a pool room, another 7-Eteven, an ice cream store, or a soup shop? What are we going to get? Do you have any idea what kind of people want to come here? We do not need any more dry cleaners. We do not need another Post and Pack Shop. Someone has to know who wants to come here and whether they are going to stay. If you have to be 20 to 30% preleased, who are you preleasing to? Chairman Senelly: Thank you very much. We have an additional person that would like to make some comments or questions. Come on up. Next speaker, Jim Parrow. 8 Brookfield Court. When they were holding the Vision of Trophy Club Citizens Meeting, the Town Council called in the developer of Southlake Town Center. During that presentation the question was asked about multi -use developments and why there were no apartments in Southlake Town Center. The comment from that developer was "if you build apartments over retail in this area it will fail. " We were told that the target market for the occupants of the apartments here in this development would be young mobile people earning about x'100,000 a year. That was the target. The question was asked, for that target what is the minimum square footage they would expect to live in, to invite their friends over Planning and Zoning Commission Page 26 of 30 Meeting Date' January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 for entertaining, and so on. The expert's answer was a minimum 1,200 square feet. i think it should be understood if the people who built successfully Southlake Town Center chose not to do apartments over retail and for those reasons stated, and if it was going to be built, there would be at least 1, 200 sq. ft. which is way above what they are talking about building. There's a good probability that we are going to have a blighted main entrance to our community with lease and vacancy signs all over the place. So pleate keep that in mind. Chairman Senelly.- Thank you very much. Yes, come on up. Next speaker.- l am Ann Carne. i live at 4 Brook Hollow Lane. I am directly affected by whatever happens here. That is not what I want to talk about. After all this discussion we have heard several reasons why we need 900 more apartments. As far as 1 can tell, the biggest reason is that we don't have enough people to support this retail development. Presumably the solution they are presenting is to bring more people in here to make it work. 1 am not dear on how 100 apartments is going to pull this out of the ditch. If we had 3 people in each apartment, are 300 people enough to make that profitable? i do not think so. No one has addressed the subject of schools to my satisfaction. t have kids in school here. Someone made the comment that anyone that wants to come to Northwest I.S.D. can come to Northwest I.S.D. We will let anyone in for free. That maybe true for Northwest LS.D. That is not true for Trophy Club schools_ Trophy Club schools are full and bursting at the seams. My child goes to Lakeview Elementary. We just underwent a major renovation. It was doubled in size. It is already full again_ As soon as the doors opened it was full again. We only have two elementary schools in this town. We are so full you cannot switch your child from one elementary school to another. The argument that anyone can come to Northwest I.S.D. if they want to is not valid in Trophy Club. The Apartments as they have now been described to us as smallish apartments with a very attractive price point_ The idea that those are going to be filled with young urban professionals is crazy. Is there anyone in this room who thinks that a great majority of those apartments are not going to be filled with families who are desperate to get their children into Trophy Club Schools? Go out there and talk to people. i know people who live in Grapevine, Flower Mound, and Roanoke who would love to have their kids in Trophy Club schools. They have a great reputation. You cannot get in unless you can afford a house in Trophy Club. There are a lot of people who cannot. They can afford $800 or $900 a month for an apartment. When you say they are one or two bedroom apartments, so what. Do we have some kind of restriction on how many people can be in that apartment? It is short-sighted to believe that people won't stack their kids like firewood in those apartments to get them in Trophy Club schools. Don't tell me that they won't bring kids to those apartments because there is no place for them to play. There is going to be a play center right on the corner. There is a pool for them to swim in at the hotel. There are all kinds of parks in Trophy Club. That is also not a valid argument. What we are really discussing here is an apartment complex with maybe retail. Chairman Senelly: Thank you very much. Next speaker: Peggy Sweeney. 51 Meadowbrook Lane. t think Mr. Reed did a good job of trying unsuccessfully to pry information out of the developers about whether they had any kind of interest from retailers into moving in here. From what l heard, Mr. Beck cannot get anybody into a car to drive out here to look at it_ This has failure written all over it. We are seeing the request for apartment increases now. I think we will see more later. 1 think this is going to tum into a low -rent rental beehive. Chairman Senelly: Thank you very much. Additional from the back, come on up. Next Speaker: Good day. Scott Folley. 2407 LiViield Drive. Two years ago we heard "we've got to have apartments". We wanted none. Over and above that, 250 Planning and Zoning Commission Page 27 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 were agreed to whether we wanted that or not. We were told at that time that they could not proceed if they didn't have those apartments. Now, two years later we are told if we don't have these additional apartments we cannot proceed. They haven't proceeded anyway so I am not impressed so far. Westlake and Southlake are more willing to defend their residents than we are because they just say no. Why do they say no? Because you don't put apartments in Westlake or Southlake. In terms of the schools being filled up, didn't we just pass a tax to add another high school? You can't tell me there's plenty of room. Thank you. Chairman Senelly. Thank you very much. Additional in the back? Next Speaker. Julie Folleyy, 2407 Lilyfield Drive. I was not going to speak tonight until i heard some information about the schools. I have three children. My youngest is 14. She loves to go with her friends to Southlake Center. It takes every bit of me to let her go with a group of girls and walk around Southlake Center and finally allow her to be independent_ i can tell you right now there is noway ever that if there are apartments on the main floor of an area of development I would ever let her walk around with her friends. i would feel very concerned about safety. Just my thoughts. I would still send her to Southlake. Thank you. Chairman Senally Thank you very much. if there are no further comments or questions then we will proceed. Your commissioners have some work to do. I am not sure we are going to get it all done tonight. There is possibility for motions of various kinds. l am going to ask our Commissioners if they have any further comments or questions at this time. It is the last chance before we go on. A motion was made by Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Sheridan, that this agenda item be recommended for denial to the Town Council. The motion carried by a vote of 5-1 with Chairman Senelly voting against the denial. Aye: 5 - Commissioner Sadley, Commissioner Sheridan, Commissioner Reed, Commissioner Card, and Vice Chair Vowell No: 1 - Chairman Senelly Chairman Senelly: Commissioner Sheridan you expressed an interest to have there be an open end to that denial. Can you clarify? Commissioner Sheridan: i am open to townhomes. My original thought before coming into the meeting and listening to everything was that there are 30 townhomes That 30 should come out of the 250. if the applicant wants to continue discussing townhomes in that location, I am open for a vote specifically only on townhomes_ I am still reticent until I see some design standards. We put design standards in everything and the architects handle if. This ordinance has 800 sq. ft. minimum urban residential. Chairman Senelly: Are you interested in having the applicant suggest those design standards? Commissioner Sheridan: Yes. At that time it can come back to us and we can discuss it. The other thing is we just voted to deny it. 1 think a lot of that vote had to do with the apartments. That's not going to change. It goes back to the applicant, if they're wilting to continue conversation on individual pieces. Chairman Senelly: Lets talk about those individual pieces. There was some question about market. There was some question about other things. Concerning Planning and Zoning Commission Page 28 of 30 Meeting Dale: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 the so-called retail ready swap to residential, what would you be interested in hearing? Commissioner Sheridan: If I'm not in favor of increasing the urban residential apartments over 250, 1 would be willing to relocate them on here so that Block B and Black A can get going. We haven't discussed the sequence tonight. Since I was part of the original conversation which came with the sequence, it gives me a lot of heartache. i do have a problem with building as I'm reading the fine print. Basically these are apartment buildings that have the option to go retail. I realize the word is retail ready but the way it says it on the requested change, page 6, "can be converted at a later time to retail use" 1 realize what we've said here tonight but at the same time I'm looking at what's in writing. Can apartments and retail co -exist on the same floor? I heard the answer no. it disturbs me greatly that the retail ready is a new process. Chairman Senelly: You don't see for yourself much wiggle room on that. Commissioner Sheridan: No, i really don't. The other thing that 1 do have to bring up, this week i did take a tour of Legacy Town Center. I visited a couple of the apartment complexes. I'm only going by hearsay, but they all told me that everything in the area was minimum 1,000 sq_ R. In both places they were pushing two month leases, $50 deposits and going month-to-month. I have a hard time relating to Legacy Town Center here because Legacy Town Center has tens of thousands of an employment base within two or three miles. Chairman Senelly; Thank you. Final question far you concerning the proposed site for a town hall, since that is not defined nor is there an established need for it coming from the city, what would you accept in lieu of it? Commissioner Sheridan: You use the words 'Mown hall". There is a feasibility study out therefor a town facility, l have seen it. i haven't memorized it but 1 understand they were talking 20,000 sq. ft. not 40,000. This does not look tome to be a police department area. Chairman Senelly: What would you accept in lieu of or instead of that proposal? Commissioner Sheridan: Because I've heard some people in favor ofa town hall here tonight I'm willing to change my mind because 1 came in saying no way Jose. t would go with a town hall of 20, 000 sq. ft maximum with no police department. if the police department or fire department wanted to put an 800 sq. ft. office satellite, rent it, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about we're going to need a police station. I would go with a town hall. Chairman Senelly: From this side. Garret, you had some objections and concerns about marketing. What would you find as a potential solution for those concerns? If we are going to leave the door open? Commissioner Reed: At this point, 1 think probably the best thing to do is to let them go to the City Council, take our recommendation there or not, whatever happens, and then come back and propose. I'm not in favor of the apartments. That's a moot point. Chairman Senelly: We understand that's the main sticking point for most people who have communicated with us about this project. It's clear. Any other words of advice that you have for the applicant or for the Council as we go forth? Whatever we say here and whatever we do here will go to the Council. Commissioner Sheridan: I thank the applicant for coming in and talking with us, even Planning and Zoning Commission Page 29 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes January 16, 2014 ADJOURN though we are not always in favor of what you want to do, Thank you. Chairman Senelly. And now t would ask the applicant do you have any further questions for us? Last word? Scott Beck. 1 fust want to be clear. With the denial we go to Council or we just withdraw? C. Huggins: You can withdraw but the Planning and Zoning Commission has made a recommendation of denial by a five to one vote and so now it would go to Council with a recommendation of denial. Chairman Senelly: Think about it. Your decision is your decision. We appreciate your presentation and we appreciate those members of the community who have come forth today and spent all this time with us voicing their concerns and listening to our deliberations. Senelly adjourned the meeting at 10:37 p.m. Carolyn Huggi s, Community6 lopment Director Planning and Zoning Commission Page 30 of 30 Meeting Date: January 16, 2014