Minutes P&Z 11/02/1995 - Joint Public HearingMINUTES OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING/PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION/TOWN COUNCIL
TROPHY CLUB, TEXAS
NOVEMBER 2, 1995
FHE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF DENTON
The Town Council of the Town of Trophy Club, Texas met in
a Joint Public Hearing with the Planning and Zoning
Commission on Thursday, November 2, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. The
meeting was held within the boundaries of the Town and was
open to the Public.
Council Members Present:
jm Carter Mayor
Marshall Engelbeck Council Member
Gene Hill Mayor Pro Tem
Cotton Moore Council Member
Patti Stoltz Council Member
Council Member- Glaspell was unable to attenj
CE
Planning and Zoning Commission Members Present:
Mike Hamper
Vance Booker
Don Cotton
Tom Mayfield
Bob Paige
David Schaaf
Roger Williams
Chairman
Go -Chairman
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Also present were guests and staff members:
John Hill
Town Attorney
Donna Welsh
Town Manager
[)an BOUtwe 1 -1
Town Planner
David Miller
Chief of Police
Pauline Shaw
Planning & Zoning Administrator
Bill LeGrand
Director of Public Works
Karen Sadri
Town Secretary
Hap Baggett
Applicant of Oakmont
Enterprises, Inc.
Town Treasurer, Jack jacobs, was unable to attend.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Carter called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m., noting
a quor-uni was present. He then welcomed Council Members,
Commissioners, staff and guests.
Page 2, joint Public Hearing/Planning and Zoning Commission/
Town Council 11/02/95
INVOCATION.
An invocation was given by Council Member Moore.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE AMERICAN AND TEXAS FLAGS.
The pledge of allegiance to the American and Texas Flags was
led by Planning and Zoning Commissioner Cotton.
PUBLIC HEARING
TOWN COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF TROPHY
CLUB, TEXAS INSTRUCTING AND DIRECTING THE TOWN STAFF TO TAKE
ALL NECESSARY LEGAL STEPS TO CALL A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF
T14E TOWN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND TOWN COUNCIL FOR
THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING THE REZONING OF 2 TRACTS OF LAND
FROM R-12 SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO 13D PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT FOR SINGLE FAMILY USES, AND I TRACT OF LAND FROM CG
COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT (FOR RESIDENTIAL USES), AND 1 TRACT OF LAND FROM CG
COMMERCIAL GENERAL TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR PO
PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND CG COMMERCIAL- GENERAL USES DISTRICT
(INCLUDING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION), THE SAID REZONING BEING
AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE
NO. 94-09, OF THE TOWN; AND TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A
SITE PLAN FOR SUCH USES; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Pro Tem Hill made a motion to consider the approval of
the joint public hearing on the tracts of land. Council
Member Engelbeck seconded; motion passed unanimously.
TOWN COUNCIL TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING JOINTLY WITH THE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RELATIVE TO THE FOLLOWING:
A. AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB, TEXAS
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 94-09 OF THE TOWN, THE SAME
BEING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE TOWN BY
REZONING 2 TRACTS OF LAND FROM R-12 SINGLE FAMILY
DISTRICT TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR
SINGLE FAMILY USES, AND 1 TRACT OF LAND FROM CG
COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPME14T
DISTRICT (FOR RESIDENTIAL USES); AND 1 TRACT OF LAND
FROM CG COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT TO PD PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND
CG COMMERCIAL GENERAL USES (INCLUDING GASOLINE
SERVICE STATION).
Before opening the Public Hearing, Mayor Carter informed
those present that there were 2 separate hearings. One for
the Villas (residential), and one for the Village
(commercia).
Page 3, joint FJublic Hearing/Planning and Zoning Commission/
Town Council 11/02/95
At 7:05 Chairman Hamper opened the Planning and Zoning
meeting and noted a quorum was present. He then called led for
a motion to open the joint public nearing. Commissioner
Mayfield made a motion to open the joint public hearing on
the Villas. Commissioner Schaaf seconded-, motion passed
unanimously.
Mayor Pro Tem Hill then made a motion to call the same
meeting for the Town Council. Council Member Engelbeck
seconded; motion passed unanimously.
Upon Mayor Carter's request Town Planner, Dan Boutwell,
l
explained how a -public hearing is conducted. He also stated
that these are 2 separate zoning cases with both proposed for
planned development.
Using the architect's renderings of the proposed Villas,
applicant Hap Bagger1t of Oakmont Enterprises, Inc. described
the location and concept of these two residential areas split
by the newly extended Trophy Wood Drive. The $ 200,000.00 to
$ 400,000.00 homes ranging from 22 -UO to 4100 square feet
would be gated adult communities with small maintenance free
lots. A home owners association would be created, and this
heavily wooded, secluded development would be the transition
to the future commercial area on Highway 114.
AT, this time Mayor Carter asked for citizen comments. i® G.
Smeraldi of I Sundance Court opposed the project and
questioned how the citizens would benefit, and 'now legally
enforceable were the provisions.
Susan McCabe of ii36 Sunset Drive complimented the developer
on the well thought out buffer concept and noted that a major
benefit would be the additional property and school taxes
collected from an area that will probably be childless.
Planning and Zoning Chairman Hamper explained that this
project has been brought before the Commission several times,
and that no recommendations wili be given to the Town Council
until all deed restrictions and homeowners, association
contracts are reviewed by legal counsel.
Hap Bagqett then addressed concerns that the Commission had
regarding the project. He confirmed that the homeowners
association would be responsible for maintenance and
replacement of any landscaping, fencing, and paved areas. In
addition to any homeowners fees the residents would pay the
Town fees (C.I.A./M.U.D). Fencing would be constructed first
and would replace existing owners' fence at no cost to them.
Emergency vehicles would have easy access because of the
swing front gates and front entry garages. Even with the
center area designated for narking, the easements are wide
enough for -fire trucks.
Page 4, Joint Pu b I i c ties r i n g/ P tinning and Zoning Commission/
Town Council 11/02/95
As there were no other questions, Chairman Hamper concluded
that more details and information were needed from the
applicant before making any recommendations.
Mayor Carter then returned to answering the following citizen
questions:
WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS "VILLAS" PROJECT?
Applicant Baggett honestly answered that the developers and
contractors make the most money, but the community benefits
because a product is being provided that accommodates all
life styles.
Town Planner Boutwell concurred that both the developers and
residents benefit. This quality project is a cutting edge
concept whereby the Town is not financially responsible for
the roadways and landscaping. He added that gated
communities provide extra security.
HOW ENFORCEABLE ARE THESE RESTRICTIONS?
Town Attorney Hill responded that the zoning ordinance
includes a maximum imposed daily fine of $ 2000.00 for those
in violation. The homeowners association and individual lot
overs will contribute to the enforcement. He also noted that
financial institutions will not lend money unless all deed
restrictions are in compliance.
WILL THE RESIDENTS BENEFIT FROM THIS?
Again applicant Baggett reiterated that the quality of this
housing and the transition concept sets Trophy Club apart
from other developments. Every resident will benefit by the
upgraded real estate evaluations.
Town Planner Bout ell pointed out that the; public dedicated
right of way is a beneficial enhancement.
Council Member Engel beck then expressed gratiTude to uakmomt
Enterprises, inc. for the East Entrance and confirmed that
the housing construction would not interfere with its traffic
flow.
Other concerns of the Town Council included the front garage
entrances, police patrol of a gated community, and both front
and back property maintenance.
TOWN COUNCIL TO CLOSE THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING AND/0FR
CON-11NUE TO A DATE CERTAIN.
Since no one else wished to speak at the public hearing,
Commissioner Schaaf made a motion to close the joint public
hearing on the Villas at 8:40. Commissioner Paige seconded;
4 1
Page n Public Hearing/PlannMg and Zoning Commission/
Joi t --- Public / - '95
Town Council 11'0Z/
motion passed unanimously.
Mayor Pro Tem Hill then made the same motion for the Town
Council, Councii Member Moore seconded; motion passed
unanimously.
Chairman Hamper announced that no action would be taken and
that the developer understands additional information is
needed. The earliest date to continue this public hearing
is Tuesday, November 21st. He then reminded everyone present
of the open invitation to all Planning and Zoning meetings.
At 8:41 p.m. Commissioner Schaaf made a motion to open the
joint public hearing on the Village (commercial).
Commissioner Williams seconded, motion passed unanimously.
Mayor Pro Tem Hill -Followed wirtn' the same motion for the Town
Council. i. Council Member Engelbeck seconded, motion passed
unanimously.
Before describing the first retail development of Trophy
Club, Hap Baggett of Oakmont Enterprises, Inc. stated that
for the past 15 months his company has been listening to what
the citizens wanted and expected. This project located at
the current T-ronT, entrance OT highway 114 and Trophy Club
Drive would have III- entrances with a park -like feel and a
residential look. The commercial retail area of 3.3 acres
would be a planned development with small buildings, large
open areas, little advertising, and high income re*cailers.
The bank, restaurant, professional offices, retail stores,
and service station would all look alike because of strict
restrictions and architectural controls.
He said the benefits of a commercial enterprise like this one
would bring sales and property tax income, employ local
residents and teens, and build parks and public services.
Mr. Baggett suggested the Town consider voting for a half
cent sales tax increase to generate even more revenues.
When Mayor carter asked for citizen participation, the
following citizens expressed enthusiastic and unanimous
support of high quality basic services, additional tax
base, and planned development as the best control of retail
commercial projects:
Jim Budarf of 54-7 "Indian Creek Drive
Susan McCabe of 1136 Sunset Drive
Pat McCormick of 5 Heritage Court
I Larry Ashh-ley of 2zz uakmont Drive
Roger Unger of 1u-2 Carnoustie Drive
Page 6, joint Public Hearing/Planning and Zoning Commission/
Town Council 11/02/95
ion Livers of ill Carnoustie Drive
.aim Gilbert of 382 Indian Creek Drive
These citizens supported progress, the quality development,
and the additional tax base but opposed the gas station's
location at the front entrance and the negative image it
creates. They also expressed concerns about safety, property
values, business hours, and non-resident influence,
Roy Gannon of 1110 Sunset Drive
Kim Cort of 1130 Sunset Drive
Molly Woodworth of 1120 Sunset Drive
Robyn Garner of 117 Summit Cove
Tim Garvey of 303 Quorum Drive
lmdad Baloch of 14 Meadowbrook Lane
Ronnie Engel beck of ill Forest Hill Drive
Denise Shirey of 530 Indian Creek Drive
John Harbin of Beck Properties, Inc. of 100
Trophy Club Drive
Thomas Delaney, V -P of Cobblestone Golf Group
of San Diego, California
Jhe remaining citizens opposed the development project:
5® G Smeraldi of I Sundance Court
John Cook of 4 Brook Hollow Lane
Tom Dyer of 8 Oak Village Court
At this time Mayor Carter proceeded to have the citizens'
questions answered:
IS THERE A NEED FOR CONVENIENT TYPE SERVICES IN TROPHY CLUB?
Richard Peacock, real estate agent for Farmco, inc./Tetco
Convenience Stores, emphatically declared that gas and food
services are needed for current and future growth. The
location is good, hidden, and definitely profitable.
WHAT ABOUT THE HOMEOWNERS VIEWS/AND PROjECT LINE ON SIGHT"?
Rick Horn of the engineering firm, Carter and Burgess, used
the architectural renderings to demonstrate the topography of
Page 7, joint Public Hearing/Planning and Zoning Commission/
"Town Council 1!/02/95
the property. He pointed out the 8 foot wall followed by a
30 foot continuous green buffer. Then the buildings actually
drop creating a terraced effect. He emphasized this well
thought out and imaginative design.
IS THERE A 30 FOOT THEN 10 FOOT FENCE BUFFER?
Mr. Horn again addressed this question, He explained that an
8 foot wood fence would be closet to the area homes, then 30
feet of landscape and trees, and set backs of 40 to 50 feet.
COULD RESIDENTS SEE LINE OF SIGHT FROM THEIR BACK YARDS?
Mr. Horn invited any resident to walk; the proper-ty and study
the renderings.
WHAT ABOUT SECURITY FOR CHILDREN IN THEIR BACK YARDS?
Police Chief Miller answered that the 8 foot fence screens
and hides the back yards from Highway 114. The lighting
around the project encourages low crime, and statistically
crime increases in residential, not commercial, developments.
WHAT ABOUT RETAIL HOURS, TYPE OF LIGHTS, PROPERTY VALUES?
Applicant, Hap Baggett, responded that the hours will
probably be 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. The lighting will be a
low profile antique patina and down cast in the back of the
retail area. Property value is subject to what is around
you, and the quality of the product effects that value.
COULD THE GAS STATION BE MOVED TO ANOTHER LOCATION OR FURTHER
WEST?
Again Mr. Baggett answered that the only reasons to move the
gas station would be for economics and replacement with a
larger building with more parking space. Both he and Maven
Carter reminded the citizens that this property will not be
the main entrance in the future. When the projected 8 lane
Highway 114 is completed, the current 114 will be the service
road.
WHY A BLUE ROOF TO THE RETAIL PROjECT?
Rick Horn of Carter and Burgess explained that this is only
the architect's rendering, and that a final color has not
been determined yet.
DEMAND EVERYTHING IN WRITING!
Planning and Zoning Chairman, Mike Hamper, confirmed that all
considerations and any subsequent changes for both commercial
and residential projects are done through legal enforcement
of the convenants and deeds of the master plan. He reminded
Page 8, joint Public Hearing/Planning and Zoning Commission/
Town Council 11/02/95
the citizens that this property has always been zoned
commercial.
IS A GAS STATION THE IMAGE TROPHY CLUB WANTS TO PROVIDE TO
THE WORLD?
Again the applicant, Hap Baggett, responded that gas service
is a definite need for the area and adds to a well balanced
retail project.
Town Manager, Donna Welsh, injected that a retail project
creates more revenues than just property and sales tax.
The citizens need to remember that personal property tax
(contents of the buildings) is also included,
As there were no additional citizen remarks, Chairman Hamper
announced that the Planning and Zoning Commission has alot of
unanswered technical and detailed questions to consider. A
permanent project of this magnitude has to have everyone in
agreement that it be done well and right and with the same
objective, Attached to the minutes are the Town Planners'
recommendations and comments.
CLOSE PUBLIC; HEARING OF CONTINUE TO A DATE CERTAIN.
AT IU:46 Tor one Hianning ants toning uommission uommissioner
Schaaf made a motion to continue the Public Hearing to
November 21st at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Williams seconded;
motion passed unanimously.
Representing the Town Council Mayor Pro Tem Hill stated the
same motion. Council Member Moore seconded; motion passed
unanimously.
Council Member Engelbeck emphasized the need to maintain
open and frequent communication with the developers of these
projects.
Everyone was reminded of the C.I.A. tree lighting on
Saturday, December 2nd.
1�10111=108
There being no further business to discuss, Commissioner
Cotton made a motion to adjourn the joint session at 10:50
p.m. Commissioner Williams seconded; motion passed
unanimously.
Representing the Town Council, Mayor Pro Tem Hill then made a
motion to adjourn and reconvene on November 21st at 7:00 P.M.
Council Member Stoltz seconded; motion passed unanimously.
Page 9, Public Hearing/Planning and Zoning Commission/
lown Council 111'021'�35
IUWN SECREIARY
PLANNING & Zot4NG C-HAIRMAN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Pauline Shaw -Town of Trophy Club
FROM: Dan C. Boutwell, AICP - Municipal Planning Resources Group, Inc
SUBJECT: Site Plan for Trophy Club Center PD
DATE: November 1, 1995
We have reviewed the submitted site plan on the above referenced project and offer the following
comments and recommendations.
1. General Comment: More detail must be provided on the site plan. Although it is conceptual
in nature, it is also the basis for establishing zoning for this property. Exact dimensions and
details of construction is certainly not expected on the development site plan, however,
sufficient detail that establishes requirements for the PD must be provided.
2. Landscape should be incorporated into the parking lots. The landscape ordinance requires
one landscaped space for every 12 spaces.
3. The parking configuration on the site plan does not agree with the commitment to parking as
indicated in the note on the site plan nor the accompanying text. According to the note on
the site plan and the accompanying text, a total of 458 parking spaces will be required. 241
spaces are provided on the site plan (after landscaping is deducted). Although a PD may
vary the parking requirements, it appears that a 47% reduction may be excessive.
4. Handicapped parking including van accessible spaces will also need to be included in any
parking calculation.
5. The applicant has included a note stating that the lighting will be compatible with adjacent
residential property. However, the proposed location of lighting has not been provided on
the site plan. In order to prevent any misunderstanding regarding this issue at the time the
construction site plan is submitted, proposed siting of all exterior lighting should be
indicated.
6. The deceleration lane should be indicated on the site plan.
7. The location of the proposed screening fence has been provided on the site plan and a
6900 Anderson Blvd., Suite 104A • Fort Worth, TX 76120-3024 • Tele: (817) 457-1107 0 Fax (817) 457-7011
Memorandum
November 1, 1995
Page 2 of 3
description of that fence is provided in the accompanying text. Nevertheless, we would
recommend that a typical detail of the proposed fence and associated landscaping be
provided on the site plan.
8. The location of all signage should be indicated on the site plan. A detail of the proposed
signage should be provided. Although, it is not necessary to indicate the message on the
sign, only the proposed area, height, and length. In addition, we would recommend that all
signage be monument type. It is not the intent of the community to bring commercial traffic
into Trophy Club from the outside. Therefore, it does not appear necessary for signage
designed to that end to exist.
9. The applicant should indicate on the development site plan the proposed locations of trash
dumpsters and the manner in which they are proposed to be screened.
10. The applicant should also indicate the proposed location of all emergency access lanes.
11. Although a detailed landscape plan is not required at this time, additional information must
be provided that describes the nature and location of landscaping.
12. The applicant has indicated in the accompanying text that all trees at the time of planting shall
be 2" in caliper. We would recommend that the initial size of trees be either a mixture of 3"
and 4", depending on the type of tree. We have discovered that trees greater than 4" at
planting run a higher rate of failure than trees of 4" caliper and smaller.
13. The applicant has indicated in item 7 of the accompanying text that the structures shall be
constructed of materials as approved by the Town. In order to evaluate this application, the
Town should be provided a description of what is proposed for construction materials. The
applicant has already suggested material types in previous meetings. It is both appropriate
and necessary that the intended constructions materials be included with the development site
plan.
14. Statement 13 of the accompanying text should be either revised or removed. Although the
development site plan is somewhat conceptual, the requirements of the PD ordinance will be
established by these submittals. Variation from the development site plan can not be
substantive. None of the requirements established in the PD ordinance are subject to
modification without due process, as described by zoning laws of the Town of Trophy Club
and the State of Texas.
Memorandum
November 1, 1995
Page 3 of 3
15. If the applicant intends to include all previously submitted color elevation drawings as a part
of this PD application, those drawings will need to be attached to the PD application.
fr1PRG ins.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Pauline Shaw -Town of Trophy Club
FROM: Dan C. Boutwell, AICP - Municipal Planning Resources Group, Inc.
SUBJECT: Site Plan for Trophy Club Villas PD
DATE: November 1, 1995
We have reviewed the submitted site plan on the above referenced project and offer the following
comments and recommendations.
1. General Comment: More detail must be provided on the site plan. Although it is conceptual
in nature, it is also the basis for establishing zoning for this property. Exact dimensions and
details of construction is certainly not expected on the development site plan, however,
sufficient detail that establishes requirements for the PD must be provided.
2. A description of the construction material of the private street should be indicated on the site
plan.
3. The applicant should provide a detail of the entrance areas showing the gates and the
associated amenities.
4. Block "A" is indicated on both blocks of the development. Blocks "1" and "2" should be
used.
5. The applicant should provide more detail regarding the fences. A detail drawing should be
provided on the development site plan.
6. The applicant should indicate on the site plan the location of adjoining lot lines.
7. The location of the proposed screening fences have been provided on the site plan.
Nevertheless, we would recommend that a typical detail of the proposed fences and
associated landscaping be provided on the site plan.
8. A detail of the proposed entrance signage should be provided. It is not necessary to indicate
the message on the sign, only the proposed area, height, and length.
6900 Anderson Blvd., Suite 104A • Fort Worth, TX 76120-3024 • Tele: (817) 457-1107 Fax (817) 457-701
Memorandum
November 1, 1995
Page 2 of 3
9. Although a detailed landscape plan is not required at this time, additional information must
be provided that describes the nature and location of landscaping.
10. Statement 11 of the accompanying text should be either revised or removed. Although the
development site plan is somewhat conceptual, the requirements of the PD ordinance will be
established by these submittals. Variation from the development site plan can not be
substantive. None of the requirements established in the PD ordinance are subject to
modification without due process, as described by zoning laws of the Town of Trophy Club
and the State of Texas.
11. If the applicant intends to include all previously submitted color elevation drawings as a part
of this PD application, those drawings will need to be attached to the PD application.