Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 05 - Z16-01; PD16-01 Aura GrapevineTO: HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM: BRUNO RUMBELOW, CITY MANAGER SCOTT WILLIAMS, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR MEETING DATE: MAY 17, 2016 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TECHNICAL REPORT OF ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION Z16-01 AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY PD16-01 AURA GRAPEVINE r ---I i I I I /�----------- -- Fill ii - Grapevine 5 r APPLICANT: Trinsic Acquisition Company I I Rq I I i I I.H. X35 ` Northwest I PROPERTY LOCATION AND SIZE: ods p4e, ^�d �' The subject property is located at 404 East Dallas Road and is platted as Lot 1 R, Block 2, Hilltop ' sDFW Airport po Addition. The subject property contains I Hall -Johnson y� I approximately 5.08 acres and has 330 feet of frontage along Jean Street and 541 feet of frontage Glade Rd. c _i along East Dallas Road. O REQUESTED ZONE CHANGE, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AND COMMENTS: The applicant is requesting a zone change to rezone 5.08 acres from "LI" Light Industrial District to "CBD" Central Business District for the development of 250 multi -family residential units. The applicant is also requesting to establish a planned development overlay to deviate from, but not be limited to the permitted uses within the "CBD" Central Business District by allowing a multi -family residential mixed use development exceedinq the height requirements of the district and deviating from the parking requirements It is the applicant's intent to redevelop the subject site currently used as an industrial/manufacturing and warehousing facility and construct a two -building mixed use multi -family and retail -restaurant complex with its principal frontage facing to the west along Jean Street. A total of 250 residential units are proposed along with two retail - restaurant spaces comprising 5,446 and 6,039 square feet. Building "A" will have its principal frontage facing to the west along Jean Street and will contain 65 residential units, the mixed use restaurant -retail spaces, a fitness center, community office space and a four level parking structure containing 311 parking spaces. Building "B" will also primarily face to the west with its frontage along a public access easement (formerly Berry Street) and will contain 185 residential units, a leasing office and a four level parking structure containing 265 parking spaces. The unit mix is as follows: • 27 efficiency units ranging between 608-682 s.f. (10.8%) • 161 one bedroom units ranging between 750-967 s.f. (64.4%) • 62 two bedroom units ranging between 1,008-1,372 s.f. (24.8%) Given the subject site's proximity to Main Street and the future rail stop, staff determined that the most appropriate zoning for the request given the size, height, density, and mixed use component of the project would be the "CBD" Central Business District. This would also allow the project to be appropriately "placed" on the property with building setbacks in harmony with current and possibly future development within the transit corridor and reduces the number of planned development deviations if another zoning district (e.g. "R- MF" Multi -Family District) was considered. With that in mind, three specific planned development overlay deviations must be considered: • As the ordinance is currently written, the "CBD" Central Business District does not allow as a principal or conditional use, residential uses within the district. The applicant is requesting to allow the development of 250 residential units within the district. This request is not unprecedented. A planned development overlay was approved by the Council in March 2009 which allowed for the development of a 1,750 s.f. residence on the second floor of 412 South Main Street. • The "CBD" Central Business District limits the height of structures to 30 feet. The applicant is requesting to allow the development of the two principal structures to a height of four stories not to exceed 70 feet. • Section 56, Off -Street Parking Requirements mandate two parking spaces per dwelling unit. The mixed use spaces, if developed as retail spaces would require one space per 200 s.f. plus an additional five spaces. This creates a required parking demand of approximately 563 spaces. The applicant proposes (see the attached parking study) a parking ratio of 1.5 spaces per unit and one space per 61 s.f. of the mixed use space for a total of 564 spaces. The applicant is providing an additional 45 spaces to be utilized by area businesses on an as -needed basis. If one or both of the mixed use spaces is developed as a restaurant the additional 45 spaces provided will still be sufficient to support the needs of the development. THOROUGHFARE PLAN APPLICATION: Dallas Road is designated a Class "C" Minor Arterial with 80 feet of right-of-way developed as four lanes with a center left turn lane. Jean Street is not designated a thoroughfare as shown on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. /rs . Z�L-D( CITY OF GRAPEVINE ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION 1. Applicant/Agent Name I CINsIc Rcak,%s1V10n Cam Qann-t. LLC- Company L.0 Company Name A aXn^ UC,Cjwr\ Address 1100 MoN1ce,�Jo Kve., She. 960 City �o2,A cIS, State AX Zip zo Phone# Z.I�I- �l�Z i'�"l0 Fax#�(�- 4111 Email Mobile # Z t4- �-C)OZ� 2. Applicant's interest in subject property ?k) rCJ^C -S0-d Q4SVne1 3. Property owner(s) name V Address Z.Og�°� �`eGn e�y`es City V Ske,�ok State F L Zip 33�Zg Phone # Fax # 4. Address of subject property 4N 'p— Legal Description: Lot I-V, Block Z. Addition Size of subject property C3,01,94 acres square foot Metes & Bounds must be described on 8 '/2 "x 11" sheet 5. Present Zoning Classification L 6. Present Use of Property Ltgtil� WQS+nc-.` 7. Requested Zoning District C— O b 8. The applicant understands the master plan designation and the most restrictive zone that would allow the proposed use is 0;\ZCU\1 FormsWPP.ZNCP.doc 7/17/2014 J�,I'! 2 � Li til The State of County of Z1 LO -0I on this day personally appeared W( ag - k Lr��`�.-�- known to me (or proved to me on the oath of or through (description of identity card or other document) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed. Given under my hand and seal of office this L- day of A. D. q-0 °er MARGIE MELCHOR Notary 10 # 11224588 Notary SigniAure My Comr Mssim Expires •.,,�a�,.4 hbrmy 6, 2020 The State of t%rr C/,q County of 2e -e, Before me „S.& -d IUM on this day personally appeared :i� n ,L = se Z/' known to me (or proved to me on the oath of or through (description of identity card or other document) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed. Given under my hand and seal of office this day of A.D. f� SEAL 21"z4z2:1 Notary Signature ,�;►,,,,,,o SHERYL HAM �,r�' Notary Public - State of Florida ' M Comm. Expires Jan 24, 2018 0:\ZCU\1 Forms\APP.ZNCP.doc N, •oQ Y P 7/17/2014%;;...... ff �Commission � FF 067793 N� (to -0 [ r X A s CITY OF GRAPEVINE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY VTT APPLICATION PART 1. APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of applicant /agent:/company/contact COM LLC SiC iS� `O Street address of applicant/ agent.- Street gent.3 t UCS W 3K (,Zk\o Ave S'�e✓ °too 1 City/ State /Zip Code of applicant/ agent: '1;bMVCk(> 7y, -} S ZdS Telephone number of applicant/ agent: ZI`1- bZ- �iqo Fax number of applicant / agent: Z.1L1-L16cs- 411 ( Email address of applicant/ agent Mobile phone number of applicant/ agent Applicant's interest in subject property. PufCAnO's 2-S I QaSk neS PART 2. PROPERTY INFORMATION Street address of subject property Ll OLI T_ _agalldescription of subject property (metes & bounds must be described on 8 1/2"x 11"sheet) a Lot ..- 1, Block Z Addition ; vo\, Wkylol\ Size of subject property So 0'1-1:61� Acres Square footage Present zoning classification: Ll Proposed use of the property.• M11te� use's IAF CeS,deµ�col �e�.til IReswran� t Minimum / maximum district size for request.- equest:Zoning Zoningordinance provision requesting deviation from: PART 3. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION Name of current property owner.- V W (XC•('ev•"-, Ltd, Street address of property owner: Zdis 6°t G �eneab\es Links Q�tve. City/State /Zip Code of property owner. • ste.`o, Fkw ;�� Telephone number of property owner. ZkLt- Z�3 - yz,q.1 Fax number of property owner: 23°x- �-�b - ° I+J'- O:\ZCU\l Forms\app.pd.doc 7/17/2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT All Planned Development Overlay Applications are assumed to be complete when filed and will be placed on the agenda for public hearing at the discretion of the staff. Based on the size of the agenda, your application may be scheduled to a later date. All public hearings will be opened and testimony given by applicants and interested citizenry. Public hearings may be continued to the next public hearing. Public hearings will not be tabled. Any changes to a site plan (no matter how minor or major) approved with a planned development overlay can only be approved by city council through the public hearing process. Any application for a change in zoning or for an amendment to the zoning ordinance shall have, from the date of submittal, a period of four months to request and be scheduled on an agenda before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. If after said period of four months an application has not been scheduled before the Commission and Council said application shall be considered withdrawn, with forfeiture of all filing fees. The application, along with the required filing fee may be resubmitted any time thereafter for reconsideration. Delays in scheduling applications before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City council created by city staff shall not be considered a part of the four month period. I have read and understand all of the requirements as set forth by the application for planned development overlay and acknowledge that all requirements of this application have been met at the time of submittal. Signature of Applicant Date: 1Z -ZZ- IS Signature of Owner Date: 0:\ZCU\1 Forms\app.pd.doc 4 7/17/2014 Aura Grapevine Basis of Design Page 2 were block -scaled, often four to six -stories tall. Complexes of this building typology were typically a mix of buildings of simple volumes, various sizes, and practical materials based on their function. While the scale of these buildings varies greatly, it is not uncommon to find three and four-story complexes stretching for multiple city blocks. Facades were fairly modest, often constructed of masonry, and reflecting the large-scale structural systems necessary for the industrial functions within. While predominantly monolithic, they often included masonry detailing at the cornice, water table, and entrances, some of which could be fairly ornate. Primary entrances were often marked with tower structures with matching or elevated detailing. First floor levels were elevated to facilitate shipping and receiving off of the rail line and held large loading -bay doors. Windows were large, simple, punched openings — typically double hung wood, steel casement or awning, and of a large, uniform size — as necessary for abundant natural light. Additional facade details included metal awnings, metal leader boxes and downspouts, and painted graphic signage. Roofs were simple gable or shed structures, predominately of standing seam steel. These large industrial developments were rarely built all at once. The facilities grew incrementally with building additions constructed as capacity was needed. Therefore, the construction and detailing of each phase could vary and reflect different influences. Brick selection could change dependent on supply availability. Window design could change depending on manufacturer. Brick detailing could be simplified or embellished, depending on project budget and intent. As a result, the overall image of the mill complexes is one of aggregate evolution. A variety can be found within one development. A mix of scale, material and detailing can allow for a complex architectural statement and create a significant sense of place, reflecting and adding to the City of Grapevine's rich history. Adapting the new mixed use development of retail and apartment to reference well-designed and incrementally -constructed manufacturing buildings can offer a rich blend of forms and material that can better relate to the historical development patterns of Grapevine. The City of Grapevine's leadership has a very firm commitment to the preservation of the history of the central township. This is evident in the developments that have taken place since the early 1990's, and with the designation of Main Street as a downtown commercial historic district listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Significant new construction and rehabilitation projects have served to contribute and strengthen the story of Grapevine's history. From the historic districts that make up the core of the city to the multiple festivals held throughout the year honoring the city's past, history is elemental to Grapevine's identity. P) C� (-r, � F - - - I APR 1907 Marilla Dallas, Texas 75201 Tel 214.748.4561 Fax 214.748.4241 location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street locating spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust, effect on the promotion of health and the general welfare, effect on light and air, the effect on the transportation, water sewerage, schools, parks and other facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas at a public hearing called by the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether this requested change should be granted or denied; effect on the congestion of the streets, the fire hazards, panics and other dangers possibly present in the securing of safety from same, the effect on the promotion of health and the general welfare, the effect on adequate light and air, the effect on the overcrowding of the land, the effect on the concentration of population, the effect on the transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council further considered among other things the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and with the view to conserve the value of buildings, encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout this city; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas does find that there is a public necessity for the zoning change, that the public demands it, that the public interest clearly requires the amendment, that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and does find that the change in zoning lessens the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers; promotes health and the general welfare; provides adequate light and air; prevents the overcrowding of land; avoids undue concentration of population; facilitates the adequate provisions of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas has determined that there is a necessity and need for this change in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the property requested for a change since this property was originally classified; and, therefore, feels that a change in zoning classification for the particular piece of property is needed, is called for, and is in the best interest of the public at large, the citizens of the City of Grapevine, Texas and helps promote the general health, safety, and welfare of this community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS: Section 1. That the City of Grapevine Ordinance No. 82-73, being the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Grapevine, Texas same being also known as Appendix "D" of the City Code of Grapevine, Texas, be, and the same is hereby amended and changed by Zoning Application Z16-01 to rezone the following described property to -wit: being a 5.08 acre tract of land out of W.M. Dooley Survey, Abstract 422, Ordinance. No. 2 and general welfare of the public which requires that this ordinance shall become effective from and after the date of its final passage, and it is accordingly so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS on this the 17th day of May, 2016. APPROVED: William D. Tate Mayor ATTEST: Tara Brooks City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: John F. Boyle, Jr. City Attorney Ordinance. No. 4 and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street locating spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health and the general welfare; effect on light and air; the effect on the overcrowding of the land; the effect on the concentration of population; the effect on the transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas, at a public hearing called by the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas, did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether this requested planned development overlay should be granted or denied; effect on the congestion of the streets, the fire hazards, panics and other dangers possibly present in the securing of safety from same, the effect on the promotion of health and the general welfare, effect on adequate light and air, the effect on the overcrowding of the land, the effect on the concentration of population, the effect on the transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and WHEREAS, all of the requirements of Section 41 of Ordinance No. 82-73 have been satisfied by the submission of evidence at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council further considered among other things the character of the existing zoning district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and with the view to conserve the value of buildings and encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout this City; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas, does find that there is a public necessity for the granting of this planned development overlay, that the public demands it, that the public interest clearly requires the amendment, that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas, does find that the planned development overlay lessens the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers, prevents the overcrowding of land, avoids undue concentration of population, facilitates the adequate provisions of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas, has determined that there is a necessity and need for this planned development overlay and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the property requested for a change since this property was originally classified and, therefore, feels that the issuance of this planned development overlay for the particular piece of property is needed, is called for, and is in the best interest of the Ordinance. No. 2 Section 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of the tract or tracts of land described herein. Section 7. Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) and a separate offense shall be deemed committed upon each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues. Section 8. The fact that the present ordinances and regulations of the City of Grapevine, Texas, are inadequate to properly safeguard the health, safety, morals, peace and general welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Grapevine, Texas, creates an emergency for the immediate preservation of the public business, property, health, safety and general welfare of the public which requires that this ordinance shall become effective from and after the date of its final passage, and it is accordingly so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS on this the 17th day of May, 2016. APPROVED: William D. Tate Mayor ATTEST: Tara Brooks City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: John F. Boyle, Jr. City Attorney Ordinance. No. 4 SPONSORSHIP Trinsic Residential Group ("Trinsic") is capitalized by Akard Street Partners, an investment partnership of Hunt Realty Investments and Teacher Retirement System of Texas. Trinsic is a privately held real estate company based in Dallas, Texas, created by a partnership of Brian Tusa, Joe Barrett, Greg Jones, and Adam Brown. Trinsic develops institutional quality class -A multifamily assets in infill and suburban locations. Initial focus has been on major Texas markets, but recent expansion has concentrated on Florida, the Pacific Northwest, and Arizona. Collectively, senior management has developed or acquired over 20,000 units with a total capitalization of over $4 billion. Brian Tusa is one of the founders of Trinsic Residential Group. He directs the investment and growth strategy for the company, as well as its development and acquisition activities. With over 18 years of experience in the real estate industry, Brian has been involved in more than $1.6 billion in development, acquisition and financing of institutional quality multifamily properties. He has helped drive Trinsic's growth to over 4,000 units in various stages of production. Prior to joining Trinsic, Brian was the Managing Director for Alliance Residential, overseeing the development and acquisition for North Texas. He also served as the Portfolio Manager for Alliance Residential Fund I, a $200 million multifamily investment fund, from 2008 — 2010. Brian holds a B.S. in Accounting from Boston College and an M.S. in Real Estate Development from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In addition, he was a licensed CPA. He is actively involved in several charities in the Dallas area. Greg Jones Greg oversees all capital market activities for Trinsic Residential Group. In this role, he sources and structures equity and debt transactions for the company. With over 23 years of experience in the real estate industry, Greg has completed in excess of $2.0 billion in multifamily, office and retail development and acquisition transactions. Prior to joining Trinsic, Greg was a partner at Phoenix Property Company, where he was responsible for multifamily and commercial development and acquisitions throughout the U.S. Earlier in his career, he worked with Lincoln Property Company and Trammell Crow Company. Greg holds a B.B.A. in Finance from Baylor University. Joe Barrett is one of the founders of Trinsic Residential Group and serves as Chief Operating Officer. He oversees operations and asset management and assists in sourcing new business opportunities. Joe has spent more than 25 years in the real estate industry and has been involved in every facet of multifamily development activity. His transactional experience includes the development of over 5,000 apartment units and $500 million of equity and permanent debt financing, construction loans and asset sales. Prior to joining Trinsic, Joe served as the COO of Commercial Real Estate Investments for Archon Group, a Goldman Sachs company, Managing Partner of North American Properties and its predecessor Ewing Properties, and Chief Financial Officer of Lincoln Property Company. Joe holds a B.A. in Economics from Austin College and an MBA from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Trinsic Residential Group focuses on areas of population and business growth where there is a need for additional multifamily homes. The product contains high-end finishes and exceptional design features with a full complement of amenities. It is the intent to create 360 -degree living environments relative to the location of the development. Currently, Trinsic has close to 4,500 units under construction, in lease up or stabilized with total development costs in excess of $630 million. In addition, Trinsic has a development pipeline of more than 1,900 new units with over $300 million in capital investment. Current construction includes: AURA WYCLIFF - 334 units, Dallas, TX AURA GRAND - 291 units, Katy, TX MMM TII IBJ S I 0 U R 1, e awit IL it clliw �I��t� � 1� �,• � his,-� i low W L. elk 17 e F � � r � P 1 _ 5 z � ♦ � 1 A r s ! OEM TT R-1 N S I �tl call - I N I AURA BURNSIDE —167 units, Portland, OR About Hunt Realty Investments Based in Dallas, Texas, Hunt Realty Investments, Inc. ("HRP') serves as the centralized real estate investment management resource for Hunt Consolidated, Inc., which is part of the Hunt family of companies directed by Ray L. Hunt. HRI has been active in all facets of the real estate investment business for over 30 years and works to identify and invest in unique opportunities that differentiate themselves from the typical commodity investments available in all markets. HRI has been one of the few companies which has successfully created and nurtured a series of attractive and fully -integrated private real estate operating company investments. About Akard Street Partners Created in 2009 through the partnership of HRI and the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, Akard Street Partners invests capital in select private real estate operating companies with the ability to create fianchise value by positioning operators to efficiently scale portfolio and achieve superior risk- adjusted returns. In 2010, Akard Street Partners capitalized California-based W3 Partners, a real estate operating platform which acquires and repositions west coast office and research/development properties. In 2011, Akard Street Partners capitalized Capital Health Holdings, a real estate operating platform focused on acquiring and developing private pay senior housing assets throughout the U.S., primarily assisted living and memory care facilities. EMM TftIN5IC PARKING DEMAND STUDY FOR AURA GRAPEVINE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT GRAPEVINE, TEXAS DeShozo Project No, 15223 Prepared for: Trinsic Acquisition Company, LLC 3100 Monticello Avenue, Ste 900 Dallas, Texas 75205 Prepared by: DeShazo Group, Inc. Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-3199 400 South Houston Street, Suite 330 Dallas, Texas 75202 214.748.6740 January 5, 2016 OF 2DeSlhazo Group i GABRIEL DAVID NEVAREZ ............................. t .off : 106244: ,Tai «a-+'/5, 201 DeShazo Group 35 Vtwie of Excellence! Traffic Engineering. Transportation Planning, Parking Analysis, Traffic -Transportation -Parking Design, Technical Memorandum To: Trinsic Acquisition Company, LLC From: David Nevarez, P.E. —DeShazo Group, Inc. Date: January 5, 2016 Re: Parking Demand Study for the Aura Grapevine Development in Grapevine, Texas DeShazo Project Number 15223 INTRODUCTION DeShazo Group, Inc. (DeShazo) is an engineering consulting firm based in Dallas, Texas providing licensed engineers skilled in the field of traffic/transportation engineering. The services of DeShazo were retained by Trinsic Acquisition Company, LLC to provide a study of the parking needs for the proposed Aura Grapevine (the "Project"). The subject property is located at 404 E Dallas Road in Grapevine, Texas. The development comprises mixed use and multifamily buildings separated by Berry Street into two blocks. The adjacent segment of Berry Street was previously abandoned and is a part of the subject property. The proposed parking supply is also divided into two parking facilities—one for each block. The west block also includes restaurant uses at street level. A preliminary site plan prepared by Womack+Hampton Architects, LLC is attached following this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project is divided into two separate blocks. The overall development will contain 250 dwelling units plus 11,252 square feet of restaurant use. A detailed summary by unit -type is provided in Table 1. Table 1. Proposed Development Summary Building A Building B TOTAL Residential Use Efficiency (One Bedroom) One Bedroom Two Bedroom Residential Uses Totals 5 units 22 units 27 units 36 units 126 units 162 units 24 units 37 units 61 units 65 units 185 units 250 units (89 bedrooms) (222 bedrooms) (311 bedrooms) Restaurant Uses 11,602 SF -- -source: Development program prepared by Womack+Hampton Architechts, LLC on January 4, 2016. NOTE: The proposed development includes other ancillary areas exclusive for residents (e.g. leasing office, business center, fitness studio, etc.) 400 South Houston StMet, Suite 330 Dallas, Texas 75202A 214.748,6740 E 214,748,7037 www.deshazogroup.com DeShazo Group January S, 2016 PARKING SUPPLY A total of 609 spaces are proposed to serve the needs of the entire development -13 spaces are provided along the private segment of Berry Street. A detailed summary of the proposed parking supply is presented in Table 2. Table 2. Proposed Parking Supply Summary Space Type Number of Spaces Building A 311 Building B 285 Berry Street (Private) Parking 13 TOTAL 609 NOTE: Additional on -street public parking is available adjacent to the subject property on Jean Street but not included in this analysis. CODE REQUIREMENT The subject property is currently zoned LI (Light Industrial) District and does not permit the proposed uses. To receive entitlements for the Project, the developer is seeking approval of a Planned Development Overlay. Upon approval of the proposed uses, the default parking requirement for the development would be based upon the requirements defined in the City of Grapevine Code of Ordinances, Part II, Appendix D, Section 56, Part C. For "Apartment, condominiums, triplex, fourplex" residential uses, the requirement is two spaces per dwelling unit (DU). Furthermore, the requirement for an "Eating or drinking establishment, no service to auto" is based upon the maximum occupant load of the building at one space per three persons. In accordance with the International Building Code, preliminary calculations for restaurants of this size are generally based upon one occupant per 15 square feet of the dining area, which was subjectively approximated at 60% of the total floor area. This calculation should be revised once detailed building occupancy information becomes available but will still be subject to City staff approval upon review of a detailed floor plan. Table 1 summarizes a preliminary parking requirement for the Project based upon an assumed building occupancy for the restaurant space. Table 3. Preliminary Code Parking Requirement Land Use Amount Parking Rate Parking Spaces Residential 250 DU 2 space/DU 500 Restaurant 11,602 SF 1 space/ 155* (464 occupants) 3 occupants Code Parking Requirement: 655 "Based upon a preliminary approximation of building occupancy Parking Demand Study for the Aura Grapevine Development Page 2 DeShazo Group January 5, 2016 PARKING DEMAND Residential Use As validation for the recommended parking rate for the residential use of this development, published parking demand data is available from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). ITE defines "low - and mid -rise apartments" as "...rental dwelling units located within the same building with at least three other dwelling units... The study sites in this land use have one, two, three, or four levels." Table 4 provides an excerpt of the published ITE from the latest Parking Generation manual, 4th Edition (2010). Table 4. Published Parking Demand Data for Apartments Land Use Average Peak Parking Demand Rate ITE Land Use 221: Low -/Mid -Rise 1.23 vehicles per Apartments (Suburban) dwellins unit The ITE parking demand ratios are calculated on a per -dwelling -unit basis since this information is usually more readily available—data on a per -bedroom basis is not provided. However, the composition of single- and multiple -bedroom units changes from one complex to the next. DeShazo has conducted numerous parking accumulation studies for multifamily developments. Results show that basing parking demand on the number of bedrooms is considered to be a more representative variable to determine parking demand than to use a "per-unit" basis, which does not take unit mix into account. Actual peak parking demand for apartments (both urban and suburban) has been studied on numerous occasions by DeShazo over several years. As with the ITE studies, DeShazo data incorporates all parkers, including visitors. Those data have consistently found parking demand to be less than 1.0 parking space per bedroom at peak times. Restaurant Use Published parking demand data is also available from the ITE as validation for the recommended parking rate for the restaurant portion. ITE defines "high -turnover (sit-down) restaurant with bar or lounge" as "...full service eating establishment with turnover rates of approximately one hour or less. This type of restaurant is usually moderately priced and frequently belongs to a restaurant chain... These restaurants typically do not take reservations." Table 5 provides an excerpt of the published ITE from the latest Parking Generation manual, 4th Edition (2010). Table S. Published Parking Demand Data for Restaurant Land Use Average Peak Parking Demand Rate ITE Land Use 932: High -Turnover Sit- 16.30 vehicles per Down Restaurant (With Bar or Lounge, 1,000 SF Saturday, Suburban) (1 vehicle per 61.35 SFJ Parking Demand Study for the Aura Grapevine Development Page 3 DeShazo Group January 5, 2016 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Owner is seeking to re -zone the property and identify an appropriate overall parking requirement for the proposed uses. Based upon an assessment of the proposed development and parking projections, DeShazo supports a deviation to the City's default code parking requirement. The recommended parking ratio for the restaurant use is supported by technical data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers: ➢ 1 space per 61 square feet of restaurant gross floor area. DeShazo also supports a parking ratio for the residential use based on dwelling units. However, the parking supply for each building should also exceed the 1 -per -bedroom ratio. Based on the proposed mix of dwelling units presented in this report, the minimum recommended parking ratio for the residential component should exceed: ➢ 1.4 spaces per dwelling unit. This rate is particularly derived from the proposed bedroom -to -dwelling -unit ratio and should be reevaluated if the composition of dwelling unit changes before a final layout is approved by the City. IN any case, the recommended ratio should exceed the one space per bedroom rate. The recommended minimum parking supply for the residential use is lower than the default City requirement but considered an adequate supply for the multifamily component at Aura Grapevine. It exceeds both the projected parking demand rate of 1.23 vehicles per dwelling unit published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and DeShazo's minimum recommended supply of one space per bedroom. The recommended parking supply for the restaurant use also exceeds most city codes in the Dallas -Fort Worth metroplex but is considered appropriate for this development. Table 6. Parking Analysis Summaryfor Aura Grapevine APPROACH RESIDENTIAL USE RESTAURANT USE TOTAL Amount Rate Parking Amount Rate Parking SPACES City Code 250 DU 2 spaces 500 + 464 1 space per 155 655 per DU occupants[A] 3 occupant ITE Average 250 DU 1.23 spaces 308 + 11,602 SF 16.3 spaces 189 497 per DU per k.5F Recommended 250 DU 1.4 spaces 350 + 11,602 SF 1 space per 190 540 Parking Supply per DEP1 61 SFlcl spaces A Preliminary building occupancy is based upon one occupant per 15 SF of the dining area, subjectively approximated at 60% of the GFA. This preliminary calculation should be revised upon review of a detailed floor plan and is not meant to be subject of City staff approval. B The recommended parking rate for the residential component exceeds both ITE's and DeShazo's projected parking demand. C The recommended rate for the restaurant component is a conversion of units from the average rate presented by the ITE Parking Generation Manual (4' Edition). Parking Demand Study for the Aura Grapevine Development Page 4 DeShazo Gmup f 400 - -- j 350 300 -I--- n250 i -- 4200 !c w 150 4 I6100-li----- SO p BuildingA-- -- 285 -- 269 281 - city RE Recommended Code Average Supply January 5, 2016 Figure 1. Parking Analysis Summary for Aura Grapevine Finally, the parking supply for both uses can be accommodated on site through the enforcement of a parking management plan: • In order to preserve the high turnover character for restaurant parking, a time limit of no more than two hours should be imposed on the 13 on -street parking spaces on Berry Street. These spaces should remain available for restaurant patrons but may be shared with residents and visitors of Aura Grapevine on a short-term basis. • The property management should initially allocate at least 21 spaces for restaurant employees in the garage of Building A. This number is based upon employee parking data available from technical publications but should be reassessed in the future by the property management, as needed. • The remaining minimum supply for the restaurant component (approximately 156 spaces) should remain available for restaurant patrons in Building A at all times. These spaces should be allocated in the lower levels of the parking garage. • Beyond the minimum spaces allocated for restaurant parking, a minimum of 91 spaces (or 65 DU times the recommended rate for Aura Grapevine) should be reserved for resident tenants in Building A at all times—preferably by exclusively reserving parking behind automated gates. • The parking garage in Building B should remain exclusively reserved for residents at all times. END OF MEMO Parking Demand Study for the Aura Grapevine Development Page 5 Buildin96---- 400 - ---- - — 350 _...-----------'-18.5 j 300 250 370 - - ----- -- 4200-{— 259 -_- - e 228 - ---- Residential Use x150 - --- - - - d j 100 NOW Restaurant Use SO -Proposed SmpPIV 0 , . -'-- - - -- - - - -- - -- (excl. on -street) City ITE Recommended Code Average Supply Figure 1. Parking Analysis Summary for Aura Grapevine Finally, the parking supply for both uses can be accommodated on site through the enforcement of a parking management plan: • In order to preserve the high turnover character for restaurant parking, a time limit of no more than two hours should be imposed on the 13 on -street parking spaces on Berry Street. These spaces should remain available for restaurant patrons but may be shared with residents and visitors of Aura Grapevine on a short-term basis. • The property management should initially allocate at least 21 spaces for restaurant employees in the garage of Building A. This number is based upon employee parking data available from technical publications but should be reassessed in the future by the property management, as needed. • The remaining minimum supply for the restaurant component (approximately 156 spaces) should remain available for restaurant patrons in Building A at all times. These spaces should be allocated in the lower levels of the parking garage. • Beyond the minimum spaces allocated for restaurant parking, a minimum of 91 spaces (or 65 DU times the recommended rate for Aura Grapevine) should be reserved for resident tenants in Building A at all times—preferably by exclusively reserving parking behind automated gates. • The parking garage in Building B should remain exclusively reserved for residents at all times. END OF MEMO Parking Demand Study for the Aura Grapevine Development Page 5 --N-o DeShazo,;roup PN;zi� Appendix Land Use: 221 Low/Mid-Mise Apartment Description Low/mid-rise apartments are rental dwelling units located within the same building with at least th other dwelling units: for example, quadraplexes and all types of apartment buildings. The study si this land use have one, two, three, or four levels. High-rise apartment (Land Use 222) is a related Database Description The database consisted of a mix of suburban and urban sites. Parking demand rates at the suburban sites differed from those at urban sites and, therefore, the data were analyzed separately. Average parking supply ratio: 1.4 parking spaces per dwelling unit (68 study sites). This ratio was same at both the suburban and urban sites. Suburban site data: average size of the dwelling units at suburban study sites was 1.7 bedrooms, and the average parking supply ratio was 0.9 parking spaces per bedroom (three study sites). Urban site data: average size of the dwelling units was 1.9 bedrooms with an average parking sul ratio of 1.0 space per bedroom (11 study sites). Saturday parking demand data were only provided at two suburban sites. One site with 1,236 dwelling units had a parking demand ratio of 1.33 vehicles per dwelling unit based on a single hourly count between 10:00 and 11:00 p.m. The other site with 55 dwelling units had a parking demand ratio of 0.92 vehicles per dwelling unit based on counts between the hours of 12:00 and 5:00 a.m. Sunday parking demand data were only provided at two urban sites. One site with 15 dwelling units was counted during consecutive hours between 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. The peak parking demand ratio at this site was 1.00 vehicle per dwelling unit, The peak parking demand occurred between 12:00 and 5:00 a.m. The other site with 438 dwelling units had a parking demand ratio of 1.10 vehicles per dwelling unit based on a single hourly count between 11:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. Four of the urban sites were identified as affordable housing. Several of the suburban study sites provided data regarding the number of bedrooms in the apartment complex. Although these data represented only a subset of the complete database for this land use, they demonstrated a correlation between number of bedrooms and peak parking demand. Study sites with an average of less than 1.5 bedrooms per dwelling unit in the apartment complex reported peak parking demand at 92 percent of the average peak parking demand for all study sites with bedroom data. Study sites with less than 2.0 but greater than or equal to 1.5 bedrooms per dwelling unit reported peak parking demand at 98 percent of the average. Study sites with an average of 2.0 or greater bedrooms per dwelling unit reported peak parking demand at 13 percent greater than the average. For the urban study sites, the parking demand data consisted of single or discontinuous hourly counts and therefore a time -of -day distribution was not produced. The following table presents a time -of -day distribution of parking demand at the suburban study sites. Institute of Transportation Engineers - ..K.1 50 ]''` Parking Generation, 4th Edition Land Use: 221 Low/Mid-Rise Apartment IBaserl on. Vehrclea per:' h Weekd�t Hour Beginning Percent of Peak Period Number of Data Points` 12:00-4:00 a.m. 100 14 5:00 a.m. 96 14 6:00 a.m. 92 14 7:00 a.m. 74 1 8:00 a.m. 84 1 9.00 a.m. _ 0 10:00 a.m. _ 0 11:00 a.m. _ 0 12:00 p.m. _ 0 1:00 P.M. _ 0 2:00 p.m. _ 0 3:00 P.M. _ 0 4:00 p.m. 44 1 5:00 P.M. 59 1 6:00 p.m. 69 1 7:00 p.m. 66 9 8:00 P.M. 75 9 9:00 P.M. 77 10 10:00P.M. 92 14 11:00P.M. 94 14 Parking studies of apartments should attempt to obtain information on occupancy rate and on the mix of apartment sizes (in other words, number of bedrooms per apartment and number of units ' in the complex). Future parking studies should also indicate the number of levels contained in the wpartment building. nal Data occupancy can affect parking demand ratio. In the United States, successful apartment commonly have a vacancy rate between 5 and 10 percent.' SitesNears 1, Not Downtown: t (1998) Not Downtown: R (2007) eowner Vacancy Rates for the United States: 1960 and 1965 to 2009, U.S. Census Bureau. '9ov/hhes/www/housing/hvs/gtr309/g309tab 1.html Ruon Engineers [51 ] Parking Generation, 4th Edition Land Use: 221 Low/Mid-Rise Apartment Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Location: Suburban Steti`stic, Peak Period'Demand Peak Period 12:00-5:00 a.m. Number of Study Sites 21 Average Size of Study Sites 311 dwelling units Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1.23 vehicles per dwelling unit Standard Deviation 0.32 Coefficient of Variation 21% 95% Confidence Interval 1.10-1.37 vehicles per dwelling unit Range 0.59-1.94 vehicles per dwelling unit 85th Percentile 1.94 vehicles per dwelling unit 33rd Percentile 0.68 vehicles per dwelling unit Weekday Suburban Peak Period Parking Demand 2,000 a� u ;E 1,500 1,000 x CL 500 11 IL 0 P=1.4.2x-38 R2 = 0.93 - -- -- -- --�-- ---� ,.•- - a �r 0 500 y , 1,000 1,500 x = Dwelling Units • Actual Data Points Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate 41 hw: Pn►catian Engineers 53 i ,' Parking Generafion, 4th Edition Land Use: 932 High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant ption land use consists of sit-down, full-service eating establishments with turnover rates of approximately lour or less. This type of restaurant is usually moderately priced and frequently belongs to a urant chain. Generally, these restaurants serve lunch and dinner; they may also be open for (fast and are sometimes open 24 hours per day. These restaurants typically do not take vations. Patrons commonly wait to be seated, are served by a waiter/waitress, order from menus )ay for their meal after they eat. Some facilities contained within this land use may also contain a bar for serving food and alcoholic drinks. Quality restaurant (Land Use 931), fast-food restaurant without -through window (Land Use 933) and fast-food restaurant with drive-through window (Land Use 934) dated uses. Description of parking demand for this land use has identified different parking demand rates between r restaurants with and without bars. The term "family restaurant' is used interchangeably as ad version of "high -turnover (sit-down) restaurant without bar or lounge facilities." F: , �, atabase consisted of a mix of suburban and urban sites, as well as one rural site. Parking demand es appeared to differ only for family restaurants during the weekday time period. For Saturdays and bays, only suburban data were submitted. .Average parking supply ratios at family restaurants: 14.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet (sq. ft.) gross -floor area (GFA) (39 study sites) and 0.53 spaces per seat (20 study sites). Average parking supply ratios at restaurants with a bar or lounge: 17.3 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA 4 X20 study sites) and 0.53 spaces per seat (21 study sites). )`Average employee density at family restaurants: 2.4 employees per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA (five study %ites). V verage employee density at restaurants with a bar or lounge: 4 employees per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA (six Eudy sites). an family restaurant study site with weekday parking demand data is not included in the data rause of its size. The site was 11,170 sq. ft. GFA and it had 360 seats. The parking supply ratios 92 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA and 0.34 spaces per seat. Peak parking demand occurred 12:00 and 1:00 p.m. and was 10.74 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA and 0.33 vehicles per seat. V scattered among several weekdays. Friday had the largest peak weekday parking demand. rban family restaurants, Friday peak parking demand was approximately 20 percent higher than parking demand for other weekdays. For suburban bar/lounge restaurants, the Friday parking rates were approximately 80 percent higher than for other weekdays. Engineers [ 3151 Parking Generation, 4th Edition Land Use: 932 High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant The following tables present the time -of -day distribution for the variation in parking demand x' course of the weekday. The data represent a combination of urban and rural study sites. 8eaed ort Nish%les Wbekafay p+er lOOf► s ix GFA .. �'•.. duly: at a Rea Hour Beginning Percent of Number of Percent of Numb Percent of Peak Period Data Points* Peak Period Dta P 12:00-4:00 a.m. _ 0 — 5:00 a.m. 9 1 _ 5:00 a.m. 6:00 a.m. 26 4 — 0 7:00 a.m. 44 5 — 0 8:00 a.m. 57 8 _ 0 9:00 a.m. 76 9 5 0 10:00 a.m. 85 9 7 1 11:00 a.m. 92 11 16 1 12:00 p.m. 100 12 49 1 1 1:00 .m. 90 11 39 1 2:00 P.m. 53 12 27 1 3:00 .m. 42 11 19 1 4:00 p.m. 42 12 22 1 5:00 P.M. 76 11 60 5 6:00 p,m. 83 12 94 5 7:00 p.m. 63 10 100 5 8:00 p.m. 66 10 81 5 9:00 . m. 63 7 84 1 10:00 P.M. 48 5 _ 10:00 P.M. 11:00 .m. * 44 2 — 0 0 Subset of database 3 - 0 * Subset of database Basal an Vehicles Sa#urdayat'a Saturday at a Restaurant per 1j'000 sq: !i. GFA Famfl Restaur nt with Bar or Lodno Hour Beginning Percent of Number of Percent of Number of 12:00-4:00 a.m. Peak Period Data Points* Peak Period Data Points* 5:00 a.m. - 0 - 0 6:00 a.m. 20 4 0 7:00 a.m. 30 5 _ 0 8:00 a.m. 51 7 - - 0 9:00 a.m. 73 9 5 0 10:00 a.m. 94 10 7 1 1 11:00 a.m. 100 10 20 1 12:00 .m. g3 11 41 1 1:00 . M. 84 10 53 1 2:00 .m. fi3 11 46 1 3:00 . m. 39 10 38 1 4:00 M. 48 11 63 1 5:00 M. 55 11 80 1 6:00 . m. 63 11 100 1 7:00 .m. 74 11 93 1 8:00 M. 55 11 70 1 9:00 P.M. 39 9 33 1 10:00 P.M. 40 8 9 1 11:00 P.M. 53 3 - 0 * Subset of database Institute of Transportation Engineers [ 3161 Parking Generation, 4th Edition Land Use: 9132 High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant Additional Data The National Restaurant Association identifies August as the most popular month to eat out and Saturday as the most popular day of the week for dining out. Monthly parking variation cannot be derived from the available data. However, the following full-service restaurant sales information (averaged for the period 1999 through 2008 from the U.S. Census) is provided as a reference to peak month activity. The full-service restaurants that comprise the U.S. Census data set may not have the same land use characteristics as sites contained in the ITE Parking Generation database for this land use. Full -Service Restaurant Sales Variation Data Month RercentIRAVer4i99 Month Fall: Service Restauran# Sales % January 91 February 91 March 101 April 99 May 104 June 103 July 105 August 106 September 99 October 102 November 97 December 104 SOURCE: Unadjusted Estimates of Monthly Retail and Food Services Sales by Kind of Business: 1999-2008. Monthly Retail Service Branch, U.S. Census. August 2009, NAICS Code 722. (www.census.gov/mrts/www/mrts.html) Study Sites/Years ;High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant without Bar/Lounge (Family Restaurant) mier City, LA (1978); Cupertino, CA (1982); Sunnyvale, CA (1982); Anaheim, CA (1983); Orange, CA 83); Tustin, CA (1983); Anaheim, CA (1984), Dewitt, NY (1984); Fayetteville, NY (1984); Naugatuck, (1984); Syracuse, NY (1984); Waterbury, CT (1984); Glenview, IL (1986); Oklahoma City, OK (1986); ahoma City, OK (1987); Syracuse, NY (1987); Syracuse, NY (1988); Seattle, WA (1999); Clearwater, (2001); Tampa, FL (2001); Tampa, FL (2002); Carpentersville, IL (2003), Indianapolis, IN (2003); Long ich, CA (2003); Los Angeles, CA (2003); Mooresville, IN (2003); Oak Lawn, IL (2003); Pasadena, CA 03), Santa Monica, CA (2003); Springfield, PA (2003); Tampa, CA (2003) Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant with Bar/Lounge arton, OR (1994); Hillsboro, OR (1994); Lake Oswego, OR (1994); Portland, OR (1994); Tampa, FL .2002); Los Angeles, CA (2003); Bedford Park, IL (2003); Burbank, CA (2003); Burbank, IL (2003); Dundee, IL (2003); Greenwood, IN (2003); Indianapolis, IN (2003); Andover, MA (2003); Methuen, 003); West Norriton, PA (2003); Wayne, PA (2003) Restaurant Association. www.restaurant.org/aboutus/fags.cfm Ttansportation Engineers "" ,, { 3171 Parking Generation, 4th Edition Land Use: 932 High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaura Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. 1,000 sq, ft, GFA<" On a: Saturday Land Use Code Subset: Restaurant with Bar or Lounge Location: Suburban Statistic Peak Period Dei anif Peak Period 6:00-9:00 .m. Number of Study Sites 7 Average Size of Study Sites 7,700 sq. ft. GFA, . Average Peak Period Parkin_g Demand 16.30 vehicles per 1,000 sq, ft. GFA Standard Deviation 4.00 Coefficient of Variation 24% Range 11.30-21.90 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GF4, 85th Percentile 20.40 vehicles per 1,000 sq, ft. GFA 33rd Percentile 14.30 vehicles per 1,000 so. ft. GFA Saturday Suburban Peak Period Parking Demand (Dar/Lounge Restaurant) Actual Data Points Institute of Transportation Engineers �� w 'M� pyrkino Generation, 4th Edition Ward 0. Hayworth 2757 Mesquite Lane Grapevine, Texas 76051 (817) 917-5043 May 10, 2016 Hon. Mayor and Council Members, Grapevine City Council Hon. Chair and Commissioners, Planning and Zoning Commission c/o Planning and Zoning Department City of Grapevine 200 S. Main Street Grapevine, Texas 76051 Re: 404 E Dallas Planned Development Application Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Commissioners: I am the current owner of five properties adjacent to the area of request in the above -referenced Zoning Case. These five properties are identified as 931 jean Street, 937 jean Street, 943 jean Street, 930 Berry Street, and 936 Berry Street. As the owner of these five adjacent properties, I am writing to you to ask you to support the requested planned development district application. The proposed development, containing restaurant/retail space and multifamily residential uses, would be beneficial to our community and specifically the rail corridor. I respectfully ask you to support this application when it comes before you for your consideration. Thank you very much. Sincerely yours, Ward 0. Hayworth IAN RUSSELL CO. Commercial Real Estate Services Ian Russell Licensed Real Estate Broker May 5, 2016 Hon. Mayor and Council Members City Council Hon. Chair and Commissioners Planning and Zoning Commission c/o Planning and Zoning Department City of Grapevine 200 S. Main Street Grapevine, Texas 76051 Re: 404 E Dallas Planned Development Application Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Commissioners: I am the general partner of VW Grapevine, Ltd.. and current owner of the property in the above - referenced Zoning Case. As the owner of this property, I am writing to you to ask you to support the requested planned development district application. This request is for the purpose of creating a Planned Development District containing restaurant/ retail space and multifamily residential uses. The current zoning of the property is Light Industrial, a zoning district that permits light manufacturing, assembly, research and wholesale activities. The property currently consists of old. metal manufacturing buildings that has been used for industrial purposes for many years. Although I am willing to sign additional leases permitting tenants to continue the light industrial use on the property, we strongly believe the proposed multi -family. restaurant, and retail uses would be more in line with the surrounding residential and commercial uses as well as the proposed rail station and transit oriented development. 'Ale believe this development would be incredibly beneficial to the City of Grapevine and to the rail corridor as it would provide connectivity to Main Street and expand upon the businesses currently flourishing in the surrounding community. 1 respectfully ask you to support this application when it comes beforeyou for your consideration. Thank you very much. Sincerely yours, VW Grapevine, Ltd Ian Russell General Partner 20869 Gleneagles Links Dr. Estero. Florida 33928-5903 (239)948-9077 Fax (239)676-9447 Cell (214) 213-9299 Email — irussellco &cMcast net SJCD, LLC May 6, 2016 Hon. Mayor and Council Members City Council Hon. Chair and Commissioners Planning and Zoning Commission c/o Planning and Zoning Department City of Grapevine 200 S. Main Street Grapevine, Texas 76051 Re: Letter in Support of 404 E Dallas Road P.D. Application Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Commissioners: I am the owner of the property located at 932 Jean Street. As an adjacent property owner to the application in question, I am writing to you to ask you to support the requested planned development district application. I believe this development containing multifamily residential uses and restaurant/retail, space would be a positive influence on the immediate area and contribute to the energy and vibrancy of our community. I respectfully ask you to support this application when it comes before you for your consideration. Thank you very much. Sincerely Managing Member SJCD, LL 932 Jean Street Grapevine, TX 76051 404 E DALLAS MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT Grapevine, TX City of Grapevine Zoning Change Information Packet May 17, 2016 TRG T A\ I S I RESIDENTIAL CROUP T R G T R I N S I C USID N`1IA1. Gl"OUP May 11, 2016 City of Grapevine 200 S. Main Street Grapevine, TX 76099 Re: 404 East Dallas Planned Development Application Dear City Council and Planning Commission Members, Thank you for your consideration of our request for 1) rezoning LI to CBD and 2) a Planned Development overlay allowing an integrated, mixed-use, transit -oriented development containing retail, restaurant, and multifamily uses. Trinsic Residential Group is a national multifamily developer, headquartered in North Texas, with a focus on developing best in class multifamily properties and operating them with an emphasis on resident satisfaction and design. Since 2011, we have developed more than 5,000 units in Texas, Arizona, and the Pacific Northwest. Approximately half of those units have been developed in the Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex. We understand the importance of this site and as such have been thoughtful in our approach while working on this specific development for more than 18 months. We have constantly improved the design through feedback from Grapevine City Staff, Grapevine Historic Preservation, neighbors, local business owners, ArchiTexas and many others. We have agreed to a partnership with the current ownership of the property, who will maintain an ownership interest in the new development. We have met with the immediate neighbors and have received many letters of support attached to this zoning application. We recognize the great potential this future rail corridor holds and we are excited to bring more than a year and a half of planning before you for your consideration. Location 1116 5116 11V1115 Z LQ11Q.5 tcuau Just east or jean street and is a few hundred feet north of the Community REC, adjacent to the east of Grapevine Craft Brewery and the future TRE Station, and just south of historic downtown Grapevine. With such close proximity to these popular community amenities, special care was taken throughout design to create a development that is walkable bikable and fitting of the urban fabric that will unite the current and future build out of this area. It is our belief that this development will help to create a critical mass in this area that is needed to support a walkable, mixed-use district and provide customers for nearby businesses. Site Plan i, 11V u 01 ®= � e q i� The site plan consists of multifamily residential and retail/restaurant space contained in two blocks separated by Berry Street, each with self-sufficient parking structures. The restaurant/retail space will total approximately 11,500 square feet of ground floor space facing Jean Street to integrate with the brewery and future development of the district. The restaurant/retail will be two-story volume resulting in approximately 20 feet of clear height, creating an open and inviting atmosphere for future users. The depth of the restaurant/retail space is approximately 70 feet, a preferable and efficient depth for retail/restaurant spaces. We have received strong interest from potential restaurant users with one letter of intent received for half of the space. The multifamily residential totals 65 units in Building A and 185 units in Building B and will be high-quality, luxury apartment rentals consisting of one and two-bedroom units. Unit finishes will be high end, including open concept floor plans, granite countertops with backsplash, and stainless steel appliances. Community amenities will include a public dog park, public green, connection to the adjacent trail, resort -style pool, community outdoor patio with pool views, clubroom, large fitness center, shared resident terrace, and a community office space that can be used to hold meetings when working from home. Connectivity The site plan allows for easy and natural pedestrian circulation, highlighted by a treed streetscape, pole lights, benches, bike racks, and open public gathering areas along Jean, Berry, and Dallas. This development will prove to be an important link between the City's trail to the southeast and the future rail station to the northwest. 404 East Dallas will maintain the integrity of the urban street grid by activating abandoned Berry Street through the center of the development, with the intent of creating a pleasing scale and efficient circulation. See street section examples. This development will set the tone for the new Dallas Road TRE Rail Corridor to contain connected, pedestrian - friendly, mixed-use, high-quality, energetic developments. First floor units will be accessible from the street, emphasizing the urban landscape and connectivity. Architecture The development has been designed with historical intent in order to contribute to the existing architecture in Grapevine and more importantly the Dallas Road TRE Rail Corridor. ArchiTexas contributed to the design in a consulting role and more information on the design intent can be found in their memo titled "Basis of Design" which can be found in the zoning package. Target Market The target market for the project is young -to -middle aged professionals that work nearby in addition to empty nesters that are looking to downsize but still seek quality and residence in Grapevine. These demographic groups are typically active members of the community and will likely frequent the rail station for transportation as well as enjoy the amenities that this development and the City of Grapevine have to offer. Unit Finishes Unit finishes will be in the top tier of multifamily rentals across the state. They will include granite countertops in the kitchen and baths, 48" upper cabinets, Energy Star stainless steel appliances, built- in refrigerator, hard surfaced flooring in the kitchen and living areas, walk in closets with wood shelving, upgraded plumbing and lighting fixtures and more. Photos of our one of our representative past developments are below: 4b �o Ablik -.Ask&- A JR. 3100NIONI7('I:I-I.OAVI:NLJE,SIJI'II:900,I)ALI.AS,I'X75205 OFFICE 214,462.7190 1 FAX 214.468.4114 Page 6 Amenities The project will be amenity rich, with both public and private amenities. A summary of these amenities are below: • Public Dog Park: A heavily landscaped dog park will be available at the south end of the development just off of the trail. A dog park is a key amenity with today's renter demographic and should help activate the trail. • Resort -Style Pool: A resort -style pool will be featured in the main residential courtyard. The pool will feature a sunning ledge as well as cabanas. The pool area will have a grilling area with seating, string lights, as well as an amenity lawn to play outdoor games and other activities • Club Room: A club room will be locatf feature a full serving kitchen, communi sitting area. • Leasing Center: The leasing center wil and will include a hotel -style concierge high-end designer finishes. • Outdoor Patio: Next to the pool cou. outdoor patio complete with serving bai • Fitness Center: The property will contain a state of the art fitness center including cardio machines and weights for use by residents. The fitness center is located on Dallas Road and is behind storefront glass overlooking the street. Home Office: A home office amenity will be available for use by residents. This office will have store front on Dallas Road and will allow residents working from home, to hold meetings on site. This amenity will cater to the working professional segment of our target demographic. Resident Amenity Terrace: An amenity terrace on top of the retail overlooking Jean Street and will be available to residents. This terrace will include a trellis, grills, and sitting area. Public Green: A public green area will be located on the south side of the retail facing Jean Street. This amenity will feature landscaping, a fountain, sitting areas. and bike racks. • Trail Connection: The property is adjacent to a trail that runs along the western and southern boundaries of the site. We are proposing connection points to the trail to allow nenity. • Public Parking: 44 public spaces will be provided in this development to service surrounding businesses and public amenities, including the trail. Tax and School Analysis Current Develovment 2015 Ad Valorem Value Improvements: $1,105,759 B.P.P. $2,662,425 Total $3,768,184 Sales Tax none Proposed Development Estimated Ad Valorem Improvements: $36,000,000 Rest. Only B.P.P. $ 550,000 Total $36,550,000 Ann. Restaurant Sales: $350/sq. ft.' $4,019,700 Tax Gain Ad Valorem Value + $32,781,816 Taxable Sales Total Annual City Tax Gain TOTAL ANNUAL LOCAL GAIN Schoollmpact x 2015 City tax rate: $107,667.61 x 2% City rate 80,394.00 $188,061.61 x 2015 ISD rate $432,751.75 x County rate 86,543.99 x JPS Health rate 74,708.78 x TCCC rate 49,008.81 $831,074.94 The estimated number of students to be generated from this development is five. The increased ISD tax revenue generated by this development is $432,752 which results in approximately $86,500 of ISD tax revenue per student. The estimated number of students is based on the Resort at 925 Main ' Within industry range for both Moderate profit full service or Moderate profit limited service restaurants from 2014 Baker Tilly materials found online nascu un approximation of nuilamg occupancy The proposed development provides 609 spaces, 44 more than the proposed requirement. These extra 44 spaces will be public parking available for neighboring area uses such as the trail and businesses in an effort to help the area continue to expand and grow. We humbly request for your approval of this development. Renderings of the project can be found on the following pages. Sincerely, H�N Adam Brown 214-462-7181 abrown@trinsicres.com Trinsic Acquisition Company, LLC Based Ordinance DeShazo PD Requirement Reguirement Recommendation Multifamily 500 (2.Ox per unit) 350 (1.4x per unit, 1.1x 375 (1.5x per unit, 1.2x per bedroom) per bedroom) Restaurant/Retail 155 (1 per 3 occupants*) 189 (1 space per 61sf) 189 (1 space per 61sf) Total a�T 1 655 540 565 nascu un approximation of nuilamg occupancy The proposed development provides 609 spaces, 44 more than the proposed requirement. These extra 44 spaces will be public parking available for neighboring area uses such as the trail and businesses in an effort to help the area continue to expand and grow. We humbly request for your approval of this development. Renderings of the project can be found on the following pages. Sincerely, H�N Adam Brown 214-462-7181 abrown@trinsicres.com Trinsic Acquisition Company, LLC where currently five students are enrolled in Grapevine Colleyville ISD2. 925 Main will have a similar renter demographic to the proposed development and is 251 units. Variances We are requesting three deviations from Grapevine's zoning ordinance, detailed below: SECTION REGULATION PROPOSED DEVATION 28 Permitted Uses Add Multifamily Use 28 Height Allow 4 -Stories up to 70' 56 Off -Street Parking Detailed below Multifamily Use: It is our belief that multifamily residents will enhance the area by adding to its vibrancy and promoting walkability while supporting the restaurant/retail users in this development and the surrounding Dallas Road TRE Rail Corridor and downtown area. The target market of these residents is detailed above. Height: Increased height allows the development to activate abandoned Berry Street rather than building over it and increasing circulation in the area while creating a more pleasing scale. Additionally, the architectural details of the elevations and site plan should make the proposed scale feel appropriate and welcoming. Offstreet Parking: Sufficient parking is critical to a mixed-use development such as this one. Recognizing this, we engaged DeShazo Group, Inc., a third party consulting group specializing in parking analysis, to analyze the parking needed for this specific development. DeShazo's recommendation for the multifamily component of this development is based on the number of bedrooms (instead of units) and is equal to 1.1 spaces per bedroom which equates to 1.4 spaces per unit. This recommendation is based on the proposed unit mix of 76% one bedrooms / efficiencies and 24% two bedrooms as well as historical parking data collected by DeShazo. It should be noted that no three bedroom units are contemplated in this development. This recommendation is consistent with our experience developing, owning, and managing other recent, similar developments in the DFW area. However, to add more assurance that parking is sufficient, we propose a 1.5 space per unit PD parking requirement. DeShazo's recommendation for restaurant parking actually results in an increase to the number of parking spaces required compared to Grapevine's parking ordinance. DeShazo's retail/restaurant recommendation is 1 space per 61sf and is based on their historic studies of restaurant parking demand in DFW. We propose using DeShazo's restaurant recommendation for the PD requirement even though it is more stringent than the base code. The following chart details the parking deviation request: 2 Data per Grapevine Colleyville ISD for the 2016 school year.