Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence Page 1 of 1 Jennifer Prochazka - Re: South Hampton Rezoning From: "Phyllis Hobson" To: "Jennifer Prochazka" Date: 5/8/2008 11:17 AM Subject: Re: South Hampton Rezoning jennifer: please remove the South Hampton zoning request from this evening's City Council meeting. Thank you. Phyllis Hobson Developer Original Message From: Jennifer Prochazka To: phyjlis@homefinderrealtyinc.com Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:48 AM Subject: South Hampton Rezoning Good Morning Phyllis, From our conversation this morning, I understand that you wish to remove the South Hampton rezoning request from this evening's City Council meeting. Please send me a request to pull the item in writing. Thanks! Jennifer Prochazka, AICP Senior Planner Dept. of Planning & Development Services City of College Station tel.: 979.764.3570 fax: 979.764.3496 www.cstx.gov College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. file://C:ADocuments and Settings\jprochazka\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4822E157Cit... 5/9/2008 Background Information NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Commission Hearing Date: April 17, 2008 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: May 8, 2008 The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station's Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing: None Property owner notices mailed: 13 Contacts in support: None Contacts in opposition: 11 Inquiry contacts: 2 ADJACENT LAND USES Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use Single-Family Low Single-Family Low North Density A-O Density(Nantucket Subdivision) Single-Family Medium Single-Family Medium South Density PDD Density (South Hampton Subdivision) East Freeway - State Highway 6 Single-Family Medium Single-Family Medium West Density R-1 Density (Nantucket Subdivision) DEVELOPMENT HISTORY Annexation: 1996 Zoning: A-O to PDD Planned Development District in 2004. The Concept Plan requires a 40-foot buffer at the rear of all lots that back up to Nantucket Drive. Fences, if constructed, are permitted only on the home side of the buffer (not on the street side). Final Plat: South Hampton Subdivision, Phase 2 Site development: Single-family homes have been constructed on several of the lots 82 i SOUTH HAMPTON PH 2 (PDD) 08-00500059 This item is to amend the existing Planned Development District zoning on 10 lots in the South Hampton Subdivision in order to alter the buffer fence requirements included in that PDD. The uses, number of lots are not proposed to change. The proposed amendment affects the required 40-foot buffer adjacent to Nantucket Drive, at the rear of the lots on Ebbtide Cove. The PDD currently requires that if a fence be placed in the rear yard, it be located on the home side of the buffer (not the street side). The applicant has requested to allow black steel fencing (as shown in the pictures on the screen) on the street side of the buffer at the rear of the properties and cedar board fencing running along the side lot lines. This property and the PDD zoning have a little bit of history, so I am going to walk you through some of it...to complicate things, our ordinance regarding PDDs have also changed several times during this time period... Initially, PDD zoning was approved on the property in 1997. At that time, restrictions were included in the actual ordinance that rezoned the property that was adopted by the City Council. The zoning approved at that time included the fencing requirement that is identical to the existing restriction. The PDD expired in 2003. The applicant requested to re-instate the PDD zoning in 2004. Our regulations regarding PDDs in 2004 required that the City Council approved only the land uses and that the restrictions and modifications be included on the Concept Plan and be approved by the Design Review Board. Since then, the PDD rules have again changed giving final authority of the concept plan and zoning restrictions to the City Council. So, in order for the Concept plan to be amended, the Council must amend the PDD zoning. Since the original restrictions were put in place in 1997, our knowledge of the reasoning behind the restrictions is limited. Meeting minutes are retained, but are what we refer to as "action only" minutes. Audio records are destroyed after 5 years. Based on the concerns expressed by area property owners at the time of the original rezoning hearings (based on meeting minutes), it appears Planning &Zoning Commission Page 1 of 2 April 17, 2008 that the intent of the decision by the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council to include the buffer fencing requirement was to ensure that a natural buffer remain in order to preserve the character of Nantucket. The buffer acts as a transition from low density residential to medium density residential. Staff has a concern with the fencing of the buffer by individual property owners because continued maintenance and preservation of the buffer in its "natural" state may be compromised... because property owners begin to feel as the buffer is a part of their backyard and that they can do with it as they wish. Ne!s't /1�'e port I stated that the Nantucket Preservation ssociation,h Y*q ueste dditional time to consider the proposal and for unified ,,position. This morning we received a resolution from the Preservation Association stating that the majority of the residents in Nantucket are against the proposal...We have also received this week a petition signed by South Hampton, Nantucket and Cove of Nantucket residents stating that they are in favor of the new fencing. Because the buffer and fencing standards were developed as a means to transition from low density to medium density residential uses and retain the rural character of Nantucket, and were proposed in order to secure the medium density PDD zoning, staff recommends denial of the request. In addition, staff, again, has concerns about continued maintenance and preservation of the buffer if it is fenced. *Approximately 20 phone calls and 5 emails against the request — with callers stating aesthetics and a loss of rural character as concerns. I have received 4 phone calls in favor stating aesthetics and safety as their reasoning. Planning&Zoning Commission Page 2 of 2 April 17, 2008 NANTUCKET PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION March 27,2008 College Station Planning and Zoning Ms Jennifer Prochazka Re;Re-plating/re-zoning plan of Phyllis Hobson Dear P& Z The Nantucket Preservation Association(NPA)is concerned about the Black Metal Fence along the South side of Nantucket Dr. in the new South Hampton Subdivision,which abuts Nantucket. The concern centers upon the effect the rezoning of the property will have on the property values and ambiance of Nantucket if this fencing is allowed to continue as it currently exists. The Board of Directors of NPA is in the process of presenting a questionnaire to its property owners asking for their opinion on this issue.The Board does not have sufficient information to bring forward a recommendation as of this date. The preliminary response received to the Board's recommendations indicates Nantucket property owners are overwhelmingly against the Black Metal Fence and any actions that will allow it to be expanded or continue in its present form.The Board does not anticipate a recommendation that will involve re-plating to include the Black Fence or the abutting wood fencing as they current exist. The Board is in the process of gathering as much information as possible from its property owners so that it may give a complete picture of the feelings of the community. Additionally,the Board anticipates further discussions with developer Phyllis Hopson in the hope of arriving at an amicable solution.The Board is working toward the goal of have a"position paper"to present to the P&Z within the next 30 days. 1 �^ / Jim Maness -President NPA 60 PETITION We, The Cove of Nantucket Homeowners, approve of the black steel fencing being used down Nantucket Drive. It has been suggested that two 8' sections of the cedar fence now abutting the steel fence could be removed and replaced with the black steel fence. We have no objections to that as well. Name Address Date 1. j--•-7.•/A--44-franv--) /7s,Z .4-J ;1- IL- Q 2 . O ,-,^.' /-70 � , .� '-'1 d 3 - i� / 6-4-A,, !! , , -il "O 5 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. . 10. H. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. f . , PETITION We, the Nantucket Homeowners, approve of the black steel fencing being used down Nantucket Drive. It has been suggested that two 8' sections of the cedar fence now abutting the steel fence could be removed and replaced with the black steel fence. We have no objections to that as well. Name Address Date 1. 4-vvt- ,:---.0k l a/s' / et� 'A. f At . s.44 o CJ / , l' , 7vvv , t 2, ,� � l , / 3. /Id , ' 1/3.46 /k/-44),44s.e *1- ----oge 4. ‘/ /SOD i ,l y.G� .� Off' 5. "24.-)4.Q✓ ', a,, 4/4 s"-? 5 'I..�►.�„Q z......h e.A yA��o 8' 6. . 7 •"/ .:0..7 . . t/ c- 1, :/, C.„)-Q_____ -/7-5.-/c) 8` 7. __;21-A--.K..., Abe 41424".-.1"-- 5 _ / i . 5.--A2 y ,o ' 8. 1�_, . /1717 L.�t�o*�- a.. i cS o. r pYos ( /fie/? //4 ie .rs i_ z r°1e 2 2 9. �. �. , /717 J�lah�Ers/ ) 4-5-os) 10. ..21• GCcufAtterh, 1 t k 1A4 AGA-12-44-4. -1- R4- ki. s o 8 11. iiiii, .t, /6/jt- Tb1.h ic,( . 1--®S-oce 12. / !`!:.i/%%/- t.) 4504 h/Vevc�o 7-65-DP /� 13. ee_at .., ,5-16sa y 7irerLae. fj OF • 5 '- s-s-c SA•vpP/ proe c.covE V ofitiP 15. AIV'LTA C, (42 -c -6--vt, 54 ovcD 9(p E•e. to i d/or 1, // moi' ., i 0 /,5,: 1 ef o`?''���.e Name Address Date 18. te=e. a DT �7 - ?Qe 19. 1 •2_ , 1 '=" siL D ,ice '/ PrP) / 22. / rCbn-6L--7 /VV/S /`c #'"(j________ __/—— 10-af 23.1' 1 Aa. i-Yt /L/1. /4 69 /hiers f"err 4// / 24. 1.) c'\. ��'0,"'•,, 4' i 2,'6 3 25. f f � '3�3 Se ►s; `-1 -rZ " 6Z 1 26. 1e etAAL ; �� Q,— S ?5 kctrhi IPA L "7 2 -4- 1 ,� j ,/ 27. `V of 73tcv.,4 4 Kf4,‘✓, L —/2 --a, -- 28. O�28. ..e/i/147Ai ' / /7171 ,. $17 ..:/f-.00y 29. �///ter: , _/� ro2S .r_ / l/ /3 0$ .ti N 30. -2! 1/ 31. )'5Z 0 p.qi- re-. 411,Ar'S 32. - 4-A16i a- la / �L �-- -) YA °4 33. S g / Com. a 54Ni i- Cv. 54//3A$ 1 34,,h / -a- 1 _ ! (/ . _ I /I a. . o 0Q J J 35. / ." /� ��7 7 /— 0r 36. / _ �.f' 4.t0 ivQ�cW�c aA7 �/� /41 (3 o, / ii • jj.41,„.. Z/ Aillti►— A.� 17.Ki.� / � 3: ' AWA AKklA/41 y�(0 12,67.4 16Mil (0v4 40 tf 04; 4. Name Address Date „. Je, BIAA,444 Lt4 o Pelt gc:v4- lq/0 40. /d C f:er1/4d/Q;- l 41. A711 /�v/4 air if &Ve �f lvr 42.��1f/1/‘G'%/�/� 4 - gore— /✓7/1 43. //1' i ' _ , - - Z �� /5, 44. / P/ 0.5", 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. /// . PETITION We, the South Hampton Homeowners, approve of the black steel fencing being used down Nantucket Drive. It has been suggested that two 8' sections of the cedar fence now abutting the steel fence could be removed and replaced with the black steel fence. We have no objections to that as well. Name Address Date 1. AA,' /z w ilatv ev / 3 6 2. I 0-0 61 ! CU 1---5'0Y 'i 3. /7/0 � ' A / i 2 1 b tci 1 r1/ D l' /Pr r r LI" 5 " D 4. /a7// a//4/a/7/ (/7 -/52 AO 5. -/ a iS W 'i' ' 1- a , '- 6 -ei /Z07C' Ji Adr(ff (ve 4/--S-0Y J40/3 /41-01,11e-e5 �Dt,4.e `�--S-dam 8. /A low �.: v11.1 Se-t 6/3 C f., q_ s-o F 9. / 4/ r ,„ "4 -4-e. 5 , V-S D) 10r.!! 4. . 6' 0 drig1'/ ba-e__ '-/- 5-Dq 1 � / L /z y 67).(7 7? c4.6--,-,0 Be /10I I f All A .il ' P 4/ I . IL 1 A 4 A A . 0.4 Ikil Cit -4_-____-_-,01 13. E ( J/ /21 / E61gTi (V, 1 ,_. 4. 4 14. // i / / / d &'J '/ `D6- Øg15. ._ 12.0WirCV_ tt (Uri (o--fl 17. Il/ 0-0 ( YV 1 O 1-t' ,, Name Address Date 18. (2 w.441/1 . 1216, tAtia, w 04-6 o 19.1 /�y //L// ,/S � - , -6g' AINSILVIIP 120. � L�i A' ,,''' ,\ ( An 21. ,_1 i �� �� 22. �f <%C/IL 101P Z I fr-aN , ' 4 & -. AO • 23. #A gIA • ( 112--DS &ez-n Li--10 - 0 24. 7ild4c--- ii7J011e /02-o 3 ee4 col- II-(P -off 25. /kg_ /Z 0 600,0tir— y -(< & 26. 5Q (- / Oi ill- w vt.t i2a) a.:0-c .- Li- 4 • ,* O, 27.�txiv 01.1- &cc4c ay. 4/@/06 28. c P,) ). ()K.) i u oo �1le'� —.(. 29. 4t.,S / , mu exetco-g) '/-6 -0 30. loci er I201-1. Bacon - (0 - M 31. Eric Gokei 17b deacon Li-- c0 - 08 32. WO tP / 2-01 ESA 0-7r 4-6 -ok 33/1 ,' OW /Ae, .4c4i c r yG-o S n 34. L' /* " :7, ek /VV/ �2i4k- `?, 7-15S) 35. . - _-.....A l-. '7 ' -1A' , / -/--7- :-/ 977,pe 36. // rl.C. Lf� 4 _fa?"� s"): / G 9'.-. 37. Z /'�—,.� _ f-S 38. Ye21-e-t-c-i_ i>A/e- /3. -t-(-147-d-ek,bi?,c EA e-i/e VS Name Address Date 39. ; _ :�� '- . .i... , .• . '.c `o ,'- 2.__P s:' 40. ed5,--- --2,,_ /,/- 134-6:-L-45,- .,__5-,r.c,,te' eff,-- ,.;/:- 7-1'.° 41. 774_ ,Ide 1 d>', iLri AL,e_ --,-.0_,,,,:e, -, ..o. 17 iMIP,f ♦moi AD Z6b4 / 7-d 43., _ii ri' A_At/7 . 7/ _, - A' .- -- .g 44i�� , /Afat1 '/ d i ' 17, ��� - 8 iii 47. _ '- t'f'�.�� f 1 fI/ 44- /I -b� 4 i°'44 VIVE‘AVIIII VIOL' ----; ,' .e 4 -//- e3X 49. f . 41,4_---� ) L2-1 T,r v-vJ Cv 9 / II/ O 50. / / ( 62 I V ��� 2 Cv 4_/( 7,0s, 51../,cam Se.... ..e.7t )moi 3 �. 4-I/ -off 52. IC/4, h .--• 12-. b /r 4d 4.. ,. k,"Cie -/.2_op 54. 126►Z- 146031 iite Cc-, LI 1) 2,1 et 55. . , t)t t.e (60S l `f D2 641121°3 56. (a�su� 1 2 !1 w;nc_ri FI- co . dLf %12/05l 57. 0714,,A11/71/7 /2/2 fy-c �� / 0? 58. • n 4kY 59. Vg 7L/./c// 71 it ' / . /0 X7,-7',2/49Ke' //,‘-/,� Name Address Date 61. 1i i _62. // / 63. / i G G>' r% 64. X/i ;�l 1.-X74' /1,1 er 7: !tee C .s. 77t�4SG / 65. 1663C1'wn erti Pr iV'c o "i tc/#r 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. Single-Family Medium Density and Single-Family Low Density on the Land Use Plan and are generally developed as such. During the development of the existing PDD zoning, the buffer and fencing standards were required to create a transition from low density residential to medium density residential. 3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment: The uses permitted by the PDD zoning include single-family residential lots, buffers and landscape reserves. The proposed amendment affects the required 40-foot buffer adjacent to Nantucket Drive, at the rear of the lots on Ebbtide Cove. The PDD currently requires that if a fence be placed in the rear yard, it be located on the home side of the buffer(not the street side). The applicant has requested that black steel fences be permitted along Nantucket Drive with wood board fences running perpendicular along the side lot lines. Based on the concerns expressed by area property owners at the time of the original rezoning hearings (based on meeting minutes), it appears that the intent of the decision by the Planning &Zoning Commission and the City Council to include the buffer fencing requirement was to ensure that a natural buffer remain in order to preserve the character of Nantucket. If the buffer is permitted to be fenced by individual property owners, continued maintenance and preservation of the buffer in its "natural" state may be compromised. Staff believes that the proposed fencing is not appropriate in this area and will detract from the natural buffer permitted by the district. 4. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: The existing buffer fencing requirement is suitable for the property. 5. Marketability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: It is unknown if the marketability of the property will be affected by the proposed change to the buffer fencing requirements. 6. Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: Infrastructure for the site is available and adequate. Since the permitted uses will not change, the need for infrastructure will not change. The proposed amendment to the buffer fence requirements are not affected by the availability of infrastructure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Nantucket residents have expressed concerns about the proposed fencing standards and the Nantucket Preservation Association has requested additional time to consider the proposal and form a unified position (please see attached letter). Because the buffer and fencing standards were developed as a means to transition from low density to medium density residential uses and retain the rural character of Nantucket, and were proposed in order to secure the medium density PDD zoning, staff recommends denial of the request. SUPPORTING MATERIALS 1. Application 2. Letter from the Nantucket Preservation Association Planning&Zoning Commission Page 5 of 6 April 17,2008 53 PROPERTY OWNER'S IN'FORMA t,..'N(OWNER(O6 OF 6-Lot 6, Block 4): Name(s) , i4( tx V'S C • K(e. !( {ler) Street Address ( 2 ! ' ,(J'TO F cc)V City C.-- Y ' State ( K Zip Code $4 S _._.... E-Mail Address ,:of . op _. • Phone Number gig - l 'c,-3 d'�, Fax Number Conveyed to owner by deed,dated and recorded to Volume , Page of the Brazos County Deed Records. SIGNATURE: .`' i4 � > - DATE: / /0/, 58 Please note that a "complete site plan" must be submitted to Planning & Development Services for a formal review after the "concept plan" has been approved by the City Council prior to the issuance of a building permit—except for single-family development. The applicant has prepared this application and supporting information and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true and correct. IF APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, APPLICATION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A POWER OF ATTORNEY STATEMENT FROM THE OWNER. Refer to Sheet 2 for Owners'signatures Signature of owner or applicant Date t 56 3. Rezoning map (provided in packet) 4. Concept Plan (provided in packet) Planning&Zoning Commission Page 6 of 6 April 17,2008 54 CIVIL DEVELOPMENT, Ltd.* CIVIL ENGINEERING&DESIGN-BUILD SERVICES TRANSMITTAL Date: March 31, 2008 To: Jennifer Prochazka Development Services City of College Station From: Joe Schultz, P.E. Civil Development, Ltd. P.O. Box 11929 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone: (979) 764-7743 Subject: Revised Concept Plan South Hampton Subdivision, Phase 2 College Station, Texas Remarks: Attached are 19-11x17 copies and full-sized copy of the revised Concept Plan for the above-referenced project. Also attached is our Response to Staff Review Comments No. 1, as well as information about the proposed fence material. Let me know if you need anything else or have any questions. -59 -D� q 9)0 AC/ Page 1 of 2 • Phyllis Hobson From: "David Wiltschko"<davewilt@gmail.com> To: "Gerald Atmar<geral datmar@verizon.net>;"Anne Janne"<a janne@tamu.edu>; "Andi Maceo" <amaceo@aol.com>;"Anita Donaho"<sevenoaks@suddenlink.net>;"Pat Atmar" <geraldatrnar@verizon.net>;"Janie harris"<bl-harris@tamu.edu>;"Brenda Clarke" <brenacm suddenlinknet>;"Becky Daniels"<becky.daniels@suddenlinknet>; "Cheryl Brown" <cheryl willatmsn.com>;"Becky Schuler"<spirithomes@suddenlink.net>;"Danny Ballard" <dannyb@tamu.edu>;"Shirley Button"<slbutton@suddenlink.net>; "Nanci Cortiaus" <bobnanc ortiaus@hotmail.00m>;"Sherry Brown"<sherrybrown69@hotmail_oom>;"Sherry Bame" <sbame@tamu.edu>;"Janie Harris"<bl-harris©tamu.edu>;"Rosemary Binova" <rmbjp@verizon.net>;"Cecivon Garcia"<cecivong@yahoo.com>;"Cokie Klckhilb" <cokie@makhomedesign_com>;"Gloria Crenshaw"<crenco@verizon.net>;"Cora Painter" <Ilpainter@verizon.net>;"Patricia Chaplupsky"<chalupsky@suddeniinknet>;"Debbie Deitering" <debbiedeit@suddenlinknet>;"Diane Wells"<dwelts@oar.tamu.edu>;"Donna Fades" <ffaries@cvm.tamu.edu>;*Oda Lazcano"<eldalazcano@yahoo.00m>;"Gilley Karen" <KAGiIIey@aol.com>;<herbe t-booker@cis-gw.tamu.edu>; "Helen King" <hking121@suddenhnknet>;"Jackie Booker"<hlb@tamu.com>;"Janet Higgins" <jhiggins txcyber.com>;"Susan Hardin"<shardin@visigenbio.com>;"Penny Holmes" <pjholmes@suddenlink.net>;"Karen Carroll-Webb"<camoil@tamu.edu>; <ksulik@sheridanexperience.00m>; <lumpee@suddenlinknet>; "Karen Weir" < . com>;"Zlvko Nicolov"<nicolov_zn@msn.com>;"Nadia Nikolov" <NtKOLOVN_Z@suddenlinknet>;"Pam Rosynek"<ptr@mail.chem.tamu.edu>;"Karen Pitts" <kap.tx@suddenlinknet>;"Pat Kegen"<WindstarPk@aol.com>;"Pat Wood" <woodypat@yahoo.com>;"Joan Rabins"<jr bins@ver¢on.net>;"Lynn Thibodeaux" <T.thibodea@verizon.net>;"Marie Wolfe"<me wolfe©yahoo.com>;"Mary Weatherl" <m.weatherl@verizon.net>;"Charlie&Patsy"<boyd195464@cs.com>;"Charles&Shirley" <Cakins123@aol.com>;"Brenda Watson"<Brenda511 @txcyber.com>;"Sonny&Linda Warren" <Lw1508@aol.com>;"Larry Weiman&Sandy Jabcobson"<sjiegaleagle@hotmail.com>;"Ward V Wells"<ward-wells@tarrui.edu> Sent Thursday,March 06,2008 10:41 PM Subject: Nantucket Dr. Fence Neighbors: We have just posted the following message on the website(http://nantuckettexas.com). We are also distributing this notice to as many as possible to ensure wide dissemination.My apologies for multiple postings. Dave David Wiltschko Vice President,Nantucket Preservation Association http://nantuckettexas.com/ There was a short discussion at the annual meeting of the metal fence on the south side of Nantucket drive at the entrance to our development. The board promised to look into the matter further and did so at it's next meeting on Feb 27. Phyllis and Joe Hobson presented the current plat for that portion of the South Hampton subdivision and their plans for the future. The main points are these: • The original plat provides for a `green' buffer from the property line along Nantucket Drive to 40 feet within the each of the lots that back up onto Nantucket Drive. The deed restrictions stipulate that no building or clearing may go on in this buffer but additional planting is allowed. • By the original plat, no fence may be built in this buffer. Therefore, 3/26/2008 Page 2 of 2 the present metal fence is contrary to the plat. • The original plat allows for a fence at the edge of the 40 foot buffer on the house side (40 feet from Nantucket Drive) . The construction of the fence (style, materials, etc.) is up to the homeowner. The Hobson's wish is to amend the original plat such that the present position of the metal fence is in compliance. They represented to us that the original motivation for building the metal fence at its present location was to prevent a proliferation of wooden fences, albeit 40 feet back from right of way, along Nantucket Drive. The example of Briarcrest Drive across from WalMat was cited, although there is no buffer in that case. A plat change requires a hearing with public comment before at least the Planning and Zoning Commission and perhaps the City Council. The board asked the Hobsons whether they would be willing to remove sections of the present wooden side fences, replacing them with metal, so that the intersection of the two won't be so jarring. . They agreed to do so although we do not yet agree on the length of these sections. The board is seeking your advice. Although all of us can voice our thoughts at the public hearings, we are tending toward allowing the fence at its current location but removing sections of the wooden side fences to make both blend in. Additional plantings on one side of the iron fence or the other was discussed but no good solution came to light. But we need your advice. Interested neighbors are urged to take a look at the lots on the Nantucket Dr entrance and render an opinion to a member of the board. -->Also, look for the public hearing signs at the front entrance and attend the meeting if interested.<-- Your board members Jim Maness, President - jpturtle@uerizon.net Dave Wiltschko, Vice President - dacewiilt@amail.com Kristie Vicks, Secretary - 4vicks@verizon.net Harvey Schulz, Treasurer - aggiebear69@vahoo.com Glen Carter, Assistant Secretary/Assistant Treasurer - glen435971@aol.com 3/26/2008 Page 1 of 1 Phyllis Hobson From: "Jim and Phyllis Maness"<jpturtle@verizon.net> To: <phyllis@homefinderrealtyinc.com> Sent: Friday, March 21,2008 4:40 PM Subject: Fw: Nantucket Fence. ---Original Message— From:Jim and Phyllis Maness To: Dave Wiltschko Cc: Jim Maness ;Jeff Milburn ; Dave Wiltschko ; Harvey Schulz ;Glen Carter; Kristie Vick; Hank McQuaid ; Phyllis homefnderrealityinc.cam Sent:Fday, March 21,2008 10:05 AM Subject:Nantucket Fence. Hi Dave, Just got off the phone with Phyllis Hopson.She needs to know Board decision and recomendations before March 31.This is the date required by P&Z for her to submit recomendations from the Nantucket Board. I instructed her to give you a phone call. Please advise me of the outcome. Thanks Jim Maness 3/25/2008 Page 1 of 2 Phyllis Hobson From: "Jim and Phyllis Maness"<jpturtle@verizon.net> To: "Phyllis Hobson"<Phyllis@homefinderrealtyinc•c0m> Sent: Sunday, March 23,2008 5:44 PM Subject: Fw: Nantucket Front Entry Cmte:Conversation with Nancy Volkman FYI Jim Original Message From: "David Wiltschko" <davewilt a@?gmail.com> To: "David Wiltschko"<davecomwilt a@gmail_com>; "Karen Weir" <Motheiweir rr hotmaii.com>; "Katherine Vick" <4vicks cr verizon.net>; "Becky Daniels" <becky camels@suddenlink.net>; "Suanne Pledger" <rpledger( copper.net>; "Tommie Schulz" <misstoinmie@ahotmail.com>; "Nancy Volkman" <nvolkmanIarchmail.tamu.edu> Cc: "Jim and Phyllis Maness" <jpturtie@—verizon.net> Sent: Sunday,March 23,2008 3:23 PM Subject:Nantucket Front Entry Cmte: Conversation with Nancy Volkman >All: > Part of my homework from our last meeting was to talk to Nancy >Volkman.Nancy is a professor of Landscape Architecture at A&M and >resident of Nantucket.Her thoughts: > 1.The first priority is for us to decide on a theme.This could >include a color scheme,materials scheme(boulders,wood posts,etc.), >and/or logo. She raised the idea that we concurrently consider changing >the name of the subdivision to allow us much greater flexibility in the >design. > 2.Either after we have the theme or as a way to find one,she >strongly suggested that we hire a landscape architect to design and draw >up the hard scape,giving us several different ideas from which to >choose.We should closely coordinate our activities with the city of >College Station because they own the central island. She would be >delighted to help the committee work with whomever we hire. > 3.The fence issue is tied up with the entry way--at least the >front. She felt that having a large imposing fence on both sides of >Nantucket Drive(one option the board is considering)would make the >entrance appear like an alleyway.Instead,she suggested that we work >towards a high hedge on the left side as you enter.The board has talked >about this and was unsure whether city College Station would allow us to >proceed with planting in the right-of-way.In any case, she felt strongly >that we keep the 40"buffer that is in the current plat for the houses on >the left as you enter,not allowing the black aluminum fence that has >been illegally built there to remain. {This also is the majority opinion >of our neighbors based on the request for comment the board issued >through the website.} 3/24/2008 Page 2 of 2 > 4. She also has some thoughts concerning how to proceed with the >planning and zoning commission that I will share with the entry committee >at our next meeting. If the issue should be scheduled to come up before >the commission ahead of our meeting,I will contact everyone and share >her thoughts. >Dave >David Wiltschko >Vice President,Nantucket Preservation Association >http//nantuckettexas.con!/ 3/24/2008 NANTUCKET PRESERVATII March 27,2008 College Station Planning and Zoning Ms Jennifer Prochazka Re; Re-plating/re-zoning plan of Phyllis Hobson Dear P&Z The Nantucket Preservation Association(NPA)is concerned about the Black Metal Fence along the South side of Nantucket Dr. in the new South Hampton Subdivision,which abuts Nantucket. The concern centers upon the effect the rezoning of the property will have on the property values and ambiance of Nantucket if this fencing is allowed to continue as it currently exists. The Board of Directors of NPA is in the process of presenting a questionnaire to its property owners asking for their opinion on this issue. The Board does not have sufficient information to bring forward a recommendation as of this date. The preliminary response received to the Board's recommendations indicates Nantucket property owners are overwhelmingly against the Black Metal Fence and any actions that will allow it to be expanded or continue in its present form. The Board does not anticipate a recommendation that will involve re-plating to include the Black Fence or the abutting wood fencing as they current exist. The Board is in the process of gathering as much information as possible from its property owners so that it may give a complete picture of the feelings of the community. Additionally,the Board anticipates further discussions with developer Phyllis Hopson in the hope of arriving at an amicable solution. The Board is working toward the goal of have a"position paper"to present to the P&Z within the next 30 days. t/v% Jim Maness -President NPA TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 04/0212008 08: 55 NAME . FAX . TEL . SER.# : 000L53598800 DATE,TIME 04102 08:54 FAX NO./NAME 97036065 DURATION 00: 00:24 PAGE(S) 02 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM (114(1,1111111141 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning 6'Development Services FACSIMILE COVER SHEET 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station,Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 Date: 4--2-08 # of pages including cover: 2 If you did not receive complete fax,please call our office it mediately for a new transmittal. TO: Phyllis Hobson FAX: 979-703-6065 COMPANY: RE: South Hampton Rezoning FROM: Jennifer Prochazka PHONE: 979.764.3570 COMPANY: Planning &Development Services Griff1S411111144 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning&Development Services FACSIMILE COVER SHEET 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 Date: 4-2-08 # of pages including cover: 2 If you did not receive a complete fax,please call our office immediately for a new transmittal. TO: Phyllis Hobson FAX: 979-703-6065 COMPANY: RE: South Hampton Rezoning FROM: Jennifer Prochazka PHONE: 979.764.3570 COMPANY: Planning & Development Services REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review ❑ Replay ASAP ® FYI CITY OF COLLEGE STATION m ' .,... Planning d Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, P.O Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM March 17, 2008 TO: Nantucket, Ltd — Phyllis Hobson, via fax: 979.703.6065 FROM: Jennifer Prochazka, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: SOUTH HAMPTON PH 2 (PDD) — Rezoning Staff reviewed the above-mentioned rezoning as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address all comments and submit the following information by Monday, March 31, 2008 at 10:00 a.m., for your project to be placed on the next available Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting scheduled for April 17, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue: One (1) 24"x36" copy of the revised Concept Plan; Nineteen (19) 11"x17" copies of the revised Concept Plan; Please note that if all comments have not been addressed, your project will be not be scheduled for the P&Z agenda. Your project may be placed on a future agenda once all comments have been addressed and the appropriate re-advertising fees paid. Once your item has been scheduled for the P&Z meeting, the agenda and staff report can be accessed at the following web site on Monday the week of the P&Z meeting. http://www.cstx.gov/home/index.asp?page=2481 If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570. Attachments: Staff Review Comments pc: ECH- Elegant Living Hones, Inc. - Cindy Morris, via fax:979.823.1606 Sierra Vista Construction, via fax: 979.846.7005 Gregg Custom Homes—Sam Gregg, via fax: 979.690.1780 Clarence H. Prihoda, via regular mail: 14181 FM 2154, College Station, Tx 77845 Jaques Richard, via regular mail: 1211 Ebtide Cove, College Station, Tx 77845 Case file #08-00500059 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City,will constitute a completely new review. 1 of 2 From: "Gwfax" <Gwfax@[10.1.0.38]> To: <DGRACE@cstx.gov> Date: 3/18/2008 8:21 AM Subject: Fax sent Attachments: Fax Output File.tif GWFax successfully delivered your fax to Sam Gregg. Fax number: 9796901780 Subject: South Hampton Phase 2 Comments 1 Status: (success) Completed: 7:17:21 AM, Tuesday, March 18, 2008 Sent pages: 2 of 2 Duration: 0:01:02 Cost: 25 Account: ID: *no cid* Received CSID: From: "Gwfax" <Gwfax@[10.1.0.38]> To: <DGRACE@cstx.gov> Date: 3/18/2008 8:21 AM Subject: Fax sent Attachments: Fax Output File.tif GWFax successfully delivered your fax to Cindy Morris. Fax number: 9798231606 Subject: South Hampton Phase 2 Comments 1 Status: (success) Completed: 7:17:26 AM, Tuesday, March 18, 2008 Sent pages: 2 of 2 Duration: 0:00:59 Cost: 25 Account: ID: *no cid* Received CSID: From: "Gwfax" <Gwfax@[10.1.0.38]> To: <DGRACE@cstx.gov> Date: 3/18/2008 8:18 AM Subject: Fax sent Attachments: Fax Output File.tif GWFax successfully delivered your fax to Phyliss Hobson. Fax number: 9797036065 Subject: South Hampton Phase 2 PDD Comments 1 Status: (success) Completed: 7:13:37 AM, Tuesday, March 18, 2008 Sent pages: 2 of 2 Duration: 0:01:04 Cost: 25 Account: ID: *no cid* Received CSID: From: "Gwfax" <Gwfax@[10.1.0.38]> To: <DGRACE@cstx.gov> Date: 3/18/2008 8:23 AM Subject: Fax sent Attachments: Fax Output File.tif GWFax successfully delivered your fax to Sierra Vista Construction. Fax number: 9798467005 Subject: South Hampton Phase 2 Comments 1 Status: (success) Completed: 7:18:45 AM, Tuesday, March 18, 2008 Sent pages: 2 of 2 Duration: 0:01:04 Cost: 25 Account: ID: *no cid* Received CSID: -4,141414 CITY (3I" COLLEGE STATION REZONING REQUEST FOR SOUTH HAMPTON PH 2 (PDD) 08-00500059 REQUEST: To amend the buffer fence requirements included in the existing PDD Planned Development District SCALE: 10 lots on 3.208 acres LOCATION: 1201, 1203, 1205, 1207, 1209, 1211, 1213, 1215, 1217, and 1219 Ebtide Cove, generally located southwest of the intersection of State Highway 6 and Nantucket Drive. APPLICANTS: Phyllis Hobson, Nantucket, Ltd. PROJECT MANAGER: Jennifer Prochazka, AICP, Senior Planner jprochazka@cstx.gov RECOMMENDATION: Denial Planning&Zoning Commission Page 1 of 6 April 17,2008 49 NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Commission Hearing Date: April 17, 2008 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: May 8, 2008 The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station's Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing: None Property owner notices mailed: 13 Contacts in support: None Contacts in opposition: 11 Inquiry contacts: 2 ADJACENT LAND USES Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use Single-Family Low Single-Family Low North Density A-O Density (Nantucket Subdivision) Single-Family Medium Single-Family Medium South Density PDD Density(South Hampton Subdivision) East Freeway - State Highway 6 Single-Family Medium Single-Family Medium West Density R-1 Density (Nantucket Subdivision) DEVELOPMENT HISTORY Annexation: 1996 Zoning: A-O to PDD Planned Development District in 2004. The Concept Plan requires a 40-foot buffer at the rear of all lots that back up to Nantucket Drive. Fences, if constructed, are permitted only on the home side of the buffer(not on the street side). Final Plat: South Hampton Subdivision, Phase 2 Site development: Single-family homes have been constructed on several of the lots REVIEW CRITERIA 1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is designated as Single-Family Residential Medium Density on the Land Use Plan and is currently being developed as such. 2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood: Surrounding properties are designated as both Planning&Zoning Commission Page 4 of 6 April 17,2008 52