Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Reviews CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Home of Texas AerM University` MEMORANDUM DATE: December 17, 2014 TO: Heath Phillips, via; heath superiorstructures@yahoo.com FROM: Jason Schubert, AICP, Principal Planner SUBJECT: THE BARRACKS II (REZ) Staff reviewed the above-mentioned final plat as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the comments and submit the following information for further staff review and to be scheduled for a future Planning & Zoning Commission meeting: City of College Station Transmittal Letter; Memo providing written responses to all of staff's comments; and One (1) 24"x36" copy of the revised Concept Plan. Please note that additional copies of documents will be requested when the item is ready to be scheduled for Planning & Zoning Commission consideration. Please note this application will expire in 90 days from the date of this memo, if the applicant has not provided written response comments and revised documents to the Administrator that seek to address the staff review comments contained herein. If all required items are not received, your project will not be scheduled on 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.pov/pz If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570. Attachments: Staff Review Comments PC: Joe Schultz, P.E., via; joeschultz(a�verizon.net P&DS Project No. 14-00900290 Planning es' Development Services P.O.BOX 9960 • 1101'TEXAS AVENUE •COI.LEGE STATION •TEXAS •77842 i'Fi ()7C1 7A.4 AS711 .G'AV (70 7!_4 2 4nc Q STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: THE BARRACKS II (REZ) — (14-00900290) PLANNING 1. A density maximum was required with prior PDDs as the development is largely in an area designated by the Comprehensive Plan as General Suburban and Growth Area 5. As described in the Comprehensive Plan, this area is intended for single-family uses with townhouse, duplexes, and suburban/neighborhood commercial/office uses being allowable due to being in the growth area. The prior PDDs limited the residential density to 8.45 dwellings per acre as calculated as described in the note on the Concept Plans. This was to keep the development closer to General Suburban character, as single-family development is limited to a maximum of 8 dwellings per acre. When the 29-acre former Barger tract was added that part was considered in the Urban designated area and not under the same density restrictions. Provide the overall density calculations for the entire development with the proposed additional townhouse areas and revise the PDD and Concept Plan accordingly. Zoning Area 3 and the part of Zoning Area 2 located in the former Barger tract area do not need to be included in the density calculations. 2. Revise Concept Plan note 1.a. to refer to T Townhouse instead of the former name of R-3. 3. Based on the smaller area and configuration of Commercial Tract 1A, if developed for commercial use, it should have the same zoning requirements and allowances (SC) as the adjacent Commercial Tract 1. If changed to SC, Concept Plan note 1.b. can be removed. 4. As there are no longer 3 potential multi-family areas, renumber Multi-Family Tract 3. 5. The subdivision regulations require that townhouse lots only take access from an alley when the lots are served by an alley. This will affect some of the new townhouse lots in Zoning Area 3. 6. Part of Concept Plan note 2.b. refers to a rear setback of self-storage units adjacent to an alley and the back wall serving as the buffer. As reconfigured on the Concept Plan, these circumstances no longer apply. The prohibition of restaurants in COM areas can be included as part of the use discussion in note 1.c. Please revise. 7. Revise Concept Plan note 2.c. to refer to Section 12-7.5.N. 8. Concept Plan note 3.f. can be revised to refer to the Non-Residential Architectural Standards as applied with SC Suburban Commercial zoning. SC requires pitched roof and limits individual buildings to a maximum of 15,000 square feet. Reviewed by: Jason Schubert Date: December 17, 2014 TRANSPORTATION 1. The new townhome lots near the curve in Gunner Trail will likely have site distance issues with driveways. Please revise. Reviewed by: Danielle Singh, P.E., Transportation Planning Coord. Date: December 15, 2014 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1 1. No comments. Reviewed by: Kevin Ferrer Date: December 15, 2014 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. 2 of 3 0 FIRE 1. No comments at this time Reviewed by: Steve Smith Date: December 9, 2014 SANITATION 1. Sanitation is ok with this project. Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: December 8, 2014 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. 3 of 3 (*r:Iff" 1144 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Home of Texas Ae7M University` • MEMORANDUM DATE: December 3, 2014 TO: Heath Phillips, via; heath superiorstructures anyahoo.com FROM: Jason Schubert, AICP, Principal Planner SUBJECT: THE BARRACKS II (REZ) Thank you for the submittal of your Rezoning application. Kevin Ferrer, Graduate Engineer I, and I have been assigned to review this project. It is anticipated that the review will be completed and any staff comments returned to you on or before Wednesday, December 17, 2014. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel free to contact us. PC: Joe Schultz, P.E., via; joeschultz@verizon.net P&DS Project No. 14-00900290 Planning 6`Development Services P.O. BOX 9960 • 1 101 TEXAS AVENUE •COLLEGE STATION •TEXAS •77842 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: THE BARRACKS II (REZ) — (14-00900290) PLANNING 1. A density maximum was required with prior PDDs as the development is largely in an area designated by the Comprehensive Plan as General Suburban and Growth Area 5. As described in the Comprehensive Plan, this area is intended for single-family uses with townhouse, duplexes, and suburban/neighborhood commercial/office uses being allowable due to being in the growth area. The prior PDDs limited the residential density to 8.45 dwellings per acre as calculated as described in the note on the Concept Plans. This was to keep the development closer to General Suburban character, as single-family development is limited to a maximum of 8 dwellings per acre. When the 29-acre former Barger tract was added that part was considered in the Urban designated area and not under the same density restrictions. Provide the overall density calculations for the entire development with the proposed additional townhouse areas and revise the PDD and Concept Plan accordingly. Zoning Area 3 and the part of Zoning Area 2 located in the former Barger tract area do not need to be included in the density calculations. A density maximum has been added(note 15) to limit the residential portion of the PDD to 8 units per acre (subdivision gross), which is closer to the General Suburban Character intended for this area. To confirm the overall development area is 138.055 acres—25.165 acres(Commercial, Multi-family, and recreation facility) = 112.89 acres residential gross area = 903 units allowed. We are around 713 total units with this concept plan. 2. Revise Concept Plan note 1.a. to refer to T Townhouse instead of the former name of R-3. Note 1.a. has been revised. 3. Based on the smaller area and configuration of Commercial Tract 1A, if developed for commercial use, it should have the same zoning requirements and allowances (SC) as the adjacent Commercial Tract 1. If changed to SC, Concept Plan note 1.b. can be removed. Commercial Tract 1A has been changed to SC and Note 1.b. removed. 4. As there are no longer 3 potential multi-family areas, renumber Multi-Family Tract 3. Multi- Family Tract 3 has been revised to Multi-family Tract 1. 5. The subdivision regulations require that townhouse lots only take access from an alley when the lots are served by an alley. This will affect some of the new townhouse lots in Zoning Area 3. Noted, and the townhouse lots adjacent to an alley will only take access from the alley. 6. Part of Concept Plan note 2.b. refers to a rear setback of self-storage units adjacent to an alley and the back wall serving as the buffer. As reconfigured on the Concept Plan, these circumstances no longer apply. The prohibition of restaurants in COM areas can be included as part of the use discussion in note 1.c. Please revise. Note 2.b. has been removed and the restaurant portion moved to note 1.c. 7. Revise Concept Plan note 2.c. to refer to Section 12-7.5.N. Note 2.c. has been revised. 8. Concept Plan note 3.f. can be revised to refer to the Non-Residential Architectural Standards as applied with SC Suburban Commercial zoning. SC requires pitched roof and limits individual buildings to a maximum of 15,000 square feet. Note 3.f. has been revised. Reviewed by: Jason Schubert Date: December 17, 2014 TRANSPORTATION 1. The new townhome lots near the curve in Gunner Trail will likely have site distance issues with driveways. Please revise. The Gunner Trail corner of the plan has been revised per discussions with you. Reviewed by: Danielle Singh, P.E., Transportation Planning Coord. Date: December 15, 2014 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1 1. No comments. Noted. Reviewed by: Kevin Ferrer Date: December 15, 2014 FIRE 1. No comments at this time. Noted. Reviewed by: Steve Smith Date: December 9, 2014 SANITATION 1. Sanitation is ok with this project. Noted. Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: December 8, 2014 FIRE 1. No comments at this time NOTED Reviewed by: Steve Smith Date: December 9, 2014 SANITATION 1. Sanitation is ok with this project. /J01-ED• Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: December 8, 2014 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. 3 of 3