Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgendaMarch 8, 2012 Regular Agenda Rezoning for 410 Texas Avenue To: David Neeley, City Manager From: Bob Cowell, AICP, CNU-A, Executive Director - Planning & Development Services Agenda Caption: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to Chapter 12, "Unified Development Ordinance", Section 4.2, "Official Zoning Map" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning approximately 11 acres located at 410 Texas Avenue, generally located at the northwest corner of the intersection with University Drive, from R-2 Duplex Residential, R-4 Multi - Family, C-1 General Commercial, and C-2 Commercial -Industrial to POD Planned Development District. Relationship to Strategic Initiatives: Financially Sustainable City, Core Services and Infrastructure, Neighborhood Integrity, Diverse Growing Economy, Sustainable City Recommendations: The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their March 1s` meeting and voted 6-0 to recommend approval with the condition that the application and concept plan be revised to reflect the conditions as agreed with staff. The revisions have been incorporated into the attached ordinance and staff report. Staff had recommended approval with conditions that have since been resolved. Summary: The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for zoning map amendments: REVIEW CRITERIA 1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is designated as Urban and part of Redevelopment Area II on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map. The intersection of Texas Avenue and University Drive has also been identified as a Primary Arrival Gateway into the City. The Comprehensive Plan describes Urban as: This land use designation is generally for areas that should have a very intense level of development activities. These areas will tend to consist of townhomes, duplexes, and high -density apartments. General commercial and office uses, business parks, and vertical mixed -use may also be permitted within growth and redevelopment areas. Redevelopment Area II: Texas Avenue, University Drive, and Harvey Road is described by the Comprehensive Plan as: This area includesa number of underperforming land uses that, due to their proximity to two of the busiest corridors in the City, are poised for redevelopment. Much of the area is currently subdivided into small lots, making it difficult to assemble land for redevelopment .... The proximity of existing neighborhoods and the Texas A&M University campus requires careful site planning and appropriate building design. These efforts should be complimentary to the Area V: Hospitality corridor plan, the neighborhood plan for the Eastgate area, and the Texas A&M University Campus Master Plan and should focus on bringing vertical mixed use and other aspects of urban character to this portion of the City. The proposed PDD zoning with associated Concept Plan is consistent with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan to redevelop and consolidate underperforming properties in this area of the City. The requested rezoning proposes to provide vertical mixed use, high density multi -family, and pedestrian oriented development at the corner of Texas Avenue and University Drive in proximity to the Texas A&M University campus. 2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood: The existing zoning and conforming uses of nearby property are consistent with the proposed uses. The scale of the proposed uses, however are intended to be developed at a higher density and are more intense than the nearby existing fourplex, hotel and restaurant uses. The neighboring developments are developed at a lower intensity with surface parking lots and open space while the proposed development utilizes structured parking and has requested reduced setbacks and increased density allowances. One of the adjacent fourplex owners along Hensel Street to the northwest has expressed concern regarding the building mass of proposed development (see attached email) and has also expressed a desire to be included in the request. The concern relates to the potential of a 50-foot tall building approximately 50 feet from the existing fourplex. While a large height differential may be created by this request, the existing zoning for each of these properties does not restrict building height so these developments could develop in this manner currently. Also, there are not height restrictions between adjacent developments of the same type of use. The adjacent R-4 Multi -Family district could redevelop in a similar scale if it were able to meet place all site requirements on the property. Representatives of the Texas A&M University System to the southwest have verbally expressed concerns regarding the nature and scale of the proposed development. It is our understanding that the A&M System intends to develop their property with private commercial, retail, residential, and other uses and is concerned about the compatibility between their future development and the proposed development. Thus far, they have expressed an unwillingness to accommodate vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian connections between the two properties, something that is commonly required betweer similar types of developments throughout the City. 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 proposed PDD Planned Development District proposes a vertical mixed use development with a mixture of commercial and multi -family uses. These uses are suitable for the property based on its location within the core of the City and proximity to the Texas A&M University campus. The scale and density of the development factor into the availability of transportation and utility capacity in the area. As described later, the proposed development proposes some transportation improvements and mitigation efforts and acknowledges that utility upgrades will be necessary to provide adequate services to the development. 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 C-1 General Commercial district at the corner of Texas Avenue and University Drive and R-4 Multi -Family district along the former Meadowland Street should be considered suitable, separate uses for the property. The smaller areas of R-2 Duplex Residential and C-2 Commercial -Industrial, however, are not suitable for this area of the City that is designated for redevelopment and intended for high intensity uses. 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: Most of the properties should be considered marketable with their current zoning, though the presence of four different zoning classifications on the property constrains the potential for large-scale redevelopment opportunities. 6. Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: The existing Plaza site is served by 12-inch waterlines along Texas Avenue and University Drive. Per discussions with the applicant, additional information will be needed through fire demand modeling on existing available capacity. Once this has been analyzed by the applicant, the City can better understand the proposed locations, potential required up -sizing, and the potential required re -alignment of existing waterlines within/near the proposed development. The existing Plaza site is served by an 8-inch gravity sanitary sewer collection line that spans from University Drive to the existing Hensel Park Lift Station. This respective lift station then pumps sanitary sewer flow to the 'Northeast Trunkline' via a 12-inch force main. The 'Northeast Trunkline' conveys this flow to the Carters Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Using the City of College Station's sanitary sewer modeling software and the proposed build -out sanitary sewer demands submitted by the applicant, the City has determined that there is not adequate capacity in the existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line that spans from this respective development to the existing Hensel Park Lift Station. The City has, however, concluded that there is existing available capacity in the Hensel Park Lift Station/force main as well as the 'Northeast Trunkline'. Because of this, this development would need to include off -site sanitary sewer improvements to provide additional collection system capacity. Drainage is generally to the south and west within the Wolf Pen Creek and Burton Creek Drainage Basins, respectively. Stormwater and other public infrastructure improvements required with site development shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the BCS Unified Design Guidelines. As part of the rezoning application, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was submitted. Because of the expediency with the approval process and in order to accommodate the applicant's timeline, up to date traffic counts were not conducted instead the applicant utilized a previous analysis conducted in 2011 by HDR the applicant's traffic consultant, of the intersection at Texas Avenue and University Drive. This analysis was presented to the Bryan/College Station MPO. Based on that analysis, the TIA utilized the traffic counts and the intersection operation analysis. The TIA indicated that the intersection of Texas Avenue and University Drive is operating at a Level of Service (LOS) E. Utilizing a scale of LOS "A" thru LOS "F" with "A" being the best LOS "free flow traffic" and LOS F being the worst LOS "bumper to bumper traffic" and LOS "D" being the acceptable LOS the intersection is operating at unacceptable LOS. With that in mind the goal was to provide mitigation strategies that would not prevent the intersection of University Drive and Texas Avenue operate at a worse LOS. The following mitigation strategies have been identified: • An additional left turn bay will be added to University Drive eastbound to northbound Texas Avenue, creating a dual left configuration by modifying the existing raised median. • On University Drive, a right turn deceleration lane for the proposed driveway will be built to meet TxDOT design criteria. The raised median on Texas Avenue will also be extended north beyond the proposed driveway location. These mitigation items are at the request of TxDOT and concurred by City staff. • Both the Brazos Valley Transit District and TAMU Transit have indicated that they would not alter their routes to provide service within the proposed site. However, both transit providers have routes along University Drive and Texas Avenue. In order to mitigate traffic at the intersection of University Drive and Texas Avenue, staff has recommended the applicant work with both transit providers regarding bus stops along University Drive and Texas Avenue in close proximity to the proposed site. Furthermore, pedestrian and bicycle accommodations within the site be provided and directed toward the transit areas. • The former Meadowland Street intersection at University Drive and the existing median break in University Drive closed. This is at the direction of TxDOT and concurred by City staff. • To meet block length requirements, one projection westbound to TAMU property west of the proposed site has been provided. Ultimately this would also serve as an alternative route to University Drive and Texas Avenue, somewhat relieving traffic at that intersection. It is anticipated that TAMU property will be redeveloped to include commercial, retail, and residential uses. • An additional right turn lane will be provided on southbound Texas Avenue to westbound University Drive. Room for the construction of the second right turn lane is available with the proposed 7.5-foot right-of-way dedication along Texas Avenue. SUMMARY OF CONCEPT PLAN The requested rezoning and associated Concept Plan propose a vertical mixed use and multi -family redevelopment at the intersection of Texas Avenue and University Drive. The vertical mixed use area consists of more than 60,000 gross square feet of ground floor general commercial uses with multi -family units above. The multi -family area consists of multi -story buildings oriented along the side and rear of the development along the former Meadowland Street. The applicant proposes building heights ranging up to 70 to 80 feet or eight stories. The development is proposed in two phases with the vertical mixed use and some of the multi -family buildings developed in the first phase with the remainder of multi- family areas along the former Meadowland Street and Hensel Street in the second phase. For the most part, parking will be provided in three proposed parking garages located in different areas of the development. All existing buildings in both phases, including the former Plaza Hotel tower, will be demolished before a building permits will be issued for new construction. The development will use the dimensional standards of the C-1 General Commercial zoning district for the commercial uses and R-6 High Density Multi -Family zoning district for the - residential uses. Additional description, standards and improvements by the development will be provided later. Meritorious Modifications This area is designated as a Redevelopment area in the Comprehensive Plan which acknowledges some role for the City may be necessary to encourage redevelopment. Some modifications result from the intended urban nature of the proposed development and some are due to the suburban style of some of the applicable development regulations. The applicant is requesting the following meritorious modifications or alternatives to standard ordinance requirements: 1. Zoning District Standards — UDO Section 5.2 "Residential Dimensional Standards" and Section 5.4 "Non -Residential Dimensional Standards": An increase to the maximum residential unit density from 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre is proposed by the applicant. While this increase in density can be supported, it is necessary to ensure that adequate infrastructure and transportation facilities including vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian are provided for the development and surrounding area. The applicant requests to reduce minimum building setbacks for the C-1 General Commercial and R-6 High Density Multi -Family based zoning districts to 5 feet along all property lines with the understanding that sufficient easements for utilities will be provided. The standard building setbacks for these districts are 25-foot front setback, 7.5-foot side setback, 15-foot side street setback, and 15-foot rear setback for the C-1 district and 20-foot rear setback for R-6. 2. Use — UDO Section 6.2.0 "Use Table": The P-MUD Planned Mixed Use District is the base zoning district for uses for the development with Health Care, Medical Clinic added as a permitted use and Country Club, Duplex, Fuel Sales, Fraternal Lodge, Golf Course/ Driving Range, Parking as a Primary Use, Single -Family Detached, Sexual Oriented Businesses, and Shooting Range (Indoor) uses removed from the permitted list. 3. Parking — UDO Section 7.2 "Off -Street Parking Standards": The applicant proposes the standard shopping center ratio of 1 parking space per every 250 gross square feet of commercial use (1:250), though not required to provide additional parking if more than 25% of these areas are utilized as intense commercial uses. The applicant also proposes the minimum residential parking requirement be reduced to one parking space per bedroom. The current ordinance requires one space per bedroom for three and four bedroom units though some additional parking is provided with one and two bedroom units (1.5 spaces/ bedroom). Also, up to 5% of the parking spaces in the garage may be compact parking spaces. This parking reduction can be supported if sufficient transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities are provided. 4. Transportation — UDO Section 7.3 "Access Management and Circulation", Section 8.2.G "Blocks", and Section 11.2 "Defined Terms"- Public Way: The applicant proposes some modifications to transportation related requirements: 1. Three driveways exist along Texas Avenue and six driveways along University Drive, including the former Meadowland Street. Though the proposed Concept Plan consolidates these to one driveway on Texas Avenue and one driveway on University Drive, the proposed driveways do not meet minimum spacing standards. Also, driveways along the proposed Public Ways do not meet spacing standards based on existing conditions. The applicant requests the proposed spacing be acceptable. 2. The maximum block length in Urban designated areas is 660 feet with a maximum block perimeter of 2,000 feet. Based on the dimensions of this area, two public way projections would be required along the Public Way Section C-C toward the Texas A&M System property to the southwest. The applicant has proposed one Public Way projection near the center of this length. Though the Texas A&M System has not been supportive of any type of connection between the two developments, they are in the process of developing a master plan for a private development of commercial, retail, residential, and other uses which will be subject to similar requirements. 3. Public Ways are defined with certain dimensional and design criteria. The applicant requests to reduce the maximum curve radius from a 200-foot radius to a 45-foot radius, allow sidewalks to be back of curb instead of three feet off and have sidewalk widths as shown in the attached cross sections. Also, the pedestrian facilities for the Public Way projection to the Texas A&M University System property may be located through the nearby amenity area. S. Signs — UDO Section 7.4 "Signs": Instead of using this Section as the basis for signage, the applicant proposes to utilize the signage permitted in Wolf Pen Creek (UDO Section 5.6.A.11 Signs) with the following modifications: 1. Signs may be approved administratively by staff with appeals to staffs interpretations being able to considered by the Design Review Board; 2. Wayfinding signage (UDO Section 7.4.AA Campus Wayfinding Signs) is permitted for this development; and 3. Projections signs may be used for identification signage for the general area and not count against the attached signage square feet unless they contain copy of the individual business. Projection signs may be oriented toward the public rights -of -way or public ways and one permitted per tenant per public way frontage. 6. Landscaping — UDO Section 7.5 "Landscaping and Tree Protection": Instead of using this Section as the basis for landscaping, the applicant proposes to utilize the Northgate standards contained in UDO Section 5.6.B.9 "Landscape and Streetscape Standards" with the following modifications: 1. The street trees along Texas Avenue and University Drive may be placed outside of TxDOT right-of-way. Street trees along Public Way Sections A -A and B-B shall be 50 feet on center with alternating planting areas spaced at 50 feet on center consisting of non -canopy trees, hedges or seasonal plantings. The Public Way Section C-C will have planting areas of 25 feet on center consisting of non -canopy trees, hedges, or seasonal plantings; 2. Building and Site Lighting shall still comply with UDO Section 7.10 Outdoor Lighting Standards; and 3. The Street Lights section is not applicable as lights are owned and maintained by property owner. 7. Architecture — UDO Section 7.9 "Non -Residential Architecture Standards": Instead of using this Section as the basis for architecture standards, the applicant proposes to utilize the Northgate standards contained in UDO Section 5.6.B.4 "Building Design Standards" except that residential dwelling units in a building with less than 12 units may have access through a parking area or garage. All subsections (Building Orientation and Access, Building Transparency, Architectural Relief, Roof Type, Exterior Building Material, Exterior Building Colors, and Canopies/Awnings) shall apply to all non- residential and residential buildings. S. Infrastructure — Section 3.3.A "Applicability": The applicant proposes a modification to the platting requirement. Most of the property is platted though a couple areas are still tracts of land. The applicant has requested that building permits may be issued on these tracts prior to platting with the provision that a temporary blanket easement be placed on the property and the property platted/replatted once all utilities are constructed and relocated and before Certificates of Occupancy are issued for the buildings. aoueulpap •g (bu!jaaw oT ao!ad pap!noad) saanu!W uo!ss!wwoD 6uluoz)R buluueld a,T goaew lieao 's aaumo puel;uaoeCpe'sso6ang ulna{ woaJ I!ew3 •{, uolaewaojuI punoa6joeg •£ ueld 4daouoD 'Z (wys) dew eaay Ilews )R le!aay •T :s;u9w43e;;y V/N :AAeuawns lepueuid'8;a6pn9 •anlaa Aq!saanlun uo Aennanlap AeM o!ignd pasodoad agp oa pappe aq Ilp auel uopeaalaoap e pue 'AeManpp AeAA o!ignd pasodoad agq 4sed gaaou popuaaxa aq ll!m anuany sexal uo uelpaw aga 'anlaa AI!saanlup uo Aenaanlap auo pue anuany sexal uo Aennan!ap auo oJui palep!losuoo aq ll!m sAemaApp aid!4lnw 'punogasaM aA1aa A4!saanlun of punogg4nos anuany sexal uo auel uan4 ag6!a lenp a 'papuajxa g46ual ananb pue punoggaaou anuany sexal 04 punogjsea an!ao Aa!saanlun uo auel uanl 43al lenp a 'pasop aq ll!m 1aaa4s puelnnopeaw aawaoj ago aol Neaaq uelpaw pue uop3asa94ul ago bu!pnpui s4uawanoadw! uo!}e4aodsuea4;o Aja!aeA e g6noagl pasodoad si uop3asaa4u! anlao A41saanlun pue anuany sexal agj ao3 u014e6p!w '1pax1 Aq paaa!waad sy •6 •sndweo AI!saanlup wQy sexal aga paemol juawdolanap agj woaJ sjuawanow ue1a4sDpod pue apAo!q a4e4!lpej 04 � 12Mapls anlaa A4!saanlun ago 04 sa6eae6 6u!Naed om4 pue s6u!pl!nq Allwej-pinw pauuoo oa ou!l Aaaadwd isomglnos ago buole pasodoad si ajnoa ue!a4sapad pue aloAo!q aooj-4g6la uy •g •A2M o!ignd aqj buole sasn Al!wej-prow ga!m paddeaM aae jaaa4s puelnaopeaW aawao3 agl 5UO1e s06eae6 bu!Naed aaglo ago pue anoge eljuap!saa pue ioolj puno.a6 uo asn lepaawwoo leaauab qa!M paddeam si anuany sexal uo a6eaeb 6uhlaed aqj 'L •4uawd0lanap aqj of Aldde lle4s (£T'g'9's uopoas oan) spaepueas Aeldsla pue a6eao4s ap!s4no a1e6gaaoN a41 '9 ,loot 6uluaaaos a se pasn aq osle Aew u014e4969n 4ega uopdaoxa ago g4!m Aldde pegs (OT'9'9's uoiioas oan) spaepuejs quawd!n63 leoluegoaw pue aalsdwna 9le6g4aoN a41 's •aoueu!pao paepuels Aq paainbaa 4ou aae saaglags snq ao sdo}s snq •aolnaas snq pi-gs!a az!i!4n o; anlaa A4!sa9nlun 6uole aagaoue pue 'pap!noad j! 'aolnaas snq 4!sueal Nwyl aoi uo!4eool e u! A4!o aga Aq panoadde se aajlags do}s snq a uopepelsut 'abesn a!suea4 aqowoadyol 'b •1014s!a 94e6g4aoN ag} Jo ap!slno s4uawdolanap !el4uap!saa aoj sluawaa!nbaa (Noea aN!q) 6u!Naed a1oAo!q ou aae aaagl Apuaaan:) •seaae a6eae6 6u!laed aqj ulgl!M pa4eooi aq Aew bui lied apAo!q pue A4!D aga Aq panoadde pue aaumo ago Aq pauwaalap s! ublsap NDw apAo!q ago jo u6lsap aqj 4egj Ideoxa juawdolanap aqj of Aldde (L•g•g•s uopoas oan) spaepue;s 6ul�laed apAo!g ale6gaaoN a41 '£ •]olaasla a4e6glaoN agp jo ap!slno sbu!pl!nq 1e!4uap!saa aoj quawaa!nbw leanpol!goae ou aae aaagq ApuaaanD Iepuap!saa-uou pue lepuaplsaa 's6u!pl!nq Ile o; Aldde (i7•g•g•s uolaoas ocin) spaepueis ubisaa bu!pling a4e6glaoN agl 'Z •uo!aona4suoo mau Aue aoj panssi aq ll!m s4!waad 6u!pl!nq aaojaq pags!lowap aq Illm sbu!pl!nq bups!xa liv „'AI!D aqj jo uo!a.aod s!ga of auawdolanap uegan jo spadse aagao pue asn-pax!w leopaan 6u!6ulaq uo snooj,, pinogs jeg4 eaae ue se ueld anlsuagaadwo3 aq4 Aq paq!aosap " pue AeMajeg len!aay Aaewud a se paaeublsap s! aegl eaae p94g6!lq '6u!waojaadaapun ue 3o 4uawdolanapa.i gbnoag4 veld aAlsuagaadi,uo:) aga jo uopejuawaldwI 'T :sluawanoadwl ao sIuawaouegua leuopippe'slyauaq A4!unwwoo buimolloj ago paypuapj seg aueo!Idde a41 sju9waoue4u3 leuoi;!ppd pue s;!;aua8 Ai!unwuao:)