Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondencePage 1 of 1 Jason Schubert - plaza Redevelopment From: Bob Cowell To: veronica@mitchellandmorgan.com Date: 3/W012 4:43 PM Subject: Plaza Redevelopment CC: David Neeley; Frank Simpson; Jason Schubert Veronica, Thank you for your follow-up phone calls and continued work on seeking a resolution to our remaining concerns. The following is a summary of the agreement reached: a Proposed head -in parking areas will be removed and may be replaced with parallel parking. The sidewalk adjacent to the parallel parking around the traffic circle may be reduced to 8' if necessary. . One public way will be provided and constructed with Phase II connecting the former Meadowland to the property line on the southern end of the northern -most parking garage. The public way will be constructed in accordance with all requirements (pavement width, construction standards, easement, vertical clearance, etc) associated with public ways, except that the required sidewalks may be replaced with an 8' unobstructed access way through the proposed amenity area, which will also be constructed with Phase II. Further, the easement associated with the public way will address the owner's concerns with aerial rights (as the podium will be over the public way) - the details of this will be worked out at a later date. No other public ways are required to break block length. • Dedicated dual right -turn lanes will be constructed on Texas providing access to westbound University Drive, with the assumption TxDOT will not prohibit this construction. As requested, I will evaluate the potential of delaying this until Phase II, but believe it is best accomplished with Phase I. • Bus shelters will be provided as detailed in the concept plan and aligned with the previous staff condition. . Minimum utility line separation from a building will be adhered to, except that deviations may be permitted based on specific design specifications submitted to staff. . Sidewalks located along Public Way Section C-C may be constructed at 6' off the back of curb versus the required 8', with the understanding that required landscaping will be accommodated outside the sidewalk and/or in traversable tree wells meeting City specifications. These agreements are, of course in addition to all other agreements already reached and contained within the staff report and/or the documents submitted by the applicant with the rezoning and concept plan. With these agreements, we will continue to support the requested rezoning and concept plan and will adjust our presentation accordingly. Likewise, I expect that these agreements will be honored by you and your clients both before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Again, I appreciate your work on assisting in a resolution and look forward to working with you further on making this project a reality. Thanks, ME Robert S. Cowell, Jr., AICP, CNU-A Executive Director Planning & Development Services College Station, TX file://C:\Documents and Settings\jschubert\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F4FA734City of College Stat... 3/1/2012 Page 1 of I Jason Schubert - 410 Texas Avenu., project From: Kevin <frontierorbital@gmail.com> To: <ashfieldmj@gmail.com> Date: 2/22/2012 3:54 PM Subject: 410 Texas Avenue project CC: Jason Schubert <Jschubert@cstx.gov> Dear Mr Ashfield and Mr Schubert I am not sure that I can be at the March 1 meeting, but, as owner of the 4-plex 151 Meadowland, I would like to register a concern. I have talked with Ms Morgan at Mitchell and Morgan. She informed me that the plan is to build a 5 story building opposite my 4-plex on 151 Meadowland such that the foot of that new residence is only 50 feet from my 4-plex. Mr Schubert tells me that there are no College Station restrictions to set minimum separation distances of the buildings since my 4-plex is also zoned multi -family. If these plans were to proceed, then my 2 story 4-plex would soon be facing a 5 story one only 50 feet away. There would be no view from this 4-plex, only the big building opposite. Do you agree this is unacceptable? Would you please confirm that you will bring up this issue to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the Mar 1 meeting? Thank you for your help. Kevin Burgess 979 574 7464 On Feb 22, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Jason Schubert wrote: Mr. Burgess, It was good to speak with you earlier today regarding the Plaza hotel redevelopment site and rezoning. As I promised, the email contact for Mike Ashfield, Chairman of the City's Planning & Zoning Commission, is ashfieldmi&mail.com. If you include me on the email, I can include in the information that will be forwarded to the Commission for consideration. Thanks, Jason Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Development Services City of College Station office:(979) 764-3570 fax: (979) 764-3496 www.cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University file://C:\Documents and Settings\jschubert\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F450FBOCity of College St... 2/24/2012 MITC�HEALL MORGAN February 17, 2012 Jason Schubert City of College Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Re: The Plaza at College Station Traffic Impact Study Dear Jason, Attached is the updated TIA information that is a part of the Plaza Redevelopment Project. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to call our office at (979) 260-6963. Veronica J°B. Mohan, PE, CFM Managing Partner Cc: File 511 UNIVERSITY DRIVE EAST, SUITE 204 COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840 • T. 979.260.6963 • F. 979.260.3564 CIVIL ENGINEERING • HYDRAULICS HYDROLOGY UTILITIES • STREETS • SITE PLANS - SUBDIVISIONS into@mitchellandmorgan.wm vv w.mltchellandmorgao.com M��IT��CppH��E��LL IY�►V� MORGAN February 15, 2012 Jason Schubert, AICP City of College Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77840 RE: PLAZA REDEVELOPMENT REZONING (REZ=PDD) - REVISED Dear Jason, As part of the rezoning of this property to PDD we are requesting the following bulk variances: We understand that we must choose a base zoning district for the residential and retail development upon which we base all variance requests, we have chosen the P-MUD district for all use restrictions and C-1, General Commercial and R-6, High -Density Multi -Family for all dimensional criteria. Bulk Variance Requests: 1. Allow for reduced required parking at commercial locations within this development to create a more pedestrian friendly environment. 2. Allow for reduced setbacks on all sides to 5 feet. 3. Allow for block length variances along Texas A&M University property line. 4. Allow for driveway spacing variances to allow drive locations as shown on the Concept Plan. These drive locations have been discussed with TxDOT and they are agreeable to their locations with the deceleration lane on University Drive and the extension of the raised median in Texas Avenue to force the Texas Avenue driveway to operate as right-in/right-out. 5. We would request that we be allowed to construct all uses within the P-MUD district with the exception of the following: a. Conference/Convention Center b. Country Club c. Fraternal Lodge d. Fuel Sales e. Golf Course/Driving Range f. Parking as a Primary Use g. Sexually Oriented Business h. Shooting Range, Indoor i. Single Family Detached j. Duplexes 1 511 UNIVERSITY DRIVE EAST, SUITE 204 • COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840 • T 979,260.6963 • F. 979.260.3564 CIVIL ENGINEERING • HYDRAULICS HYDROLOGY UTILITIES • STREETS - SITE PIANS • SUBDIVISIONS info®mitchellandmorgan.com w .mitchellandmorgan.com And the addition of the following: k. Fraternity/Sorority I. Multi -family constructed prior to 2002 (we intend on keeping the tower structure and refurbishing) m. Medical Clinics 6. Allow for a reduction in right-of-way acquisition on Texas Avenue from 12.5 feet to 7.5 feet. 7. Allow for a reduction in parking requirements for the residentia' component. Unknown at this time but estimated at a 10-20% reduction. 8. Allow for an increase in density on the property to a maximum of 60 units/acre. 9. Allow for reduction in geometric standards for a public way. 10. Allow for flexibility in sidewalk locations on the public way. 11. Allow for flexibility in easement widths for any infrastructure that is not publicly maintained (i.e. public ways and sidewalks) 12. Allow for compact spaces to be utilized within the development. 13. Allow for a reduction in landscape points if necessary due to the redevelopment limitations and expanse of hardscape being utilized. 14. Reduction in side setbacks between buildings to be a minimum as established by fire code. 15. Allow for reduction in easement separation distances from structures. 16. Allow for a public way to be utilized in place of a Thoroughfare on the Thoroughfare Plan. 17. Allow for flexibility in meeting NRA standards for all commercial store fronts. 18, Allow for wayfinding signage throughout the development, 19. Allow for signage variances to allow "Super Graphics" to be placed on the parking garage along Texas Avenue. 20. Allow for street light pole banners with the identifying area name and not count them toward attached signage limitations. The subject property is located at the most highly visible and traveled intersection in Brazos County. The City's Comprehensive Plan recognizes the importance of redeveloping the subject property and designated this area as both urban redevelopment and an anchor of the University Drive hospitality corridor. The Plan goes on to recommend some form of "direct market intervention by the City" that may involve "regulation", "investment" or "incentives" to encourage redevelopment activities in such prominent areas of the city. As stated in the UDO, the purpose of the Planned Development District Is to promote and encourage innovative development that is sensitive to surrounding land uses and to the natural environment. A PDD may be used to permit new or innovativq concepts in land utilization not permitted by other zoning districts. Finally, the PDD allows development to vary from certain development standards so long as there are community benefits which outweigh the requested modifications. The redevelopment envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan is very urban in character; however, the Cicy does not have an urban zoning classification or urban development standards. The PDD zoning 2 classification is the only process currently available to implement the vertical mix of uses and urban character envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. In order to provide that urban character, we are required to modify current suburban development standards. We have utilized the city's existing development standards including the urban standards in the NG-1 Historic Northgate district. The modifications requested are essentially creating urban standards to be used outside of the historic Northgate district, We believe that this project offers significant community benefits that certainly outweigh the modifications being requested. These community benefits are as follows: 1. Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan at a critical intersection of the two busiest corridors in the entire county. The Plan states that the city should "focus on bringing vertical mixed -use and other aspects of urban character" to this portion of the city. 2. Creation of an urban mixed use concept development located in a highly visible redevelopment area and anchoring the University Drive hospitality corridor, 3. Converting an underperforming land use at a major intersection within close proximity to Texas A&M University identified specifically in the Comprehensive Plan, 4. Major redevelopment of a blighted property within two major image corridors as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. Creation of a major mixed use development that follows a Traditional Neighborhood Development concept, promotes Smart Growth principles, encourages walkability within close proximity to the University and creates a sense of place through a new outdoor plaza at the intersection of Texas Avenue and University Drive.Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks again for all your help on the project. Veronica J.B. Managing Partner Cc: file 3 Jason Schubert From: Bob Cowell Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:06 PM To: 'Chuck Ellison'; 'Veronica Morgan' Cc: Jason Schubert; Kathy Merrill; David Schmitz; Frank Simpson; Bridgette George Subject: Plaza Parkland Fees Chuck and Veronica, As we discussed at our meeting last Friday, I am forwarding the following regarding the Plaza redevelopment and its related parkland fees. As stated by staff and applicant representatives at previous meetings, there exists no legal basis to compel parkland fees that differ from current ordinance requirements. Previous use of portions of the property (specifically the Plaza Hotel) for residential dormitory purposes should have resulted in the payment of parkland fees in effect at the time. No evidence has been presented to demonstrate that such fees were ever paid. Further, since that time the property had reverted to commercial use (hotel) and subsequently was demolished and rezoned for the current mixed use development. Current City practice includes the "crediting" of parkland fees for residential uses that either existed prior to the date of the ordinance enactment or for those residential uses that previously paid fees. In this instance, the City is willing to permit the proposed Phase I residential units (currently proposed at 307) to pay parkland fees equivalent to the amount that should have been paid originally (based on fees in existence in 1999) when the units were converted into residential dormitories. Because this concession is one not of legal requirement but of an exercise of judgment, the City will not allow any Phase I "credits" to be used in Phase 11, nor will any Phase II "credits" be allowed for Phase I. It is understood that there exists credit in Phase II for 50 4-plex units that either pre-existed City parkland fee requirements or where it has been demonstrated that required fees were paid. These credits will be applied in Phase II of the development. It is essential that all parties involved understand the significance of this concession — that is it represents a reduction in project development costs of more than $400,000. It is my understanding that the project is currently undergoing a "value engineering" process to facilitate development of the site. While I do not seek to underestimate the significance of this effort, I want to stress that further cost -savings are expected to come from the private side of this project and not through the reduction of necessary public improvements required to accommodate the redevelopment of this site. As the project moves forward please continue to work with Jason Schubert, Principal Planner on finalizing the required parkland fees. Thank you for your assistance with this project and I look forward to seeing its continued success and completion. If you have any questions or need additional information please let me know. :. r.