Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesAGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing to consider an amendment to Section 7 of the Zoning Ordinance creating a Research and Development zoning district. (96-805) .City Planner Kee presented the ordinance amendment that is a result of direction received from the City Council .during the rezoning hearings for the property along Sebesta Road and the East Bypass. The City Council rezoned .approximately thirty-three acres to M-1 for Bob Bowers to develop a business park and to relocate the Texas Digital Systems offices. The .conditions, of that rezoning called for deed restrictions addressing buffering, architectural controls and other items. These .restrictions were offered by Mr. Bowers during the process of his discussing the proposal with neighborhood representatives along the East Bypass. Mr. Bowers also agreed to rezone his property to a new Research and Development (R&D) zoning district if the restrictions in that district were nat more restrictive than his deed restrictions. The new district was suggested so that .the City could enforce items listed in the deed restrictions in a more effective manner. The.proposed district does have several more restrictions. than the deed restrictions, but when applied to Mr. Bowers property, these should not be more onerous due to specific bharacteristics of the property. For example, the proposed district calls for buffering from residentialproperties. The existing creek and vegetation on Mr. Bowers property. already satisfies this requirement. `There will be a need for some amount of additional buffering to screen the existing house on the property from this development. Other restrictions are those typically found in light industrial zoning districts similar to this one. The district regulations had to be written, not only to apply to this particular piece of property, but. to apply to .other potential locations within the City. City Planner Kee stated that he met with both Mr. Bowers and representatives of the East Bypass Coalition and incorporated most of their comments into the ordinance amendment. City Planner. Kee stated that the new district is designed for office, research and light industrial uses meeting the standards and performance criteria that'.. could be compatible with low intensity uses and all residential when developed under appropriate development controls. These uses should have little or no impact on surrounding areas, thereby maintaining character and integrity of neighborhoods. Uses should be designed to provide- adequate access ,and internal circulation such that travel through residentially zoned or developed areas is precluded. This district should be carefully located in areas where there is sufficient access to arterial.level thoroughfares: One change in the list of permitted uses since the packet is the change of"Administrative'' Offices" to "Offices" to not restrict what type of offices are allowed. All processes are to be conducted inside buildings and there. shall be no outside storage,, or .business activity. Most activities, will occur during. normal business hours with only minimal activity at night. The new zoning district is not for general retail uses. Uses are intended to be,those that are free from danger of fire, explosion, toxic or noxious matter, radiation, smoke, dust and other hazards, .offensive noise, vibration, odor, heat, glare, or other objectionable influences that would render them incompatible with surrounding planned or existing land uses. City Planner Kee explained that the -buffer yard is a combination of setback and visual barrier with the plantings required thereon. Both the amount of land and type plantings are designed to separate different zoning districts from each other '.and to separate different types of land uses from each other. Buffer yards'shall be located on the outer perimeter of a lot or .parcel, extending to the boundary line. They shall not be located on any portion of an existing or dedicated public or private street or right-of- way. The building setback area may be contained within the buffer yard area. Plantings shall be selected from the City of College Station's approved plant list for buffers. Buffer areas may be excluded from the land area used to calculate landscape point requirements under Section 11, and the plantings thereon do not count toward the required,landscape points. P & Z Mirnrtes May 2, 1996 Page =~ of 8 City Planner Kee stated that the buffer areas shall be irrigated. .Irrigation is optional when using the buffer yard with the masonry wall. Buffer areas may be used for passive recreational activities or storm water management. They may contain pedestrian, bike or equestrian trails provided that no plant material is eliminated, the required width is maintained and all other regulations are met. In no event, shall anyactive recreation activities occur such as swimming pools, tennis courts, etc. No parking or building shall be allowed in any buffer yard ..area. No required buffer yard plantings shall be located in any storm water detention area. Buffer yards-must be in place prior to an approved request for R&D zoning becoming effective. Bufferyard plantings and anywall details. must be approved by the City Planner prior to installation.. Walls must meet the specifications outlined in the Buffer Yard Wall Specifications. According to .the performance criteria, buffer yards are required in the following instances: (1) When this district abuts residentially zoned land or land that has been platted for residential development; (2) When this district is separated from residentially zoned land or land that has been platted for residential development by a street; (3) When this district abuts land that is not zoned or developed for residential uses, but where an existing residence(s) is located within 100 feet of the R&D boundary .line, the buffer yard shall, be placed along the common property line in such a location as to maximize the screening for the residence from proposed development, extend 100 feet along the common property line and generally centered behind the residential structure. City Planner Kee stated that buffer yards must be in place prior to an approved request for R&D zoning becoming effective except in this instance, where the buffer yard shall be located and installed on the R&D .property as part of site .development of that property. Since the ordinance amendment was written, there has been one change to the buffer yard section. At least 50% of the understory and canopy tree plantings must be evergreen so that the area is adequately screened year round. The following performance criteria are also included in the ordinance amendment: (1) Irnpervio2is S2rrface: Impervious surface is a measure of land use intensity and is the proportion of a site occupied by impervious surfaces including, but not limited to, buildings, sidewalks, drives and parking. No more than 70% of a lot or site in this zoning district shall be covered with an impervious surface. (2) Floor Area Ration: The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is anon-residential land use intensity measure analogous to density. It is the sum of the areas of several floors of a building compared to the total area of the site. The maximum FAR in this district shall not exceed .50. (3) Bzrildin~ Heim No portion of any structure or building in thin. district and .within 75 feet of an existing residential property line shall exceed one story or 20 feet in height. When greater than 75 feet :from a residential property line, the maximum height shall not exceed 2 stories or 35 feet. P & Z Minutes May 2, 1996 Page 5 of 8 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA CONTINUED: (4) Building Materials: All main buildings shall have not less than ninety (90%) percent of the total exterior walls, excluding :doors, windows and window walls, constructed or faced with brick, stone, masonry, stucco or pre-cast concrete panels. (5) Setbacks: Front Yard: 30 feet. Side Yard: 30 feet. Rear Yard: 30 feet except when abutting non-residentially zoned or used land, where it can be reduced to 20 feet. (6) ~LightinQ: All: exterior lighting designed for security, illumination, parking lot illumination or advertising shall be designed pointing downward to ensure that it does not extend into adjacent residential properties. Nighttime lighting .shall be low level .lighting and so situated as to not. directly or indirectly. extend into adjacent residential properties. (7) Utility Service: All new utility services or upgrading of existing services shall be installed underground according to City standards. (8) S~ Any detached or freestanding signage shall meet the criteria established in Section 12 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to low profile signs. Materials shall match building facade materials (9) Noise: All uses and activities conducted within this zoning district shall conform to the requirements and limitations set forth. in the City of College Station Code of Ordinances, Chapter 7, Section 2: Noise. (10) Odors: No operation shall permit odors to be released which are detectable at the property line, City Planner Kee stated that there. are additional standards that can be applied to any conditional use proposed in this district when either the City Planner or City Engineer believe that the existing performance standards contained in this ordinance are insufficient to address the proposed use because of its technology or processes and thus, will not effectively protect adjacent existing or future land uses, one or both shall so advise the Commission in writing.. In such cases the Commission shall hold a hearing to determine whether a professional investigation or analysis should be performed to identify and establish additional reasonable standards.. If so determined, based on the information presented at the hearing, the Planning & Zoning Commission will identify the areas to be investigated and analyzed and will direct the staff to conduct the .appropriate research necessary to develop standards for successful management of the new project. Any and all costs incurred by the City to develop additional standards shall be charged to the applicant and included as an addition to the cost of either the building permit fee or zoning application.fee. P & Z Minutes May 2, 1996 Page 6 of 8 Commissioner Gribou suggested referencing actual heights instead of the number of stories in the height and setback requirements section. He also stated that sometimes pre-cast concrete panels are more questionable than cast in place concrete. The cast in place concrete. provides a much higher quality than the other which has amore industrial look. Commissioner Hall stated that he is concerned about the vagueness of such references as "minimal activity at night" and "normal business hours". The ordinance could specifically define "night" and then tie a specific decibel level to that time of day. The ordinance should be more specific. Commissioner Hall opened the public hearing. Spokesman for the East Bypass Homeowners Coalition, Ray Martyn, of 7803 Appomattox informed the Commission that he was prepared to read a statement on behalf of the. Coalition in support of the ordinance amendment. However, the concern expressed by the Commission with respect to the activity allowed at night was a major point. of discussion and is considered extremely important. If the Commission. is considering changing this section of the ordinance, then the Coalition may have to re- evaluate their position and have time for. further discussions. The purpose of limiting activity at night was to exclude vehicular and. truck traffic. As long as the intent of the Commission is similar to that of the Coalition's, the wording can possibly be worked out. City Planner Kee .suggested that any particular type of use that has shift work be required to come before the Commission as a conditional use. The use permit process will give the Commission and the public an opportunity to consider the request. Commissioner Hall closed the public hearing. Commissioner Gribou moved to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment with a request that the concern regarding activity at night be discussed by staff and worked out prior to the City Council meeting. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4 - 0). Commissioner Hall requested that staff inform the Commission of the changes to the ordinance. AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Consideration of a preliminary plat of the Michael C. Laine .Subdivision located along Kemp Road south and west of the current. city limits line along State Highway 60. (96-302) Staff Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report and recommended approval. of the preliminary plat as submitted with no conditions. The subject property is in the City's extra territorial jurisdiction about 1.5 miles outside the City Limits on Kemp Road, which is just offH~ghway 60. Commissioner Gribou moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat of the Michael C. Laine Subdivision as presented. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a parking lot plan for two existing trailers located in the parking lot along Colgate Drive of the Wolf Pen Creek Amphitheater. (96-408) City Planner Kee informed the Commission that the Design Review Board met on site to discuss the placement of two temporary trailers at the amphitheater. These trailers were placed in their present location as a temporary measure to meet a demand. for office,. storage and dressing room space for concerts scheduled for. this upcoming season. The Board was asked to review these to see if there is any effective way to screen them during their temporary stay and also to discuss possible permanent solutions. The Board voted to recommend that no additional money be spent on the trailers at this time; but, that they be removed at the end of the seven month lease. During this time period the Board recommends that staff work toward developing alternative solutions and present these to a group represented by the Board members, Parks Board members and Commission members for direction. P & Z Minutes May 2, 1996 Page 7 of 8 s ~~ 8~ Regular Item Consent Item 0 Statutory Item Item Submitted By: For Council Meeting Of: Director Approval: City Manager Approval: pane R Kee City Planner Ma 23 99 Ends Statements /Strategic Issues: Civic Pride Item: Public Hearing and consideration. of an amendment to Ordinance 1638, the Zoning Ordinance for the City of College Station creating Section 7.23 District R8~D -Research 8~ Development and Light Industry. Item Summary: This proposed ordinance grew out of rezoning requests along the East By-Pass and particularly the Sebesta Road property. There were 3 different rezonings denied on the property bound by Sebesta and the East By- Pass over the past 3 years.. The most recent request for Planned Industrial zoning (M-1) on a portion of the property was approved in February of this year because of conditions that were .included as a part of the request. The - applicant (Bob Bowers of Texas Digital Systems) offered deed restrictions to, lend assurance that only. certain uses would be allowed and that certain .performance criteria would be met. At the time rezoning was approved Council directed staff to prepare a new zoning district that would provide for certain types of industrial. and office uses and that could be placed in largely infitl locations wherethere would be adjacency concerns with other low intensity uses. The intention was also that the just zoned property on Sebesta would be rezoned to this new district once created. Staff had to balance 3 major goals when researching and preparing this ordinance. These were: "R&DCO V .dori" (1) to create a district that would offer the protection needed for existing residential areas, (2) to provide a district that could be placed on the M-1 property on Sebesta without being terribly onerous to Texas Digital's plans for development, and (3) to provides district that could be placed on other properties in town. This district. is designed for office, research and light industrial uses meeting the standards and performance criteria contained in it. It is could be .compatible with low intensity .uses and all residential when developed under appropr-iate development controls: These uses should have little or no impact on surrounding areas, thereby maintaining the-character and integrity of neighborhoods. Both Mr. Bowers and representatives of the East By-Pass Coalition worked with staff is preparing this ordinance. Financial Summary: NA Staff Recommendation: P&Z recommends approval by a unanimous vote with the condition that language be incorporated to address nighttime hours of operation. The Commission thought the original language might preclude businesses with shift work like Westinghouse while the homeowners wanted to preclude any nighttime activity that would impact their, or any, residential areas. The original language called for "minimal activity at night" while the: new language states "Any :business operations occurring during the hours between 7 p.m: and 6 a.m. must meet all the performance criteria established in this section, as well as limit vehicular. access into the site through a designated access point that mitigates any adverse impacts of the traffic on surrounding residential areas. " Staff recommends approval with this new language. City Attorney Recommendation: N/A Council Action Desired: Approve ordinance as presented. Supporting Materials: 1. P&Z Minutes 2. Proposed ordinance 3. Buffer plant list. 4. Wall specs "R&DCOV.doc"