Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous Nom; '=~!:;_ ~- a e 3 .~ a e ,-~ /wir^ V+~ ww~^ tR ~l ~fl 0 V ~e~r^ C ^aa~a ww^ ~~ ~" ~ ~ ~ ~~ » ~ ~ ~~ ~" i ~~} ~ ~~~ 1 '- ~~ ~` l'-' r ~~ --, ~... ; ~~, '~' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~` ~L `~ ~ (~'~ t---t,~ ~~ ~.~- ~~` ~--~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~' `` ~: t'=-- -' ~~ . ~: 4 ~~~m° m r. ~' '' pr O 3 0 w ~^ C iwi.^ wow ~"~ ~•, CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I `~ PLANNFNG DIVISION \, / POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1701 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9960 (409) 764-3570 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISS N FROM: JANE R KEE, CITY PL R RE: SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT The attached ordinance is the result of proposed changes. to the. subdivision regulations that will do the. following: 1. Generally take the Council out of the plat review process and give the P&Z plat review and. approvaUdenial authority. 2. Give the City. Engineer authority for the approval of minor and amending plats. 3. Better defines and explains what a master development plan is and what a master preliminary plat is. _ 4. Removes the requirement for impact studies except when an applicant is requesting oversize participation. This amendment was directed by Council, as you recall, at a joint P&ZJCouncil meeting where the development review process was discussed and staff suggested. this amendment as a way to streamline our platting process. This is not a public hearing as it is amending the subdivision. regulations. The item will go to the City Council May 9, 1996, with comments from the Commission. ~~. Y ~~,.~ ~~ its Sri a~ t~ta _ ~.i;,~~ .v.i ~~ •~ s t ~~ei~~~t a :~ ` °. Subdivision Amendment GI'ant P Z A ; __ Pro Ap 1 P tc uncil _. Grgant C eer Auth ~i~orj d 1~Esj ~F~vei~~~~n~: e~i~~; _ Subdivision Amendment 1~ ace Im ct Stu R alts nt 1 -~ , "~ ~ ~~~ ~ ar~ C~-v7rt_ 'i ~~~i~~~~?~~ ~~~.~ p Subdivision Amendment tin ~ u~ ~~ _: €~-;~is~~~s~~ ~ti~i~~~ • Subdivision Amendment ~ f~ ~ 11 awn ay P ~ ~ ~~« ~~ ~~ ~ ~-~ C~~ ~ L ~ ~~ ~ c( Planning lss f , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-~' ~ ~ I ~~ ~ e ~v~i~~ ~-~~°i~~~ ° Subdivision Amendment ~- G~ ~~.e./ ~~:~i~~t ~~i~ -Subdivision Amendment ~ ~~ } ~. ~~ ~ 1 r ~ C.~ fl~'l~, yt~l~~ ~~ ~ca .~ ~~es~- 4 ~ ~~1~--- ~. Regular Item ® Consent Item Statutory Item Item Submitted By: For Council Meeting Of: Director Approval: City Manager Approval: Ends Statements /Strategic Issues: Issue #1 -Streamline Development Process Item: Consider anamendment to Chapter 9, of the College Station Code of Ordinances, Subdivision regulations, generally granting authority to the Planning Zoning Commission for consideration of subdivision plats. Item Summary: In February a joint. meeting of the P&Z and City Council was held to discuss staff suggestions to streamline the: platting process. From that meeting direction was given to prepare an ordinance amendment to address the various items discussed. This proposed amendment does the following: 1. Grants authority. for plat review to the Planning & Zoning Commission. 2. Retains Council review of master plans. and master preliminary plats. 3. Requires Council action for consideration of oversize participation, development agreements, right-of-way abandonment .requests, and appeals of P&Z decisions in certain cases. 4. Grants authority for approval of minor and amending plats to either the City Engineer or the City Planner. 5. Better defines various terms. The above items were directed to be included in the amendment The following item is an additional one staff proposes in this amendment to further streamline the requirements and. process: 6. Streamline the preliminary platting process by .removing the requirement for impact. studies except when oversize participation funds are. being requested. Once the staff has been trained to operate.. the water and wastewater models received as part of the HOK contract, impacts on these infrastructure will be able to be assessed in-house, and will no longer need to be required of the development community. Financial Summary: Staff Recommendation:. Staff recommends approval of .the amendment. The P&Z reviewed this item on 4-18 and recommends approval with the following addition: Grant authority to both the City Engineer and the City Planner for approval of minor and amending plats as a checks and balances measure. This P&Z suggestion has been included in the copy of the amendment. in your packet. City Attorney Recommendation: Comments from the Legal Office have been incorporated. Council Action Desired: Approve amendment Supporting Materials: Copy of ordinance amendment P8~ minutes ®f 4-18-96 Joint CC/P&Z minutes of 2-7-96 o:kieve servlcvshtbh9ord.doc" -.,,>,~ r~ „~. _, .. „__ ., ~~ , ., r, _, ... ~. ~y,; l fpm )g ~ S `~ d ~ i~ e ` ' 3„v~ ~ ~ _ Jd' 8 J _3 .,. 6 , F ~ - __ . ~, X19 M $rrr~ II ~ v§~..: ..~Z. ~ 1 ~:uC... ~ ~.~ ~~ie~z ~i - Subdivisian Amendment ..~~,~~ ~e~ °~ °~"~ ~ Fa T '`I e ^~ r Q.w/ b Y.v'~ f S A "~ + '~~ ,, t ®PrOVic~ J4PPeaI Process to Caeuincil ~ y.~ ~ ~. ~ ~` ~ ~ ~ . ; c~ ~ ~ ~ . Girarat Autho r t ~, t ~~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~e~~~ - s ~ ~-~ ~-_ ~ ... ~ .~~_l t ~~ai~~~~ i~~ - Subdivisian Amendment R~dut~e Im~ct Study vi nt 1 ~~+i~~~~ ~~~i~~ -Subdivision Amendment @t Y. I @t . f ~ 4 ~,~ ~- ~ i ~ ~ ~ €, ~ ~ a ~ y ~, ~ ,.,.,-u. _..,, s ~ .<,.,~ <, ~ a a ~f M J ~, `®, CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I ~~ MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNIl~IG & ZONING COMMISS N FROM: JANE R KEE, CITY PL R RE: SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT. The attached ordinance. is the result of proposed changes to the subdivision regulations that will do the following: 1. Generally take the Council out of the plat review process and give the P&Z plat. review and approvaUdenial authority. 2. Give the City Engineer authority for the approval of minor and amending plats. 3. Better defines and explains what a master development plan is and what a master preliminary plat is. - 4. Removes the requirement for impact studies except when an applicant is requesting oversize participation. This amendment was' directed by Council, as you recall, at a joint P&ZJCouncil meeting where the development review process was discussed and staff suggested this amendment as a way to streamline our platting process. PLANNING DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9960 (409) 7643570 This is not a public hearing as it is amending the subdivision regulations. The item will go to the City Council May 9, 1996, with comments from the Commission. . From: Roxanne Nemcik Toss JKEE .pate: 4/10/96 11.47am Subject: plat amendment -Reply -Reply.-Reply Iii,„cases where the Commission is the final decision making authority without o~ouncil review, the normal method to'challenge the denial of a plat or issue within the planning commission authority is in court. In this case, I do not think we should require appeal of the decision to the council but make it permissive. I agree that we should continue with the plan and draft the ordinance. I will review the appeals procedure and get back with you this afternoon. >» Jane Kee 04/10/96 10:34am »> this helps-- We have-found only two cities so far that appeal to Cout:cl --one is Waco and they are in the process of changing-this to appeal to Court. All other cities appeal to a court of law. San Marcos used to appeal to council but changed that to go to Court. There must be some reason no one does it or least why some cities who do appeal to Council are changing that. we'll see what we get from-Waco ,and will follow up and talk to them more about why they're changing. I'd like to continue along the lines you suggested and outline an"appeal process to Council. We may have to explan`to Council: that it is not. possible for anyone who wants to appeal just because they do not like the way the subdivision is laid out or because it violates deed restrictions, that they cannot. Below, is what I have written so far onthis section - see what you think. 5-C Appeals:. 5-C,1. Appeal of Denial of a Variance Request: Appeals of a decision of the Commission in denying a variance request may be forwarded to the City Council upon written request by the applicant to the City Planner within ten (10) days of the Commission°s decision . The plat shall not be considered approved until the outcome of the appeal. The appeal shall be placed on a Council 'agenda within thirty (30)"days of receipt of the written appeal. The applicant must show how the Commission's decision was unjust or in error'in .whole or in'part. The appeal shall specify the grounds of the injustice, and/or points oa which the Commission erred. The appeal .will not be processed without this information in writing. The,Council shall uphold the' Commission's derision in its entirety or overturn the denial.. Denials of variances by the Commission may be overturned only by a 3/4 majo~itp vote of the Council. Ia the event the Council overturns the Commission's decision, the City Planner shall report back to the Commission the reasons for starve at the next available meeting of the Commission. 5-C.2. Other Appeals: When an applicant or other affected party (being property owners is'an adjacent development) wish to appeal a decision of the Commission with regard_to planning issues such as, street locatoa~ and sines, public facility locations, lot layout and orientation, and/or paxk and greenbelt locations, the appeal must be presented in writing to the ;City Planner within ten (10) days of the Commission's decision. The appeal shall be placed on a Council agenda within thirty (30) days of receipt of the written appeal. The applicant must show how the Commission's aecisicn was unjust or is error in whole or in part. The appeal shall specify the grounds of the injustice and/or points on which the Commission erred. The appeal will not be processed without this information in writing. The Council shall .uphold the Commission's decision in it's entirety, overturn the decision. The Commission's decision may be overturned only by a 3/4,majority vote'of'the Council. In the event the Council overturns the Commission' decision, the City Planner shall report back to the Commission the reasons for same at the next available meeting of the Commission. A »> Roxanne Nemcik 04/10/96 10:12am »> Jane, OK. Here's my conclusion on the research. I have not found anything that says we cannot have council-retain appellate"authority over the Planning Commission. The statute does not provide for it expressly but allows joint apprval by .council and'P&Z. I found a case that says the Commission is vested with final decision making authority on plats and a Board of Adjusment cannot exercise appellate jurisdiction over these decisions. Lacy v. Hoff,"633 S.W.2d 605 (Tex. App.-- Houston 1982). But this is .not on point in the case under discussion. However, it did give me condern that I should do further research and that is why T sent you the email last night. So, I'm going to say the following. Since we are a home rule city with full powers of self government and can do anything except what is prohibited by federal, or dtate law, and nothing I can find expressly prohibits us from having council exercise appellate jurisdiction over the commission, I think we can do it. There are a couple of items we need to consider in arranging things this way. First, as you said, what will be the basis for appeal. When deciding the basis for appeal, remember that the approval of plats is a ministerial function. As a result, once the applicant has met the statutory. requirements of the local government code and our ordinance, the planning commission .must approve the .plat.. It does not have discretion to deny .approval. Consequently, you may want to structure .you appeal process to permit appeals when the. applicant can show that the plat has met our requirements but has been denied. .Another alternative is: Any applicant aggrieved by a decision of the planning commission may appeal to the city council. Another alternative is: Any applicant may appeal to the city council for denial of a plat or to appeal a Condition placed on the plat. Hope this resolves the situation. I'll be waiting for the draft ordinance. »> Jane Kee 04/10/96 09:38am »> Skip and Jim - FYI aaahhhhgggg!!!!!! An appeal procedure is the only reason I think Council was willing to give up their hand in the plat approval process. Shirley is calling the other cities we talked to'earler about their platting procedures. We'll see what we find. This is a big deal. If we can't resolve this by Friday I can't let it go on to P&Z next week. If that's the case we'll have to have it go to the 5-2 P&Z 'cause it has to go to CC 5-9: If we haven't figured out a way to have CC hear appeals by then, they may throw the whole thing out, unless I can somehow convince them to try this for a while and see how it' works . »> Roxanne Nemcik 04/09/96 05:25pm »> Jane,. Started researching this in between doing some research on your R&D ordinance. The only problem that T can see right now is that I don't think you can have an appeal to council? I'm checking further. The only case I can find doesn't seem to authorize an appeal provision. I'll let you know tomorrow what the outcome is. P.S. If-.you know of any cities who are doing this let me know.