Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes MINUTES ~-~ 3ac~ Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS November 20, 1997 4:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Massey, Commissioners .Garner, Parker, Lightfoot, and Gribou. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Rife and Silvia. STAFF PRESENT:. City Planner Kee, Senior Planner McCully, Staff Planner Battle, Staff Planner Roman, Assistant. City Engineer Morgan, Graduatf, Engineer !. Kaspar, Development Coordinator Volk, Staff Assistant Charanza, and Assistant City AttorneyReynolds. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes from the meeting of November 6, 1997. l Commissioner Garner moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of November 6, 1997 as written. j Commissioner Parker seconded the. motion which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration of a request from Fozfire Homeowners Association and direction. to Staff regarding City-initiated rezoning of the 177.84 acre subdivision from R 1 ~i Single Family ResidentiaC to A-OR Rural Residential Subdivision. (97-114) City Planner Kee presented the staffreport and explained that in 1995 the City adopted some new ordinances which would .help with concerns of the .newly annexed residents. One of the ordinances created a new residential district that allows rural type. single family development within the City limits. This district, along with changes. made to the subdivision regulations allows areas to be rezoned to A- OR Rural Residential with minimum lot sizes being one acre. This ordinance deals also. included more rural type .street standards and ways to deal with sewage. At the time of the adoption of these ordinances, the Fozfire residents were interested in changing their zone to the A OR classification to protect their one acre lot size minimum. Over the past year, the Fozfire. Homeowners Association has been working on getting petitions from the lot owners. Seventy percent of the lot. owners have expressed their agreement and support of this zoning change. Four property owners were opposed to this change; no response was received from approximately 38 .owners. The Homeowners Association would like to request the City to initiate the rezoning process. Either the Commission or the. Council can do this by ordinance. Granting this would not mean that it is approved, it will just start the rezoning process.. Staff would conduct research and return at a later meeting with the report and recommendation. All property owners in the subdivision would be notified as well as residents within the 200 foot notification range. P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 1 of 11 Commissioner Lightfoot asked if anyone voiced their reason for opposition. Staff Planner Kee explained that some concern was enforcing the weed restrictions.. One of the owners, thhat was in opposition has moved from the area, meaning actually three property owners are in opposition. Commissioner Gribou moved to initiate the rezoning. procedures. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a proposed final plat for Woodcreek Section Eight encompassing 3767 acres zoned. PUD-2, Planned Unit Development located on the estst side of Stonebrook.Drive and Wilshire Court intersection. (97-244) Graduate Engineer Kaspar presented the staff report and stated :that the final plat is proposed as a Planned Unit Development imilar to Woodcreek Phase 7 which is located across Stonebrook Drive. This development would create 13 PUD lots around the east extension of Wilshire Court. Mr. Kaspar explained that the water service is .being extended within this subdivision to provide service and fire protection. The applicant is proposing to continue Wilshire Court across Stonebrook Drive. Approximately 0.5 acres of public right-of--way is 'being dedicated with. this plat. A stormwater detention facility would be provided by the. applicant which would be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Associations. Staff recommended approval of this proposed final plat. Commissioner Lightfoot moved to approve the proposed final plat. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration. of a final plat for Dartmouth Crossing, !3.289 acre subdivision 'on the south side of Southwest Parkway at the proposed extension of Iartmouth Drive. (97-246). Staff explained that this item was withdrawn by the applicant prior to the meeting. AGENDA ITEM NO.S: Establish parking requirements for the Sylvan Learning Center. Senior Planner McCully presented .this .item and stated that the applicant is proposing to build a free standing tutoring center on a vacant tract that has been subdivided recently on Southwest Parkway near Central Park Lane.. The proposal wi1L be'the first tutoring center to locate on an individual site in this City. In two instances in the past, the tutoring. services were classified as "schools" rather than tutoring services due to the large amount of students that would be taught at peak times within a relatively small lease space. Those businesses were required to go through the Conditional Use Permit process due to the school classification. This request has been classified as a "freestanding tutoring service" by staff. The proposed building will be approximately 6000 square ft (included in the conceptual plan). According to the. applicant :during the highest peak times-there would be around 25 people in the center. Many children are dropped off. Thee. applicant is requesting the same parking requirements as an office building of the same size. The .ratio for, an office building of the same size would. be 1 to 250, and would require 24 parking spaces. Staff recommended approval with the condition that any future significant changes in use or employees be reevaluated. Commissioner Gribou expressed his concern with-dead-end public parking lots.. Ms. McCully said Staff would relay this concern to the applicant. P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 2 of 11 Commissioner Lightfoot moved to approve the: parking requirement of 24 parking spaces (one space per 250 sq. ft. with the staff comments. Commissioner Gribou seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0), AGENDA ITEM N0.6: Break for Dinner. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Public hearing and consideration of a request to rezone' approximately 5.8 acres located along the south side of .Southwest Parkway being Lots 2,3,5,6 and ~, Block C and Lot 6, Block D Ashford Square Subdivision from A-P Administrative Professional to R 2 Duplexes. (97-115 and 97-116) Senior Planner McCully-presented the staff report and stated that the subject site is located •on the rear portion of the Ashford Square Center. The. lots to the north. are. zoned A-P Administrative Professional and are developed as a day care center and an office building. Lots. to the immediate west are zoned C- 1 General Commercial and are developed as a bank and fast food restaurant .across the frontage. Behind the frontage area there is a :15,000 square foot commercial building (formerly the Schulman Theater). that has recently been approved for a nightclub use. That: approval is the .third nightclub that has been approved for that property since 1993. The R-7 zoned property to the south is developed as a mobile home park. The abutting vacant property to the east was zoned R-5 Apartment Medium Density three years ago and is currently in the platting process. The request is currently not in compliance with the Land Use Plan nor with Development Policies relating to screening and buffering .between. residential and commercial uses. An immediate juxtaposition of the proposed R-2 adjacent to a high intensity commercial development would not be compatible without mitigation. In order to approve a zoning that is in .direct conflict with the Land Use Plan, an .applicant must show that there is a change of conditions within the area that could justify the proposed zoning as opposed to the planned land use for the property. In thin case, the applicant has studied the market conditions and concluded that the subject property has remained vacant because the. rear lots are not marketable as zoned. The applicant understands the .Staff's: concerns regarding the adjacent commercial lots and has communicated verbally that. he intends to separate the. commercial traffic. from the residential traffic and to screen the proposed duplex area from the existing commercial sites. In response to Staffs concerns for not only the layout but also the condition of the existing drives,. he has agreed to rebuild and reconfigure these drives. At the time the property comes in for replatting, the Staff will ensure that the conditions of zoning are met. The Planning and Zoning Commission will have ultimate approval authority over he replat. Seven property owners within the 200 foot notification area were notified. Staff'received one inquiry as of the date of the... stafl'report. Staffxecommended approval with. the condition that the zoning. is not effective .until a replat has been approved, and that the replat provide the.. following: 1. New access :drives that. meet current City paving standards. 2. That the access drives meet standards for adequate fire lanes and City vehicle turnarounds/radii. 3. That the access drives have no connection with the commercial access drives that currently exist to the west. 4. That the duplex lots be oriented away from the commercial lots. 5. That there be an impenetrable screen installed along the western boundary of the. duplex lots and that the screen is not easily mountable. P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 3 of 11 ' Chairman Massey opened the public hearing and .seeing no one present to speak in reference to this project, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Garner moved to recommend approval of the request to rezone this property with the conditions recommended. by Staff. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. S; Public hearing and consideration of a parking lot plan in a C-N Neighborhood Commercial .zoning district-for Equity Realty's office building located at 201 Wellborn Road. (97-431) Senior Planner McCully presented the staf)' report and stated that the subject site is zoned C-N Neighborhood Commercial, which requires Planning and .Zoning Commission approval. In order to approve. the use and .site plan of a C-N proposal, the Commission must find that the purpose of the district is met. The Zoning Ordinance .states the. purpose of this district as follows: This district provides small commercial sites for residential convenience goods and service businesses. No use shall be allowed which would adversely affect the health, safety, welfare, or residential character of the neighborhood The use shall be a law traffic generator and shall not create any noise, light, or odors abnormal to the neighborhood. No outside storage or display of goods or materials shall be allowed. The applicant is proposing to construct a 3,770 square foot one story metal office building. The site wily be oriented to Wellborn Road. and take sole access from the front. The subject. property abuts a developed apartment. site to the north and a developed single. family area to the east. A screening fence along these property lines has. been discussed with the .applicant. A fence along the northern property line may interfere with some of the trees that the applicant wishes to retain. The :screening hence to the east would be adjacent to a dedicated.. alley that is not longer used. The. applicant may choose to request abandonment of the alley,. at which. time a screening fence -will be required adjacent to the residential lot. Approximately nine .property owners within 200' were notified and no responses were received as of the date on the staff report. Staff recommends approval with all staff comments as listed as well as the condition that a screening fence be installed either adjacent to the alley or adjacent to the single: fanuly. Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. Steve Musser, MM Design, explained that the property between Varsity Apartments and the Equity Realty site contains large live oak trees on the property line, and the applicant would like to use these live oaks as screens instead of putting a wood fence-along the trees. Shirley O'Brien,. representative for Varsity Apartments, .would like the trees to stay instead of having a fence put up. Chairman Massey closed the public .hearing. P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 4 of 11 ' Commissioner Garner. moved to approve the parking lot plan for Equity Realty at 201 Wellborn Road without a fence btween the Varsity Apartments and this project. Commissioner Lightfoot seeonded the motion which passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Public hearing .and consideration of a request to'rezone approximately 37 acres in the proposed Westfield Addition located along the south side of Graham Aoad near the future extension of Victoria Avenue from A-0 Agricultural Open to R 1 single Family Residential and consideration of a Master Plan and Preliminary Plat of the entire Westfield Addition, 52 acres divided.. into. 171 single ..family lots, 1 C-N reserve tract and 3 reserve tracts (97-117 and 97-320) City Planner Kee presented the staff report and stated that the subject property was annexed into the City in 1993, at which time it was reflected as A-0 Agricultural Open on the Zoning Map. This area as well as most of the property within the southern parts of the City remains undeveloped, however, many of these areas have seen recent development interest due to the City's planned utility expansions into them. Originally this property was. divided into ,3, approximately, 15 acre tracts. Recently the-most southerly portion of these 3 tracts, (where .Southern Plantation will extend) and the. westerly portion where Victoria will extend was .subdivided from the 3 original tracts. This was done without platting the property. The. thoroughfareplan calls for the extension of Victoria and .Southern Plantation to extend through these properties. Ms. Kee. explained that for the past year and a half, the applicant has been involved in numerous discussions. with City Staff regarding the development of the subject property. The applicant submitted several conceptual plans for `initial.. response from the Staff. Staff discussed the following with the applicant: the possibility of combining the parkland dedication requirements with the existing creek to gain compliance with the. Comprehensive Plan goals .relating. to park linkages and combining .schools and park sites (there is an adjacent future school site), orienting. the subdivision to take advantage of the creek as an amenity,. the thoroughfare plan and .how it relates to the .site, the internal. street layout and access, and how to sewer and drain the property. Staff discussed these concerns with the developer for the past year and still does not feel they have been adequately addressed. The developer asked to bring this master and preliminary plat and associated zoning request forward to the Commission and Council knowing that there would be a negative staff recommendation at this. time. Ms. Kee stated that Staff has. the following specific concerns: Zoning: Staff has difficulty recommending approval of any zoning changes at this. time. The developer requested rezoning the first two phases to R-1 Single Family :(currently zoned A-O Agricultural Open). Ms. Kee explained that although the. R-1 .zoning is in compliance with the land use plan, Staff feels that there are too many unanswered- questions on the master plan. Phasing: The developer's intention is to build single family residences with some possible neighborhood commercial at the Victoria and Graham Road intersection. The master plan shows Phases One and Two, or more than. half of the proposed. residential .development, before the extension of Victoria and Southern Plantation is even addressed. The concern stems from the ability for the remainder of the development to support such large pieces of infrastructure. There are also additional concerns about the internal street layout. Ms. Kee explained that the plan shows no secondary access to Graham or P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Puge S of 11 ' Victoria until Phase Three, which would mean there .would approximately 107 lots built with only a single access. Drainaue: The preliminary plat .refers to a regional detention area located on the adjacent CSISD property. According to CSISD staff and consultants, their project does not necessitate participation in a regional detention facility.. Ms. Kee stated that staff cannot verify CSISD detention plans at this time. Floodplain/Floodway Ms. Kee explained that the developer has not confirmed that there is not any floodplain on the property.. CSISD on the adjacent tract is performing. a hydraulic analysis toy define the floodplain/floodway on their property and there. appears to be floodplain on their tract. The location of the floodplain may have an impact on the lots that backup to the reserve creek area. At this point, with the location unknown, the suitability for development of these lots is also. unknown. Sanitary Sewer: Ms. Kee stated that the' developer has discussed the ability. for this property to sewer toward the south rather than participating in the Graham Road Impact Area Phase 3 sanitary sewer line and they have discussed a request to amend the existing impact fee `area 92-01 to remove the Phase 3 line. Ms. Kee explained. that if Phase 3 is deleted, the developer would then like to pursue an alternate sewer alignment along the north fork of Lick Creek. A portion. of this line has already been constructed, and is existing in the Springbrook Subdivision and would .continue west. to and through this development.. Ms. Kee .explained that the developer would be requesting oversize participation in this new sewer line. Ultimately, City Council would have to approve the change to the impact fee area. Oversize Participation: Staff requires that impact. studies be presented when oversize participation is being requested. The developer has not presented the studies to Staff. Proposed C-N Tract: Ms. Kee explained that this property will: come before the .Commission and Council as a rezoning .request in the future. Approval of this master plan. does not guarantee approval of any future. rezorrings. Ms. Kee stated that Staff does not see a problem with some .neighborhood commercial zoning in the master plan. Parkland Dedication and Open .Space Along the Creek: Ms. Kee explained- that this master plan also includes a portion: of the north fork of Lick Creek.. She acid that this. master plan should address how this creek area will work with the. planned development. Currently, the creek is shown as a "Reserve Tract" and does not incorporate the residential .development... Ms. Kee fated that Section 8-A of the Subdivision Regulations states "In all subdivisions, .due regard shall be shown for all natural features such. as trees, water courses, historical spots, and similar community assets, when preserved, will add attractiveness and value to the property. " Ms. Kee said that the Parks Director has. had conversations with the developer and indicated the Parks Department's desire to have pedestrian. and maintenance vehicle. access from all .streets in this development to the creek open. space. The .applicant has offered one access from the cul-de-sac in Phase One. She explained that the Comprehensive Plan recommends moving toward a linkage. system of greenbelts and open space connecting. neighborhoods and parks. The parkland cash dedication from this development would be in the amount of $38,475.00. However, the applicant has recently acquired all the tract on the other. side of this creek which runs completely to Barron Road_ Ms. Kee indicated that this would be `an ideal .opportunity to provide. a neighborhood park location with access to the creek as open space, tying. in nicely with the adjacent CSISDD property where there will be an elementary school and intermediate school in the future. P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 6 of 11 Ms. Kee stated that although staff supports single family residential land uses with some associated neighborhood commercial in this location, staff cannot recommend approval of the zoning, overall master plan or preliminary .plat at his time' until the following are addressed: Thought given to how the creek area could ultimately be incorporated as part of the development . Alternative phasing to address access and infrastructure guarantees.. A determination as to how the property will be severed. A determination and ultimate recommendation from the Parks Board as to the best way to provide ..parkland.. Submission of impact analysis for the oversize requests. Ms. Kee explained that the Commission .could .approve the request, deny, or deny without prejudice which would waive the 180 day waiting period. Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. John Szabuniewicz, .Applicant, explained that he is trying to address all staff concerns. He stated that the staff report relates to a much earlier submittal. Mr. Szabunewicz handed out xerox copies of maps (attached). He stated that Lick Creek Development, Inc. only owns the Westfield Addition which stops I' just short of the creek. A different owner owns the creek. There is a 50 foot access. point to Graham Road on the tract in the. back. He showed on the map the extension of Victoria, to comply with the Comprehensive Plan as recommended by .Staff. He said that the Victoria extension also needs property from.... other property owners,. He stated that he has talked to the other owners and they do not want to donate the land needed to continue Victoria. He also said that his company does not have a problem with,developing Victoria and they will have to address this item at a future date. The followiing are Mr. Szabuniewicz's responses to .Staff concerns: Zoning: He believes the master plan is being met considering his is just asking for R-1 zone for the two tracts. He feels that even though staff has a problem with. the platting he thinks the zoning change should still be allowed. He believes the platting. problems should be addressed with the plat not with the zoning request. Phasing: The second. map he handed out .reflected the phasing. He stated that the phasing. is intended to change to address the staff concerns. Phase two will then include building an additionaY access to Graham Road to improve traffic .circulation. These changes in phasing will .give them time. tc~ figure out a way to handle the extension of Victoria scheduled for Phase 3. They will talk to the other owners during this time and try to resolve. some the right-of-way questions. C-N Zoning: Mr. Szabuniewicz stated that the C-N zoning has not been requested yet. ,They are waiting. to see what they want to do with that property.. The property located adjacent to the proposed subdivision is zoned M-2 Heavy Industrial, and the property "catty cornered" is zoned. C-2 Commercial Industrial, which puts "higher" zoning all around the subject property. Taking this into consideration, Mr. Szabuniewicz stated Ghat he was not sure what the appropriate zoning should be for the C-N proposed section. This will. be decided on at a later date. Floodplain/Floodwa~ Another drawing Mr. Szabuniewicz handed out was from the FEMA map. Mr. Szabuniewicz stated that the entire property is in the Zone X which puts. the property outside the 500 year floodplain. He .said that none of their property is in the Floodplain. He commented that flooding is not an issue. at all.. Mr. Szabuniewcz stated. that the homes already developed in the Springbrook area P&ZMinutes November 20, 7997 Page 7 of 11 ' have a slab. elevation of 283 - 284. feet,. and-the bottom of the creek on the property is 284 feet, which means the creek is higher than the slabs on the homes. Drainage` Mr. Szabuniewicz said that there is off-site drainage. He .said they have talked to CSISD and have come to an agreement that the school has a portion of their tract in the corner that they would be willing to sell the Lick Creek Development for building the detention facility. He stated that at the time of the agreement he was not sure if they would have a joint detention area or an easement. As of the meeting, CSISD agreed to :sell Lick .Creek Development the corner property since it would not be usable by CSISD. Sanitary Sewer: 1VIr. Szabunewicz stated that a letter was submitted to Kent Laza, City Engineer on August 19, 1997 which included an impact study for sewer demands for the area. He stated .that he recommended looking at a 12" sewer line (oversize), but it has been determined by Lick Creek Development and CSISD that they would need an 8" sewer line coming up from Springbrook along the creek.. A request for oversized participation was .submitted to the City and he said they were willing to oversize. it to a 12", 15" or even an 18", depending what the City wants.. Mr. Szabuniewicz said that the development is ready to proceed on this issue. Parkland Dedication: Mr. Szabuniewicz said that they would prefer at this time to pay the fee rather than make any park dedication: He believes CSISD would like to have a park located on their site. He stated that at some future date Lick Creek Development would work with the staff to provide. better access for the'reserve tracts. The preliminary plat for Phase One shows a 50' access at the end of the cul-de-sac for access to the back tract and the creek area. He said they plan to have all cul-de-sacs provide access to the creek. 1VIr. Szabuniewicz stated that. he feels between now and the Council review they can resolve any other questions and concerns from Staff and the Commission. Chairman Massey closed the public: hearing. Commissioner Garner felt there were too many unanswered questions to approve the requests as presented. Chairman Massey .agreed with Commissioner Garner that there are too many "loose ends" needing to be taken care of before approval. Commissioner Lightfoot agrees and felt that there is a need for more residential housing and there. were some staff questions. and concerns that were; addressed tonight, but there are still many things that are not meeting staffs concerns. He believed it would be necessary for the developer to meet with staffto take care of all concerns and uncertainties. Commissioner Garner moved to deny the rezoning request, master plan and preliminary plat for the Westfield Addition without .prejudice {waive the 180 day waiting period). Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for the use and associated site plan to show the expansion of Oakwood Intermediate School at 106 Holik. (97-718) StaffPlanner Battle presented the staifreport and stated that the proposed development is an expansion to the existing school facilities. The additions will .include 8,749 square feet of new classrooms, a 12,126 square .foot locker room and gymnasium, 20 new parking spaces and covered .walkways. Section 14 of the Zoning Ordinance :authorizes; the existence of conditional uses. The Commission may P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 8 of 11 permit a conditional. use subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards, when after public notice and hearing the Commission finds that:. (Staff comments are in italics) 1. "The proposed use meets. all the minimum standards. established in the ordinance for the type of use proposed." The Project Review Committee reviewed the site plan on November S and found compliance"with most of the required development standards. A couple of minor revisions were required. 2. "That the.proposed use meets the purpose and intent of the ordinance and is in harmony with the development policies and goals and objectives as embodied in the Comprehensive Plan for Development of the. City." The use is compatible with the existing school uses on the site and surrounding residential uses. 3. "That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of the surrounding. neighborhood or its :occupants, nor be substantially or permanently injurious to neighboring property." The public hearing is an opportunity for the Commission to measure the potential impact on surrounding land uses. 4. "The Commission may impose additional reasonable restrictions or conditions to carry out the spirit and intent of the ordinance. and to mitigate. adverse .effects of he proposed use. These requirements may include, but are not limited to, increased open space, loading and parking requirements, additional landscaping, and additional improvements such as curbing, sidewalks, and screening." Unless the public hearing brings to light any new information indicating potential negative impacts, Staff recommends approval. Approximately 28 property owners :within 200 feet were. notified, and no response was received. Chairman Massey opened the public. hearing. Seeing no one to speak in favor of or in opposition to the request,. the public hearing was. closed. Commissioner Garner moved to approve the conditional .use request. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which ,passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 11: Public hearing and. consideration of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment regulating telecommunications towers within .the city limits. (97-814) Before the dinner break, Staff Planner Battle presented .the draft ordinance and proposed amendment regulating telecommunications towers within the city limits. He explained that the current ordinance was adopted in 1994, and in 1996 the Telecommunications Tower Act was passed which set forth new standards in regulating towers. He stated that input for the new ordinance came from many groups including local service providers, City of Bryan staff and Telecommunications. Committee, City of College Station .staff,. the Community Appearance Committee, a College Station telecommunications focus group, many local residents, -and the Planning and Zoning Commission. In addition, lengthy research into the Telecommunications Act and the ordinances of many other cities ensures. that this ordinance is in compliance with the FCC and contains elements similar to those already adopted by municipalities nationwide. Coordination with the City. of Bryan has helped both cities ' develop ordinances that are very similar and will aid service providers. entering this area. Bryan's ordinance is also currently being considered .for adoption. P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 9 of I1 The draft ordinance addresses public health and safety :issues by maintaining minimum distances from residential structures .and zoning districts and requiring FCC certification. The notification area was increased to SOO feet from the property line of the host site to allow more public comment. The issues concerning .visual impact have been. addressed. by setting height limits, requiring tower separations, establishing. setbacks from major thoroughfares, establishing aesthetic controls in special districts and encouraging collocation on existing towers and structures. The use of stealth. technology to "camouflage" .new WTF's is also encouraged.. The ordinance also requires applicants to submit necessary information, including a visual impact analysis, that will aid the. Commission in making decisions; All WTF's would: require successful completion of the Conditional Use Permit process. Chairman Massey opened the public hearing after the dinner break. Seeing no one to speak in favor of or in opposition to the request, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Garner .moved to recommend .approval. of the ordinance amendment with the exception of the following suggestions for changes: - .Page 1 (ordinance) part 3, correct the dollar .amount of the fine - General Regulations (Section C) -omit the WPC, NG,' PDD (except PDD-H), and C-B zoning districts under the Major WTF's that are listed elsewhere in the section. - Separation Between. Towers -Include staff recommendations in this section. Commissioner Parker seconded themotion which passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 12: Zoning Ordinance amendments modifying the composition of the Zoning Board of Adjustments to include an engineer for drainage variance hearings and removal of the certified mail requirement from notification sections of the Ordinance. (97-820) Staff Planner Roman presented the ordinance changes before the. dinner break. He stated that at the joint Planning .and Zoning .and Council meeting of October 2, 1997, modifications to the drainage ordinance were discussed. Dne of the amendments, requiring notice. of approval or disapproval of a development permit .sixty (60) working days after receipt of the. developer's proposal was heard by Council on November 13, 1997. 1VIr. Roman stated that also at the October 23, 1997 City Council meeting, staff was directed to modify the existing ordinance to require. the presence of at least one licensed engineer on the Zoning Board of Adjustments which would achieve the goal of lhaving one member with an engineering background on the board to hear drainage .variance requests without the necessity of creating and managing a Drainage Variance Board. 1VIr. Roman stated that. the first ordinance amendment would require that at least one member of the Zoning. Board of Adjustments have an engineering background whenever appeals or variances- to the drainage ordinance are presented to the Board and to having two of the four alternate members of the Board be licensed engineers in the State of Texas. Mr. Roman explained that the remaining. ordinance amendments are related to changing. the current requirement of "notification by certified mail" to "notification by depositing the notification in the municipality, properly addressed with postage .paid, in the United States Mail". This change is recommended to reduce the cost related to the notification process, as well as giving.. City Staff the option of notifying by .certified, registered, or regular mail the property owners within .200' of the property for which notification is required. Mr. Roman stated that this amendment would bring the City of College Station Zoning Ordinance in line with the Texas Local. Government Code requirements for notification. P&ZMinutes November 20, 1997 Page 10 of 11 Y' Chairman Massey opened the public hearing after the dinner break. Seeing no one to speak in favor of or in opposition to-the request, the public hearing was-closed. Commissioner Garner moved to recommend .approval of these ordinance amendments. Commissioner Lightfoot. seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4-0). ~~ AGENDA ITEM NO. 13: Other Business. ', Commissioner Lightfoot stated that he likes the way this meeting was handled and would like to start all long meetings a little" earlier. AGENDA ITEM NO. 14 Adjourn. Commissioner Lightfoot moved to adjourn the meeting of the. Planning .and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4-0). j APPROVED: Chairman, James Massey ATTEST: E Staff Assistant, Debra Charanza I P&Z Minutes November 20, 1997 Page 11 of I1 STAFF REVIEW REPORT December 31, 1997 TO: John Szabuniewicz, Lick Creek Development Inc. P.O. Box 14000, College Station,. TX 77841 Martin Riley Jr. 7182. Riley Road, Bryan, TX 77808 FROM: Development Review Staff Jane Kee, City Planner , Paul Kaspar, Graduate Civil Engineer ~_ -; Natalie. Ruiz, Assistant Development Coor in ° o Shirley. Valk, .Development. Coordinator Tony Michalsky, Electrical Operations Coordinator Laverne.Akin, GTE Representative David Durough, Lone Star Gas Representative SUBJECT: .Master Development Plan & Preliminary Plat - Wes~eld Addition; proposed master plan for 52 acres located on the- southeast corner of Graham Road and the future extension of Victoria Avenue. The subdivision consists of 184 residential lots, 1 commercial lot,. 1 reserve tract and a futurepark. A Preliminary flat for Phase I of this subdivision includes 15.941 acres divided into 58 single family lots, a detention area and. a future park. (98-300) The development review staff reviewed the. above mentioned master plan and preliminary plat on Monday, December 29, 1997. Staff still cannot recommend approval of the overall master plan until the developer shows the City that the plan as phased can support the infrastructure required. The staff cannot support a .plan which might. result m .leaving the. developer's. obligation to provide infrastructure to future taxpayers. There are still many:: unanswered questions regarding sewer, drainage,. floodplain and parkland, and these must be answered before any. final plats can be processed. Until a master plan is approved, staff cannot recommend approval of any preliminary plats.. Staffwill also recommend denial of anypiecemeal .zoning request, albeit in compliance with the Land Use Plan.. The following is a list of ordinance requirements identified by staff. This list does not relieve the applicant of total .compliance with all current ordinance requirements. Master Plan Related.` Ordinance Requirements:. _ Show location of the rear property lines for northern most lots on Renee Lane to show how the future East-West: collector will .align with the existing lots. Explain what the bold line means dividing. the .lots between Hartford and Winchester. _ All streets shown on the ..Master Plan can be a 50' right-of-way except for Victoria Avenue and the future east-west collector which must be 60' rights-of--way. i PRC Report Westfield Addition Case #98-300 Page 2 of 3 Master Plan Related (cont.): Ordinance Requirements: _ Add general .note addressing the minimum residential lot. size. (There are several lots that do not appear to meet the minimum residential of size. Provide a general note ithat all residential lots. will meet the minimum lot size as required in the Zoning Ordinance. Staff will verify that the minimum lot sizes are met at the time of final plat.) _ Verify. that the drawing is to scale. It appears that several areas are not drawn to the 1:100' scale. _ Clarify the property included in Phase 3. Specify the zoning districts referenced in general notes 2b and Zc. _ There are two lines that extend across. the Springfield right-of-way between Winchester and the Creek that are not labeled. Clearly label: or remove these lines. Include the word "approximate" in the description .shown as the "Future East-West Collector" since the. exact location has not been determined. _ .The entire right-ofway for the east/west collector must be dedicated.. The Subdivision Regulations prohibit the platting or construction of "half streets". _ Staff continues to have concerns as to whether the Master Plan subnutted with the indicated phasing can support. the remaining infrastructure required including the Victoria Avenue extension and the East/West Collector. The developer must .submit construction estimates sealed by a registered engineer which supports the developer's verbal statement that the proposed phasing will support the required infrastructure. (Phase four appears to contain a large amount of infrastructure with a 'small amount of developable land remaining.) Preliminary Plat Related Ordinance Requirements: Remove the service lines to the individual lots. Clearly label and number all lots and blocks. Clearly label all utilities as existing or proposed: _ Clearly label contour lines. _ Clarify general note.#7. The. 50' :access way is not shown as it was on previous plats; the cul-de-sac extends into the reserve area. State what is being :reserved for "future. use" (access to open space, creek area, park, etc.) Explain what the F.H. is for at the rear of the lots between Westfield Drive and the CSISD property. (Staff suggests that it be removed and fire hydrant location be .determined at the time of final plat.) PRC Report Westfreld Addition Case #98-300 Page 3 of 3 PreliminaryPlat Related (cont.) Ordinance Requirements: Show oversize. participation for sewer line extension. _ Show primary :control points or descriptions and ties to such control point, to which, all dimensions,.. angles bearings, block numbers, and similar data shall- be referred. (See item 16 on the Preliminary Plat checklist _ General note #6 must be revised once the Parks Board has made a decision pertaining to the parkland. _ Refer to the "Possible Flood-.Hazard Area" as the approximate location of the flood hazard area - to be determined by a study currently underway. Comments/Concerns: Coordinate electrical details with Electrical Operations Coordinator Tony Michalsky at (409) 764-3660. The subject property is currently outside the City's service area and the legal department is working on this situation. City staff will update the developer as more information is available. Coordinate. telephone service details with G.T.E. Representative Laverne Akin at (409) 821-4723. There is a 4" gas main on the opposite side of Graham Road near the proposed subdivision for future gas service. Coordinate service details, availability and meter locations with Lone Star Gas Representative David borough at (409) 776-0627 or by mobile at 777-0305. SUBMIT THE MYLAR ORIGINAL AND 15 COPIES EACH OF THE REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIlViINARY PLAT BY NOON ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 7, 1997 TQ BE INCLUDED IN THE PLANING AND ZONING COMMISSION PACKETS FOR THE MEETING ON THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 1998 AT 7:00 P,M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL ROOM, 11:01 TEXAS AVENUE .SOUTH. ....................................................................................::•::: w:::::::nw:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: w:::::::::: x?:ii4;;^}ii:;Liii:iiii::iviiY i:4i: ii}i:4}w:::::::::: x. tiw'•ii :i{•i~~+:.:{:::n:.•i;?.}?: r..:::::::.~:.:_{:::.~.:t+-•~ ::.::'i{•:ii^i;{{.}~:.i:.... 1. n..::.:: n ::::::.:....:. :::::::::::.~::.. ~:::..:. x.:•vv......••vpv.:::::. (~ ~~:~ti{>-i'~'.iiii~ii'~:ii2}}ixS:;::~tii •'*Y V4' Regular Item Consent Item Statutory Item Item Submitted By: Jane R Kee, City. Planner _ For Council Meeting Of: December 11,.1997 _ Director Approval: City Manager Approval: _ Item Summary: For the past year and a half, the applicant has been involved in numerous discussions with City Staff regarding the development of the subject property.. The applicant has submitted several conceptual. plans for initial response from the Staff:: We discussed the following: the possibility of combining the parkland' dedication requirements with the existing creek to gain compliance with the Comprehensive Plan goals relating to park linkages and combining schools and park sites (there is an adjacent future school site), orienting the subdivision to take advantage of the creek as an amenity, the thoroughfare plan and how it relates to the site, the internal street layout and access, and how to sewer and drain the property. Staff still does not feel these areas have been adequately. addressed. The developer asked to bring this. master plan and preliminary plat and associated zoning request forward to the Commission and Council. Staff has the following concerns: Zonma The property currently. has A-0 Agricultural Open zoning on it. The developer has a request to rezone the first two phases to R-1 Single Family. Staff has difficulty recommending approval of any zoning at this time, although R-l is in compliance with the land use plan, because there are ~o many unanswered questions. on the master plan. Phasing The developer's intention is to .build single family residences. on the property with possible neighborhood commercial at the Victoria/Graham intersection. The master plan shows Phases One and Two or more than half of the proposed residential development before Victoria and Southern Plantation are even addressed. Staff is concerned about the phasing of this overall plan.. The. concern stems. from the ability for the remainder of the development to support such large pieces of infrastructure. There are also additional concerns about the internal. street layout. No secondary o:~groupkleve_ser~cvshtU7117320.doc access to Graham or Victoria is provided until Phase 3. There would be approximately 1071ots built with only a single access. Drainage Staff is concerned about. drainage facilities for the subdivision. The preliminary plat refers to a regional detention area located on the adjacent CSISD property... According to CSISD staff and consultants, their project does not necessitate participation in a regional detention facility. Staff cannot verify CSISD detention plans at this time. Flood~lain/Floodway Floodplain and floodway may exist on this property. The developer has not confirmed that there is not any floodplain on the property. Sanitary Sewer The developer has discussed the ability for this property to sewer toward the south ratherthan participating in the Graham Road Impact Area Phase 3 sanitary sewer line. They have discussed) a request to amendthe existing impact fee area 92-01 and remove the Phase 3 line. If this phase is deleted, they would. then like to pursue an alternate sewer alignment along the north fork of Lick Creek. A portion of this line has already been constructed, and is existing in the Springbrook Subdivision and would continue west to and through this development. The developer would be requestingoversize>participation in this new sewer line. The responsibility for demonstrating. the need to amend the Impact Fee Area 92-01 and reduce the number of lots that would participate ur this impact. fee is inherent on this developer. Ultimately City ;Council must approve any change to the impact fee area. This has not been done to date. Oversize Participation It is required. that impact studies be presented when oversize participation is being requested. No impact studies have been presented to the City staff. Parkland-Dedication and Open Space along the creek This master plan also includes a portion of the north fork of Lick Creek. Given the Comprehensive Plan, and. discussions about open space along creeks, this plan should address how this creek area will work with the planned development. Currently, it is shown as a "Reserve Tract" and does not incorporate the residential development. It is notbeing treated as an asset but ratherthe development has its back turned to what could be an amenity. The parkland cash dedication from this development would be in the amount of $38,475.00. However, the applicant has. recently acquired all the tract on the other side of this creek which runs completely to Barron Road. This is an ideal opportunity to provide a neighborhood park location with access to the creek as open space. This could tie in with the adjacent CSISD property where there will be an elementary school and intermediate school in the future. Policy Statements: Civic Pride Citizens benefit from well-planned, attractive residential and commercial-areal and from preserving historic areas. - Parks and Recreation. -Citizens benefit from parks and recreational activities that are geographically and demographically .accessible and serve a diversity of interests. o:\group\deve_set\cvsht\97117320.doc Transportation/Mobility -Citizens benefit from the ability to move into, out ~of, and within College Station in a safe and efficient manner. Budgetary & Financial. Summary: The developer has indicated that oversize participation will be requested on the sewer line, Victoria, and Southern Plantation. There have not been any impact fee reports done on this property which address the magnitude of this request. Oversize participation funds are extremely limited at this point. Advisory Board Recommendations: The P&Z held a public hearing on 11-20-97 and recommends denial without prejudice which allows a waiver of the 180 days for reconsideration of a rezomng. Staff Recommendations: Although staff supports .single family residential land uses with some associated neighborhood commercial in this location, we cannot recommend approval of the zoning, overall master plan or preliminary plat at this time until the following are addressed as discussed above: Thought given to how the creek area could ultimately be incorporated as part of the development Alternative phasing to address access and infrastructure guarantees, A determination as to how the property will be sewered A determination and ultimate recommendation "from the Parks Board as to the best way to provide parkland.. _ Submission. of impact analysis for the oversize requests City Attorney Comments:. Council Action Options:. Approve, deny, deny without prejudice, approve with conditions. Supporting Materials; 1. Comp Plan Goals & Objectives, Engineering and Notification Information 2. Location Map 3. Applications for Rezoning and Plan 4. Master Development. Plan 5. Preliminary Plat 6. Rezoning Ordinance o:\group\deve_ser\cvsht\97117320.doc COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: Transportation -Goal #2 -- College Station should continue to develop ai.nd maintain a transportation planning. process which addresses long .range needs... Goal #3 -- continue to maintain a Master Thoroughfare Plan ...which permits Right-of--way dedications as specified....dedication of street system right-of--ways in those areas of the community that are undeveloped Parks and Recreation Goals and Objectives -Goal # 1 -- encourage additional connections between selected parks/recreation areas and residential areas by a system of linear parks/parkways/greenbelts which .utilize creek beds, drainage ways...Goal #2 -- continue to jointly develop and maintain parks ...with otlher public agencies... Goal #3 -- designate selected portions of 100-year floodplain on .undeveloped properties as "natural comdors" that are to be used for open space and passive recreation uses that will link .parks to one another and to residential areas. LAND USE PLAN The. Land Use Plan shows medium density single family at a maximum density of 6 dwelling units per acre.. The proposed zoning would be in compliance with the Land-Use Plan. .., THOROUGI~'ARE PLAN The Thoroughfare Plan shows. the extension of Victoria along the western boundary of the 14.8 acre tract located just to the west of the two tracts submitted for rezoning. The Plan also shows the extension of Southern Plantation through the southern portion of the subject tracts and through the southern portion of the adjacent 14.8 acre tract. ENGINEERING Water: Water is provided along Graham Road Off-site Easements: May be required for sanitary sewer. Sidewalks: Will be required internally. The sidewalk along. Graham Road will be constructed with the City's Graham Road CIP project. Variances: Developer is requesting a variance to the cul-de-sac length for Phase One.. Staff cannot recommend approval at this time because of so many unanswered questions on the design of the overall plan. NOTIFICATION: Legal Notice Publication(s): Eagle; 11-5-97 and 11-26-97 Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 11-20-97 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: 12-11-97 Number. of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200':. 8 Response Received: None as of date of staff report o:~groupkleve~ser~cvsht\97117320. doc