Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes q~-iii Council Meetings 8/12/99 Page 8 Agenda Item_No. 14 --.Regular Agenda 14 1 Public hearing, discussion and possible action on rezoning 13.82 acres, Pebble Creek Phase 8 B located southwestof the intersection of Royal Adelade and St. Andrews Drrve from A O Agricultural Ogen and M-1 Planned Industrial to R-1 Single Family Residential Staff Planner Jessica Jimmerson stated that the. request complied with the Land Use Plan and the approved Pebble Creek master .plan: She noted that the fence issue would be addressed during the filing of the final plat for Phase 7A. Mayor McIlhaney opened the public hearing. Steve Parker, 1105 San. Saba came forward. He served as Planning and Zoning Commission liaison to the council meeting and was present to clarify the P&Z's action and answer questions. Mayor McIlhaney closed the public hearing. Councilman Garner made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2405 rezoning 13.82 acres, Pebble Creek Phase 8-B located southwest of the intersection of Royal Adelade and St. Andrews Drive from A-0 Agricultural Open and M-1 Planned Industrial to R-1 .Single Family Residential: Seconded by Councilman Massey which carried unanimously, 7-0. A enda Item No 14 2 Public hearing, discussion and possible action on rezoning approximately 18 6 acres located in front of and adiacent to Raintree Subdivision from R-1 Single Family Residential and A-0 AgriculturaVOpen Space to PDD-H Planned Senior Planner Sabine McCully addressed this item. The applicant has proposed an apartment complex on the frontage road with a smaller townhome subdivision or development to the east where Appomattox ends. There are five single family homes in Raintree subdivision abutting the proposed. development. Opposition by Raintree homeowners has been expressed to staff= and Planning and Zoning Commission. The main issue is the multi-family development next to single family residential. Councilmembers discussed the drainage impact on this development and surrounding properties. Staff Engineer JeffTondre discussed the drainage flow.. At this time, an engineering plan has not been submitted. This will be presented during the site plan review. Mayor McIlhaney opened the public hearing. ., Council Meetings 8/12/99 Page 9 The following individuals supported the request. Shirley Volk represented the property owner who has addressed the lighting and noise problems and other .issues expressed by adjoining property owners.. She. pointed out that the engineers for the project will have to comply with the city regulations. She Darrell Grein of DL Ventures, Developer of the Project emphasized his willingness to work with adjoining property owners. He presented pictures of the project. Greg Taggart. of Municipal Development Group came forward. This firm has been acquired to perform the .engineering and surveying services for this project. Bill Batchelor, 8103 Raintree expressed support of the development. Davis McGill, majority partner of the property encouraged council to support this development. The following persons spoke in opposition to the request: Amy Trembley, 2715 Wilderness North Arthur Bright, 7701 Sherman Court Grant Suhm, 2712 Red Hill Drive Boyce Sherrell, 7704 Sherman Court John Peters, 7803. Shiloh. Court Raul Gonzalez, 2715 Red HiIT Drive Charles Hamilton, 7714 Appomattox- Sherry Ellison, 2705 Brockway Drive Sherry Scarborough, 2412 Wildnerness South Mayor McIlhaney closed the public hearing. Councilman Maloney made a motion to deny the rezoning request. Motion seconded by Councilman Massey which carved by a vote of 6-1, Mayor Pro Tem Mariott voted against the motion. Council asked the staff to work with the developer and keep in mind the integrity of the greenspace and the concerns of the existing neighborhood. Council recessed at 8:05 p.m. for a break. Agenda Item No 14 3 -- Presentation and discussion of the City of College Station 1999-2000 Proposed'Budget. Council returned at 8:20 p.m. to continue the meeting. a `fl,: AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Public hearing and consideration of a rezoning of approximately 13.82 acres, Pebble Creek Phase 8-B, located southwest of the intersection of Royal Adelade and St. Andrews Drive from A-O Agricultural Open and M-1 Planned Industrial to R-1 Single Family Residential, {99-118) Staff Planner Timmerson pFesented the staff report and clarified that the existing zoning on this property also includes M-1 classification. The proposed rezoning is in compliance with the Land Use. Plan and the approved Pebble Creek Master Plan. The Land Use Plan shows the area as medium density (3-6 dwelling units- per' acre), and the proposal shows: approximately 2.5 - 3 dwelling units ..per acre. The properly is bounded on the north and east by existing and .future Pehble Creek development and. is bounded by the Business Center on he south and. west. .She thought that: buffering between this development and the Business Center may be an issue since this property is abuts the Business Center. She explained that there is a conceptually,planned common area in the Business Center adjacent. to this phase. The common.. area: may not develop to the extent. of the Business Center conceptual plan however it will not be otherwise developed because of the floodplain through he property. Therefore, common area would act as a buffer for the rezoning. Commissioner Kaiser asked what parkland dedication would be required for this development. Ms. Timmerson stated that it would be addressed with the Final Plat. :Commissioner Warren .asked how far the floodplain line was from this development. Assistant City Engineer Morgan explained that there was some question between the City and the Developer as to where the line is and that this is currently being worked out. There is some question that a couple of the lots .may -have a small section of floodplain on them. This will be discussed further during the final plat consideration (the next agenda item). Ms. Morgan explained that the parkland dedication has been met during earlier phases of Pebble Creek. Commissioner Kaiser was'' concerned that there is a fence across previously dedicated: parkland, in this development, which blocks access to .parkland.. Ms. Morgan reminded. the Commission Ghat this was addressed at an approval of an earlier phase. Mr. Kaiser wanted this issue reconsidered .during the rezoning and not the final plat (the .next item). led Walker, Wallace Group Engineers, :.explained that. the fence issue was a .major ..issue during the consideration of Phase 7-A (currently .under construction). He had originally. told the Commission during the prior phasing that he thought. it was a mistake..for the fence to be there. He assured the Commission that they', did not forget about the fence. The developer did not have a problem removing the fence. He was not aware that the fence needed to be taken down immediately. He thinks this issue can be resolved rather quickly. Mr. Walker then explained that it was staff s and the developer's decision. not to get. the easements. At one time the .easements were removed from the plat. He would be happy to put the easements in the appropriate locations.. He said that he had concern with the plat being denied because of the easements, he would be alright if,the plat was approved contingent upon the easements. He said that he felt pretty good that'the flood plain .would not affect. -~`~ Acting Chairman Mooney closed the public hearing. P&Z~nutes July 1S, 1999.. Page 7 oj12 ~, Commissioner Horlen moved to recommend approval of the rezoning. request. Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion,. which passed unopposed (6-0). Agenda Item No. 7: Consideration of a Final Plat for Pebble Creek Phase 8-B located in the Pebble Creek Subdivision just south of Royal Adelaide and Stv Andrews Drive and east of the College Station Business Center. (99-226) Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report and stated that it for the same property as the rezoning case. presented in the previous item. .She explained that the information presented for the previous item would be the same for this item. Staff recommended approval of the Final Plat with the. following conditions: L )f there is floodplain on the property, it be fully contained within a drainage easement. 2. That all offsite easements are shown and the volume and pages be filled in prior to filing the plat for record. Staff is working with the. developers to establish the location of the floodplain line, which would satisfy the first .condition. As for the .second condition, there are several offsite easements that .will need to be dedicated with this final plat. for utilities and drainage. There will be an off-site easement through the Business Center. She explained ,that during discussions. with the City's Legal Department and the Economic Development Coordinator, there is some concern with the dedication of those easement from the standpoint of surveys and disturbance of vegetation due to construction.. She asked that the Commission'give Staff some flexibility as to the location of the offsite easements to avoid disturbance of existing vegetation. Commissioner Kaiser asked if Ms. Morgan was aware of any action taken by the developer to remove the. fence surrounding the parkland area that was dedicated to the City. Ms. Morgan said .that she would have to defer this question to the applicant. Commissioner Kaiser asked if the :Commission had. authority to deny a plat because of violation of a subdivision requirement (fencing the land that was dedicated. for parkland)... Assistant City Attorney Nemcik replied that this could be an argument but she said that she would note feel comfortable supporting. She said that the best way to handle the fenced parkland area would be to tell them they are trespassing on-City's... property because it was dedicated,. and give them notice and then remove it if necessary (with a court order). She said'that if this plat meets the requirements it needs to be approved, however this plat does not' meet the requirements because it does not, at this time,: have the off-site easements and have tthe zoning. She suggested making the approval of the plat contingent upon receiving the off-site .easements and any other requirements that are lacking. Staff said that through discussions regarding,the parkland fencing issue, the Director of Parks was. not uncomfortable with the fence being there since there were no imminent plans to development the park. die would notce concerned about the fence until the park was ready to be developed... Commissioner Horlen moved to approve the. Final Plat with the following conditions: 1. That if there is floodplain on the property, it be contained within a drainage easement; 2. That all. off-site easements be shown and volume and pages be filled in, prior to filing the plat for record.. 3. That all off-site easements be obtained and dedicated. P&ZMinutes July IS, 1999 Page 8 oj12 Agenda Itcm Covcr Shcet L~c~~~,1 ~.~~~ I `~-1 c I ~~ ~~ 0 Regular Item Consent .Item Workshop Item Item Submitted By: :~~U~ ~~~~ Jessica Jimmerson, Staff Planner Council Meeting Date: August 12,.1999 Director Approval: Jim Callaway, Development Services Director City Manager Approval: x~~,.,. Item: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on rezoning approximately 13.82 acres, Pebble Creek Phase 8-B, located southwest of the intersection of Royal Adelade and. St. Andrews Drive from A-O Agricultural. Open and M-1 Planned Industrial to R-1 Single Family Residential. (99-118, 99-71) Item Summary: The proposed rezoning is in compliance with the Land Use Plan, the approved Pebble Creek Master Plan, and the approved final plat for Pebble Creek Phase 8-B. The applicant is Davis Young for. Pebble Creek Development Company. Item Background: The subdivision has been building out during the past decade as a low and medium density single family development. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval. Related Advisory Board Recommendations: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on July 15, 1999 and recommends approval by a unanimous vote. Council Action Options: 1. Approval of rezoning as submitted. 2. Approval with physical conditions that will mitigate negative impacts. 3. Denial. 4. Denial without prejudice (waives 180-day waiting period). 5. Table indefinitely or defer action to a specified date. Supporting Materials: 1. Infrastructure and Facilities: 2. Ordinance. 3. P&Z Minutes. INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES The developer will be extending necessary public infrastructure to support this rezoning request as part of the platting process. NOTIFICATION: Legal Notice Publication(s): The Eagle;: 6-30-99 Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 7-15-99 Advertised. Council Hearing Dates: 8-12-99 Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200': 3 Response Received: None as of date. of staff report.