Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes/Staff ReportsCommissioner 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 Finat Ptat for Pebble Creek Phase S-B located in the Pebble Creek Subdivision just south of Royal Adelaide and St. 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: 1. If 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 not 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 the 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. He would not be 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&Z~nutes July IS, 1999 Page 8 oj12 Commissioner Warren added a condition that City staff have flexibility as to the location of the off-site easements to avoid disturbance of existing vegetation. Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (6-0). Agenda Item No. 8: Public hearing and consideration of a rezoning of approximately 14.23 acres located adjacent to the Raintree Subdivision from R 1 Single Family and A-O Agricultural Open Space to PDD-H Planned Development District -Housing. (99-114) Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report and explained that the subject property, as well as all adjoining properties are reflected as mixed use on the Land Use Plan. The classification is used in areas where a variety of land uses could potentially be developed, if the sites are designed with proper height, area, setback, building materials, building orientation, buffer zones, and other performance-related site controls. The subject property is located in an infill area between the Raintree Subdivision and Highway 6 with a portion lying immediately to the north and abutting Raintree single family lots. The area was so designated on the Land Use Plan with the intent that only the PDD districts would be considered suitable zoning classifications. It is only through a planned district approach that the City is in a position to enforce specific site plan and building characteristics that have been presented to the City during consideration of the rezoning. The applicant has submitted a development plan with the following elements: 1. A 180-unit apartment complex in a combination of 2- and 3- story buildings at a maximum height of 40'. 2. A 12 unit townhouse development on the 2 acres to the east of the proposed apartment development. The townhome buildings would be 3 story at a maximum height of 38.5', with garages on the first level and the living area on the upper two stories. 3. A 35' landscape buffer between the subject property and the existing Raintree Subdivision with a combination of canopy and non-canopy trees planted in a relatively dense fashion and an 8' wood fence with brick columns along the southern edge of the buffer. 4. Access to the apartments would be taken off of the Highway 6 frontage road via an entrance drive in the southwest corner of the tract and an exit drive on the northern corner. Access to the townhome area would be via a gated, private entrance leading off of the existing dead-end of Appomatox Drive. This private drive would be required to meet the City's residential street standards. 5. All buildings would be in accordance with the elevation drawings as submitted. 6. Lighting would be per the lighting plan as submitted and would be oriented away from the existing single family area. The townhome private drive would not include streetlights. 7. The floodplain fill would be as submitted on the elevation cross sections such that the new ground elevations would not exceed the existing ground elevations in the Raintree Subdivision. A retaining wall would be constructed of split-face block as submitted by the applicant. At Staffs recommendation, the applicant held a developer's meeting with several of the homeowners in Raintree. The attendees had questions regarding the following issues: 1. How does this development relate to the Greemvays plant and haw does it affect the City's plan for ~--~ Wolf Pen Creek? Staff informed the neighbors that this portions of Wolf Pen Creek was not included in the. Wolf Pen Creek Master Plan, and that it was ranked as a "priority 5" on the Greenways Master Plan. However, all of Wolf Pen Creek is listed in the City's Drainage Ordinance P&Z~nutes July IS, 1999 Page 9 oj12 STAFF REPORT Item: Consideration of a FINAL PLAT for PEBBLE CREEK PH. 8-B located in the Pebble Creek Subdivision just south of Royal Adelaide and St. Andrews Drives and east of the College Station Business Center. (99-65) Applicant: JED WALKER with the Wallace Group Item Summary: This final plat is located off Royal Adelaide and St. Andrews Drives in Pebble Creek. The western property boundary is contiguous with the College Station Business Center. The land use plan shows this area as single family medium density. The plat as shown complies with the land use plan and the preliminary plat submitted for this phase. Sidewalks will be provided on both sides of St. Andrews and one side of Holston Hills. Item Background: A preliminary plat for this area was approved by the Commission in 1996. It was revised slightly in 1998 at which time the developer submitted a revised master development plan and master utility layout. Budgetary & Financial Summary: N/A Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the plat with the following conditions: 1. If 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. Related Advisory Board Recommendations: N/A Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the final plat. The options regarding the final plat are approval as submitted, approval with conditions, or denial. Defer action or table only at applicant's request. Supporting Materials: 1. Location Map 2. Application 3. Infrastructure and Facilities 4. Copy of Final Plat INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES Water: Water is provided through a 6" waterline in St. Andrews Drive. This waterline will be looped through Phase 8-B. Sewer: Sewer is provided through an 8" sewerline along the western side of the subdivision. Streets: Several residential streets are being created with this plat. St. Andrews, a collector (60' right-of--way) will provide the collector street functions for this phase of Pebble Creek. Off-site Easements: Several offsite easements will be necessary for utilities and drainage. Drainage: Drainage will be handled via storm sewer and overland swales. There will be no detention for this phase as a study was performed showing the effects of the increased runoff into Alum Creek stream AC-1. The developers of Pebble Creek agreed to provide drainage easements on the entirety of the developed 100 year floodplain in lieu of detention on all phases within this basin. Flood Plain: There may be some floodplain on several of the lots. The applicant is providing staff with detailed drawings to show the floodplain and elevations on the individual lots. If there is floodplain on the property it should be covered by a drainage easement. Oversize request: See Budgetary and Financial Summary Section. Impact Fees: N/A NOTIFICATION: Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): July 15, 1999