Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes/Staff Reports12 03,'99 18:10 $409 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 1 Project: 99-318 Preliminary plat review - Legacy Addition ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE DISTANCES TO OPPOSITE AND ADJACENT DRIVEWAYS, STREETS, ALLEYS, AND THE ACTUAL PAVEMENT SECTION ON 2818 NEED TO BE SUBMITTED IN ORDER TO COMPLETE A THOROUGH REVIEW FOR THIS PLAT. ACCESS WILL BE ONE OF THE MAIN ISSUES IN THE REVIEW OF THIS PLAT, THEREFORE, THIS INFORMATION IS NEEDED. THE FOLLOWING, IS A PARTIAL LIST OF COMMENTS THAT WILL NEED TO BE ADDRESSED ONCE ACCESS HAS BEEN WORKED OUT. 1. We are assuming that there will be no separate phases and that the final plat will be of the entire 7.168 acres. 2. Provide a utility master plan to show how public water and wastewater will be provided to each proposed lot. There is a good possibility that some of these lines may need to be larger to meet the City's utilities master plan. For instance, there is a good chance that we will require extension of an 18" waterline across the 2818 frontage. You may wish to reconsider whether you wish to request Oversize Participation. 3. We are currently reviewing the request for C-1 on proposed Block 2. At this time, it is unlikely that staff will recommend C-1, but we are currently looking at possibly recommending C-B. If we do recommend approval of some type of commercial district on this lot, we will do so only with a buffer condition. That buffer will need to be reflected on the Preliminary Plat between the residential and commercial uses on the commercial side of the zoning line. ~ACCess to this site will also be an important issue during the rezoning discussions. ~ 4. Provide a master drainage plan. ' 5. Clarify which easements are existing and which are proposed. Remove the note that "detailed easement research for this property was not provided..." and add all existing easements to the plat. 6. Provide any correspondence that has been conducted with the Parks Department. We will at least need to check with the Director, and this item may need to receive a recommendation from the Parks Board. 7. What is the purpose of the 24' private access easement on Lots 7 and 8? Reviewed by: Sabine McCully Date: 12-3-99 e002,'003 417 Staff Review comments Page 1 Of 1 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 2 Project:: 99-318 Preliminary plat review - Legacy Addition PROVIDE THE DIMENSION BETWEEN THE PROPOSED STREET AND WOODSMAN TO ASSURE THAT THE SUBDIVISION REGULATION PROHIBITTING STREET JOGS OF LESS THAN 125'. WE NEED THIS INFORMATION TO ENABLE US TO APPROVE THE STREET LOCATION FOR THE PROPOSED STREET. The following is a further clarification of platting requirements. Several additional items must be addressed before the plat will be considered a complete submittal. The actual additional changes or clarifications needed on the plat drawing itself are shown in italics. 1. OK .2. The master utility plan must show how public water and sewer will be provided to each new lot. You must provide a drawing showing the preliminary internal utilities before your plat submittal will be considered complete enough to be scheduled for PNZ. Should Staff recommend C-B on the tract on 2818, we will do so with a buffer condition. Illustrate the general location of a landscaped buffer along the eastern property line of the proposed commercial lot and provide a note that its width will be determined at the time of site plan review. 4. Provide a conceptual drainage plan. We will need this before your submittal is considered complete enough to be scheduled for PNZ. (5, Add wording to the easements shown to indicate whether they are existing or proposed. Remove the note "detailed easement research was not provided". Add allyeasement information to the preliminary plat. We will need this before "your submittal is considered complete enough to be scheduled for PNZ. 6. ;There will need to be some coordination with the Parks Department before the preliminary plat is reviewed by PNZ. 7 The private access easement should not provide a connection between the commercial and residential lots. Change the easement configuration so there is no connection to the commercial lot. If a drainage easement is needed to convey water, change the easement designation so the access easement i portion does not connect to the cnmmi-minl cite Reviewed by: Sabine McCully Date: December 8, 1999 Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1 f7 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 3 Project:: 99-318 Preliminary plat review - Legacy Addition C44 1. Illustrate the general location of the landscaped buffer as shown on the " approved development plan along the eastern and northern property lines of the commercial lot. Either dimension the buffers or provide a note that their r - exact width will be determined at the time of site plan review. Remove the building lines from the plat drawing or provide a note that the building lines reflect deed restrictions only and that all City of College Station setback lines must be met as well. 3. It is a plat requirement that you show all existing easements. Remove the note "detailed easement research was not provided". Add all easement information to the preliminary plat. What are these two small lines? They either need to be removed, or, if this is PUE and drainage easement, label it so. b/5. Add the date of the latest revision to the preparation date. 6~ Provide the dimension between the proposed street and Woodsman to y.r assure that the subdivision regulation prohibiting street jogs of less than 125' is met. We need this information to enable us to approve the street location F for the proposed street. ~7./ There will need to be some coordination with the Parks Department before the preliminary plat is reviewed by PNZ. Reviewed by Staff Review Comments Sabine McCully Date: 21-Mar-00 Page 1 of 1 L~, L ik adversely affect the health, safety, welfare, or residential character of the neighborhood. The use shall be a low traffic generator and shall not create any noise, light, or odors abnormal to the neighborhood." The use must be compatible with the surrounding area that it serves. Staff recommended approval with conditions as stated on the Staff Review Comments No. 2 (included with the staff report). She did specify that review comment number 3 (Waiting for approval from the Fire Marshal about proposed "lay of hose" configuration) was denied by the Fire Marshal - the hydrant will need to be on Dartmouth. The manager of Heritage at Dartmouth Apartments is in favor of the request. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Mr. Greg Taggart (Municipal Development Group) representing the applicant said that the three major concerns expressed by the Commission at the last review relating to parking, lighting, and landscaping have be addressed and reflected in the new proposal. He said that the majority of the traffic for this site will be pass-by traffic. Commissioner Floyd asked if Mr. Taggart was aware of the amount of traffic generated by a convenience store with gas pumps opposed to a convenience store without gas pumps. Mr. Taggart did not know, but he said that the Dartmouth study showed a similar development at the same intersection on the opposite corner. Some Commissioners wanted to know the height of the sign and canopy. Ms. Anderson said that there were no sign height requirements specified in the C-N district. Senior Planner Kuenzel said that the Commission could add a condition to the height of the canopy. Mr. Akber Dosani, the owner, said that the canopy would be an average size to allow larger vehicles to use the pumps. He clarified that there would be 4 pumps on each side of the island (8 total). He told the Commissioners that he was not sure as to which type of gas supplier he would use (Exxon, Texaco, etc), but there were only standards on colors and canopies normally, they do not usually regulate the size of the building. Ms. Marianne Oprisko, 14125 Renee Lane, said that there were other convenience stores with gas stations that "fit" into the surrounding areas such as the store at Welsh and Holleman. She was glad to see that there was adequate access to the site for the handicapped. Chairman Rife closed the public hearing. Commissioner Parker moved to approve the request. Commissioner Warren seconded the motion. Commissioner Warren stressed that ramps were an important issue since there would be sidewalk access from the apartments. Chairman Rife called for the vote, and the motion to approve the request failed 3-3 (in favor: Chairman Rife, Commissioners Parker and Warren; opposed: Commissioners Kaiser, Floyd, and Horlen). AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat for Legacy Addition, consisting of approximately 7.165 acres on the northwest corner of Holleman and Harvey Mitchell. (W184) P&ZMinutes April 6, 2000 Page 6 of 7 Senior Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is preparing the property for a duplex development with a convenience store/service station at the corner of Holleman and Harvey Mitchell Parkway. The Council approved R-2 zoning for the duplex lots a few months ago and more recently approved a PDD-B designation for Lot 1, Block 2. The PDD-B was approved to facilitate a convenience store/service station on the corner site. The plat as forwarded to the Commission meets all applicable requirements, including the PDD-B ordinance rezoning the commercial lot. Staff recommended approval. Commissioner Horlen moved to approve the preliminary plat as presented. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (6-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Update to the Commission of any new Minor or Amending Plats approved by Staff. None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Discussion of future agenda items. None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Adjourn. Commissioner Warren moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 6-0. TTEST: 'Staff k),uo Gkmavja Assistant, Debra Charanza P&ZMinutes April 6, 2000 Page 7 of 7