HomeMy WebLinkAbout00071504.0
Sourcenet Solutions Development Services Timeline
1-7-02 3pm Monday - Siteplan Submittal Received
Did not meet loam deadline, yet was reviewed this week.
1-8-02 Tuesday - Distributed to staff at regular staff meeting
1-14-02 Monday - Review Completed, was determined to be a stop review. Significant
Elements were missing that could affect site layout.
1-16-02 Wednesday - Development Permit Issued for clearing and grading only.
1-18-02 Friday - Comments Returned to applicant from first review.
1-22-02 2pm Tuesday - Screening wall details submitted.
Mett the loam 1-28 deadline for distribution and review. Copies
forwarded to Kim.
1-29-02 Tuesday - Distributed to staff a regular staff meeting.
2-1-02 Friday - Siteplan Resubmittal Received
Met the I Oam deadline.
2-4-02 Monday - 1. Review of screenwall detail by DS staff. Nothing can be determined
unless reviewed in conjunction with site plan, and the Board will need to approve
the aesthetics of the wall.
2. Fax received from applicant changing a portion at the rear of the property.
2-5-02 Tuesday - Plans Distributed to staff at regular staff meeting.
2-7-02 Thursday - Neighbors raised concerns at hear visitors portion of the P&Z meeting.
Chairman requested that staff place an item on the agenda at the next P&Z
meeting fFf to report to the Commission on the facts of the situation. This is
not intended to be a public hearing.
2-8-02 Friday - Meeting scheduled between the DS staff, ED staff and the applicant.
2/4-8/02 Week of - Multiple occasions of feedback and inquiry received from neighbors.
2-12-02 Tuesday - Meeting scheduled by ED staff with neighbors.
2-21-02 Thursday - Report to P&Z Scheduled. y
v-`
rz
46-1
ok'r Pte-` 9s-
3 - P
9
4-
.5
V,cws 0~-
9-1
u~
~ 1 ~
f \
~ t
~ - s~ ,f
fy> ~ ~
! ~
~V,_ z Yl< \
INFORMATIONAL MEETING
FOR PEBBLE CREEK RESIDENTS
ON SOURCENET DEVELOPMENT IN BUSINESS PARK
FEBRUARY 12, 2002
'If r
dxx
AICE
W-D
~y
ame
Address
Telephone
E-mail address
u.LA
!7. o~ ~~q~(.t
~~I o -2t t
~c v C S.
*W, is rad
?9 l~~ C+
Goo- rb9
G l~r.~ lti.m It
CILP~ V`/~t+n
VCS
coL
Lc! ~ld~ ~/tS~'ru/~ 1
F?A bWZA e/~
~~d GPi
y4 -662
Al
0
A
z
- -71
.
2
cl
t4
. I v .
. G
4o
( - 6 9
,
-
.
r
0 /_7 l
5002-C hrfr W.11s rf
l.`(0 -543$
(-s coch@cb•••pKs~r~•
+ Roc G
Woe
,oti Pte' Co~x•t
610-Z654
<Pd 9~y at~n.Qt
.
/V4v ViS
l ff
~lO"7S2Z
y S ~C
610-015
r$2~ mod.
0441L
(010 -03
at -Acti<i m s B t "u.
7dl Puy Coe, r-
650 -
a r,
t,An0 c
44qv- 2b~ 2
~wwwcr@ bcsed►c _
<~~Zc~+.f ~ FM
o -~.2J
~
690 a/
s
IDo N Cs
/
~(SDa a L~~K Luc
C(0• D t
`P~O~ PQ ~ ~ctr.
ti1LZ I
4Sb0 ~
~LA Cs~k
61b-09
M @
~
11 p - VOV Pie\ 4q ~ 0 v P4 q ovot
v
n Ce"Z
c
u
i
6k
INFORMATIONAL MEETING MEETING
BUSINESS CENTER
QUALITY CIRCLE DEVELOPMENT
City of College Station
Public Utilities Department Training Room
1601 Graham Road,
Tuesday, February 12, 2002
6:00 p.m.
Attendance:
See attached residents sign in sheet
Robert Payne, R.L. Payne & Associates
City Staff:
Kim Foutz, Director of Economic Development
Glenn Brown, Assistant City Manager/Acting Director of Development Services
Natalie Ruiz, Development Manager
Jessica Jimmerson, Staff Planner
Spencer Thompson, Graduate Civil Engineer
An informational meeting was held on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 to provide adjacent
property owners with information regarding the SourceNet/UCS development on Quality
Circle in the Business Center.
Kim Foutz, Director of Economic Development called the meeting to order. Mrs. Foutz
discussed the attached presentation which includes information on the following:
• Business Park including history, zoning, platting, tenants, and vacant parcels
• The site plan and it's current status as submitted by R.L. Payne & Associates
on behalf of UCS - The site plan is still under review and will have to be
amended to meet parking and buffering ordinances.
• Discussion with UCS regarding staff requested revisions to the site plan
including relocation of a protected area and preservation of trees for additional
buffering, lighting, and parking lot location
• Zoning history for the business park and adjacent properties - the Business
Center was zoned M-1 in 1992, adjacent property was rezoned in 1996 from
townhomes and agricultural to single family residential.
• Buffer Ordinance requirements - all buffering requirements will be met
• Responses to resident's questions that were submitted prior to the meeting
The business park was master planned to be adjacent to the neighborhood, the park and
the elementary school as a "live, work, and play" environment. Additionally, the City
originally exchanged property with Pebble Creek Development for the purpose of
developing the Business Center.
Robert Payne, the architect for the project discussed the site plan layout including
location of buffer areas, preserve areas, and parking. Mr. Payne also discussed the size
and layout of the facility and the possibility of future expansion.
The residents at the meeting then asked questions regarding the development. Primary
issues that were of concern to residents included the following:
• Review and permitting process and level of public input
• Rear parking lot
• Buffering issues
• Lighting issues
• Loss of trees
• Safety and buffering as related to the adjacency with the park and elementary
school
• Size of trees installed in the Buffer area
• Possible future expansion of building
Staff is currently working with the architect to minimize the impact of the development
on the adjacent properties. Developer has agreed to relocate the protected area along the
property line to supplement the requirements of the buffer ordinance. In addition, the
architect has indicated that he will attempt to utilize the landscaping budget to further
buffer the northeast parking lot from adjacent properties.
Additional comments to Staff Review-Business Center:
• Elevation drawings should include color and material samples
• Need lighting plan and specifications
• Need specifications for trees and bushes in the buffer areas i.e. looking for fast
growing trees and fast growing bushes that grow in excess of 6' in height
• Need to review revised protected area as discussed - newly submitted does not reflect
discussions with UCS
• Need clarification on location and design of sidewalks - newly submitted does not
meet intent for sidewalks
• Move parking lot 15 feet to the south (based on newly submitted)
• Building setback and LAUE line have not been changed to reflect discussions (ie to
push parking and building forward through variance)
Clarify that buffer fence must wrap around small corner of the lot with the iron fence