HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportCFI'Y 01, COLLEGE Sl FION
PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR
HORSE HAVEN ESTATES PH 4 (PP)
08-00500060
SCALE: 74 lots on 14.47 acres
LOCATION: 2691 Horse Haven Lane, generally located north of Horse Haven
Lane and south of Switch Station Road
ZONING: R-1 Single-Family Medium Density
APPLICANT: Alton Ofczarzak, property owner
PROJECT MANAGER: Jennifer Prochazka, AICP, Senior Planner
jrochazka@cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION: If the requested variances are granted by the Commission and the
Commission agrees with discretionary items as proposed by the
applicant, then staff recommends approval.
Planning & Zoning Meeting
April 17, 2008
Page 1 of 6
33
Planning & Zoning Meeting
April 17, 2008
Page 2 of 6
34
Several easements exist on the property and are shown on the Preliminary Plat as "to be
abandoned." These easements will need to be abandoned prior to review of the Final Plat.
In addition, several lots are encumbered by numerous easements that will remain on the
property. Since the City does not require a minimum home size or minimum buildable area,
the lots do meet minimum standards. Staff continues to have concerns with the viability of
the lots.
2. Compliance with Subdivision Regulations: As proposed, the subdivision requires two
variances to the Subdivision Regulations. In addition, there are three items that the
Planning & Zoning Commission has discretion over.
The first variance request is to Section 8-12 -Blocks. The Subdivision Regulations state
that the block length may not exceed 1,200 feet in single-family residential areas. In areas
over 800' in length, the Planning & Zoning Commission may require an access way to
facilitate pedestrians. Block Two is 1539 feet in length, requiring a variance of 339 feet. No
pedestrian access ways have been provided. The applicant has requested to vary from this
requirement because of the rezoning condition that requires that Appomattox be off-set
within the development (see attached Variance Request letter).
The second variance request is to Section 8-G.2 -Relation to Adjoining Street System. The
Subdivision Regulations require that streets be projected to all adjacent un-platted
properties. The applicant has requested to vary from the requirement to provide a street
connection to the east because, while the property is not platted, it is currently developed as
the City's electrical switch station (see attached Variance Request letter). While staff agrees
from a planning standpoint that it is not necessary or desired that there be a right-of-way
projection to the switch station, it is important to note that the projection is required because
the adjoining property is unplatted, not because it is necessary to the neighborhood pattern.
In accordance with the Subdivision Regulations when considering a variance, the Planning
and Zoning Commission should make the following findings to approve the variance:
1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such
that strict application of the provisions of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the
reasonable use of his land;
2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant;
3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering
this chapter; and
4. That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly
subdivision of other land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
The first of the discretionary items is found within Section 8-G.8 of the Subdivision
Regulations. This Section gives the Planning & Zoning Commission the discretion to restrict
driveway access from residential lots to collector and arterial roadways. As proposed, the
layout requires that residential driveways be permitted along Appomattox Drive, a minor
collector on the Thoroughfare Plan. The initial submission of this project (for staff review)
proposed private drives (to function as alleys) at the rear of the lots fronting on Appomattox
Drive.
There are both positive and negative aspects of each proposal. Because the "alleys" were
proposed to be private, staff had concerns about future maintenance. The maintenance of
Planning & Zoning Meeting
April 17, 2008
Page 4 of 6
36
% r
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
If the requested variances are approved by the Commission, and the Commission agrees with
discretionary items as proposed by the applicant, then staff recommends approval of the
Preliminary Plat.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1. Application
2. Copy of Preliminary Plat (provided in packet)
3. Variance request letters
Planning & Zoning Meeting
April 17, 2008
Page 6 of 6
38
Total Acres Of Subdivision 114.48 R-O-W Acreage 333 Total # Of Lots 77
Number Of Lots By Zoning District 77/R-1
Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District:
771600,9
Floodplain Acreage 9
Parkland dedication by acreage or fee? FEE
A statement addressing any differences between the Preliminary Plat and approved Master Plan (if applicable)
NA
Requested variances to subdivision regulations & reason for same
NA
Requested oversize participation
THE TH GHFARE PLAN DE GINATES PPOMA OX DRIVE A COLLECTOR SIZED PAVEMENT
SECTION WITH A 60-FQ►OT ROW & 3$' B-8 HMAC THE DEVELOPMENT WILL GENERATE ONLY
ENOUGH TRAFFIC F„tQR A LOCAL PAVEMENT SECTION OF 50-FOOT ROW 8 2718-B HMAC. ALSO ANY
UTILITY OVERSIZE REQUESTED BY STAFF. ALSO ANY.IMPROVEMENTS TO SWITCH STATION ROAD.
Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat:
ACREAGE:
# of Acres to be dedicated # of acres in floodplain
# of acres in detention # of acres in greenways
OR
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND.
77 # of Single-Family Dwelling Units X $556 = $42,812
(date) Approved by Parks Recreation Board
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits
attached hereto are true and convect. The undersigned hereby requests approval by the City of
College Station of" above identified plat and attests that a -it respective owners have been identified
on this awiicationJ )
3 -10,w
Date
40
P S Grou
I
FA
Planning Solutions
March 31, 2008
Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Planner
Planning & Development Services
City of College Station
PO Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
RE: Horse Haven Ph 4. Subdivision Variance Request to Relationship to Adjoining Street System (8.G.2)
Dear Jennifer.
We are requesting a variance to Section 8.G.2. We do not feel that your application of this section is
appropriate in this case. You state that the regulation requires that we project a street eastward to the City's
electrical substation. The actual regulation states:
8-G.2. Relation to adjoinina Street Systems
"Where necessary to the neighborhood pattern, existing streets in adjacent or adjoining areas shall
be continued in alignment therewith. Where adjoining areas are not subdivided, the arrangement of
streets in the subdivision shall make for provision for the proper projection of streets into such areas."
The intent of this regulation appears to be two-fold; first to allow connection between and among neighborhoods
where necessary to the developing neighborhood pattern and, second to ensure that unplatted tracts (which are
typically undeveloped tracts) that might be developed as part of the neighborhood pattern, not be left isolated.
As per Section 5 of the Subdivision Regulations we offer the following for consideration of this request:
5-A.1 The special condition in this case is the location of the City's electrical substation. It makes little sense to
project a street to this property when it will never be extended. The only reason this requirement is
being imposed is because the City property is not platted. If it were platted there would be no need for a
variance request. If it had been developed privately the City would have required platting.
5-A.2 This is the minimum necessary to enable the developer to layout streets and lots in an efficient manner.
An additional street section in a development already over burdened with infrastructure would result in
the loss of lots and increase costs.
5-A3 This variance will not be detrimental to the public or property in the area, nor
5-A.4 Prevent the orderly subdivision of land as evidenced below:
The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public nor prevent the orderly subdivision of land. The
unplatted tract is not part of the neighborhood pattern that is developing and even if it were, the variance will not
result in leaving it isolated. The unplatted tract has access from Switch Station Road presently.
It seems inappropriate to take the second sentence out of context with the first This would require the
projection of streets from any neighborhood into any other unplatted property regardless of the intended or
existing land use. It seems obvious that the intent of the regulation is to protect neighborhood patterns and NOT
simply to extend streets into unplatted tracts.
Thank you for your help in this matter and in forwarding this variance request to the Planning and Zoning
Commission for their consideration.
6 J~ Kee, AICP 3 V A
Princi all'
l '
CC' Alton Ofczarzak, Owner / Developer /Mike Hester. Hester Engineering Co. j~
42
511 University Drive East, Suite 211 College Station, TX 77840 979-846-9259 www.IPSGroup.us
HORSE HAVEN ESTATES PH 4 (PP) 08-00500060
This item is for a Preliminary Plat of Horse Haven Estates Phase 4.
The plat includes 74 lots on 14.47 acres located north of Horse Haven Lane and south
of Switch Station Road
The property was zoned R-1 Single-Family Medium Density in 2007. At that time, a
condition was placed on the property requiring that Appomattox be extended from its
termination in Windwood Subdivision through the subject property. Further,
Appomattox is required to be off-set within the subject property.
A Development Agreement is in place on this property that guarantees the extension
of Appomattox Drive from its termination in Windwood to Horse Haven Lane. Both
of these conditions appear to be being met by the Preliminary Plat.
The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Single-Family Medium Density
and designates Appomattox Drive as a minor collector. The Preliminary Plat is in
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Several easements exist on the property and are shown on the Preliminary Plat as
"to be abandoned." These easements will need to be abandoned prior to review of
the Final Plat. In addition, several lots are encumbered by numerous easements
that will remain on the property. Since the City does not require a minimum home
size or minimum buildable area, the lots do meet minimum standards. Staff
continues to have concerns with the viability of the lots.
As proposed, the subdivision requires two variances to the Subdivision Regulations.
In addition, there are three items that the Planning & Zoning Commission has
discretion over.
The first variance request is to Section 842 -Blocks. The Subdivision Regulations
state that the block length may not exceed 1,200 feet in single-family residential
areas. In areas over 800' in length, the Planning & Zoning Commission may require
an access way to facilitate pedestrians. Block Two is 1539 feet in length, requiring a
variance of 339 feet. No pedestrian access ways have been provided. The
applicant has requested to vary from this requirement because of the rezoning
condition that requires that Appomattox be off-set within the development (see
attached Variance Request letter).
The second variance request is to Section 8-G.2 -Relation to Adjoining Street
System. The Subdivision Regulations require that streets be projected to all
adjacent un-platted properties. The applicant has requested to vary from the
requirement to provide a street connection to the east because, while the property is
not platted, it is currently developed as the City's electrical switch station (see
attached Variance Request letter). While staff agrees from a planning standpoint
that it is not necessary or desired that there be a right-of-way projection to the switch
station, it is important to note that the projection is required because the adjoining
property is unplatted, not because it is necessary to the neighborhood pattern.
The first of the discretionary items is found within Section 8-G.8 of the Subdivision
Regulations. This Section gives the Planning & Zoning Commission the discretion to
restrict driveway access from residential lots to collector and arterial roadways. As
proposed, the layout requires that residential driveways be permitted along
Appomattox Drive, a minor collector on the Thoroughfare Plan. The initial
submission of this project (for staff review) proposed private diyes (to function as
alleys) at the rear of the lots fronting on Appomattox Drive,
ltiU ~~~lt LLB
There are both positive and negative aspects of each proposal. Because the
t{l I~
"alleys" were proposed to be private, staff had concerns about future maintenance.
The maintenance of public alleys is more certain and would provide opportunities for
sanitation and fire service in these areas. Aesthetically, staff believes that rear
alleys may be preferable because there would be more open green spaces along
the roadway and the majority of cars would be "hidden" in the rear alleys.
Generally, driveways to collector roadways are discouraged because they may
~I C
impede the traffic flow, but because Appomattox Drive was required to be off-set
with the zoning of the property to lessen potential traffic through the area, this is not
a primary concern. Traffic will be slowed by the off-set reducing some of the safety
concerns of the multiple access points. Ck, t
Oj-<< w C4~~~1yL A~ts
'The second discretionary item is found within Section 8-K.1 Lots and states tat
"side lot lines which make acute angles with front lines shall be avoided where
practical." One acute angle lot is proposed at the Appomattox intersec ion s
graphic below). T et
i ts the eriteria found within the BrYaA-C n
Gti- intersections In_gP.neral, the intersection alignment seemingly
directs traffic to the local street to the northeast and may discourage traffic to
continue traveling on Appomattox Drive to the southwest. Appomattox is a minor
collector and is intended to efficiently move traffic. The applicant has stated that this
design is preferred to create a better looking intersection.
The third discretionary item is also found within Section 8-K.1 Lots and states that "in
general, an arrangement placing adjacent lots at right angles to each other shall be
avoided." Four right angle lots are proposed within the subdivision (see graphic
below). Depending on the design, it may be possible to yield the same number of
lots while avoiding right angle lots. The proposed layout may be awkward if lots 20-
23 have rear fences because the fences would run along the side lot lines of Lots 38
and 39. Most side lot line fences to not run the full length of the property. Rear
fence lines for lots 20-23 may have to be adjusted to meet sight distances for the
driveways on lots 38 & 39. On the other hand, the proposed layout may provide a
more aesthetically appealing view along Horse Shoe Drive.
f
`j 1 t~, vL
Variance criteria on the screen... ~a -ft f.
STAFF ~ 6,t,l
RECOMMENDATION L 1, t L ~1
If the requested variances are approved by the Commission, and the Commission
agrees with discretionary items as proposed by the applicant, then staff recommends
approval of the Preliminary plat.
I have received one phone call and one email in opposition to the requested variances -
the concerns ranged from safety at Windwood park with the increase traffic from
this density to the lack of sidewalks on the cul-de-sac, to lighting and fencing concerns
for properties adjacent to Windwood.E`~~~~~'it~~