Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS December 12, 2002 6. Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a Rezoning from R -3 Townhouse and A -O Agricultural Open to PDD -H Planned Development District - Housing for 16.316 acres of the Robert Stevenson Survey A -54 located 1 /2 mile north of Greens Prairie Rd., west of State Highway 6. (This item was previously tabled by the Commission on November 14, 2002.) (02 -225) This agenda item was moved and presented as Item No. 8. Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report. Ms. Hitchcock stated that Staff recommends approval of the rezoning as proposed. She added that Staff met with Mr. Philips and Mr. Schultz and discussed the proposal. An amended concept plan has been submitted and staff feels this amended plan better balances the community benefit with the requested modifications. Also, Ms. Hitchcock reported that a significant portion of the land will be dedicated common areas and that these areas will allow for streetscaping. In addition, there will be grass paths and 6 -foot sidewalks, short-cuts through the subdivision, and open recreation areas. Ms. Hitchcock explained that the application still requests variance set- backs and parking in the right -of -way, but after further consideration, the main issue of parking in the cul -de -sac is that of maintenance which can be resolved at the time of platting. Also, the original request has been withdrawn and the request to plat two adjacent lots throughout the neighborhood has been reduced to one instance that is shown on the concept plan. In her closing remarks, Ms. Hitchcock stated that the plan offers an attractive pedestrian environment that will be even more beneficial as the whole tract develops. There was some concern about a precedence being set by allowing parking in the right -of -way. Ms. Hitchcock cited an instance where this has already been done in the Woodcreek Subdivision on a private street which has since been adopted and is now maintained by the City. In closing, Ms. Hitchcock stated that the parking would not interfere with emergency access vehicles. Commissioner Trapani motioned to move the item from the table. Commissioner White seconded the motion. The motion carried 7 -0. , T Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing. Joe Schulz and Wallis Philips displayed renderings of the proposed project. The parking areas were pointed out and briefly discussed. Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing. Commissioner White motioned to approve the rezoning. Commissioner Trapani seconded the motion. The motion carried 7 -0. FOR: Floyd, Williams, Hall, Shafer, McMath, Trapani, and White. AGAINST: None. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS November 14, 2002 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a Rezoning for 16.316 acres for Spring Creek Townhomes, formerly the Crowley Tract, from A -0, Agricultural Open, and R -3, Townhouse, to PDD -H, Planned Development Housing. (02 -225) Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report. She stated that Staff recommends denial of the rezoning request. She explained that the area is currently undeveloped and that the Land Use Plan designates this area as Single Family Residential Medium Density. She added that the subject property was rezoned to R -3 Townhouse, last year in compliance with the Crowley Master Development Plan. Even though the R -3 zoning district allows for Single Family and Townhomes, by right, and Duplexes by Conditional Use Permit. The applicant has proposed a PDD -H rezoning to develop a townhouse project. The goal of the a PDD -H zoning district is to promote and encourage innovative development that is sensitive to surrounding land uses and to the natural environment. She explained that Staff does not believe that the proposal meets the PDD Policy. The few elements of innovative design in the proposal does not in themselves constitute an innovative development. Additionally, processes are in place for the applicant to achieve many of the modifications that are being requested without going through a rezoning. Other items proposed are standards that are already required for development within the City or Staff does not see them as a benefit to the public. There are concerns regarding the meritorious modifications that have been requested. The proposal does not fill the purpose or the guidelines that the PDD sets forth. Commissioner Shafer asked Ms. Hitchcock to explain again the difference between the PDD -H vs. Townhomes. Ms. Hitchcock stated that the PDD was created for someone who came forward with something so unique that it could not fit within the requirements set forth in the zoning ordinance. It would then be up to the Commission to weigh these things and determine whether the design that is being proposed and what is being given up will be a true benefit to the community. A PDD needs more flexibility than your standard R -3. It is intended to promote a unique design. Chairman Floyd stated that it is understandable why a developer would be willing to submit to the PDD -H process. This process would provide the developer with some certainty that the project could progress forward. He added that there is more site control available to the Commission in this process. Commissioner McMath asked if the PDD were granted would a townhouse of 2 be valid in a PDD. Ms. Hitchcock explained that the ability to have duplexes within the development instead of townhomes would be granted. She added that the Commission could approve it without that condition if the developer is willing to accept it. The PDD now is moving away from the micro - management of every lot. However, when you grant some things in a PDD, you are granting a lot of flexibility. Commissioner Trapani pointed out that many of the points or questions discussed this evening can be addressed without micromanaging. Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing. Joe Schultz, 3208 Innsbrook, stated that a portion of the 16 acres was zoned A -O because the street right -of -way was zoned A -O. Therefore, a rezoning was already necessary. In addition to that, the need for a variance to the cul -de -sac and a setback variance, which cannot be considered until after platting would also be required. Also, the developer already has his buildings designed and can't be certain that he will be granted the variances needed to move forward with his plans on certain lots. Addressing the townhouse proposal, Mr. Schultz explained that the project is unique due to all the easements, pipelines, power lines, and sewer lines on the property which has made it difficult to get full use of all the lots. He also pointed out that this is the first development on the Crowley Tract and that the developer is trying to make it unique and has a good plan to maximize the use of it. Mr. Schultz stated that because townhouse lots are typically narrow, the 400 feet depth for the cul -de -sac should be acceptable. He added that it is not a safety problem and speed is not an issue of concern either. Also, parking will be provided on the bulb of the cul -de -sac adjacent to common areas. In closing, Mr. Schultz stated that this development is similar to others that have private streets. He explained that the developer prefers a 50' street right -of -way and a public street and the flexibility to create a unique subdivision. Wallace Philips, the developer, displayed conceptual drawings of the townhouses that he is proposing, which included a two car -two door garage and driveways for each one of them. Setbacks were discussed and he showed that more green space would be allowed with the plan that he is proposing. He added that the units would be upscale, affordable housing for South College Station, which is currently not available. Chairman Floyd asked Development Services Director Templin to explain what the new UDO says about the PDD -H zoning district. Mr. Templin stated that you would be able to continue with townhouse developments in a PDD. He added that there are clustering provisions that have been included and other devices that could also be used. He stated that he shared Staffs concern that the PDD not be used as a device to avoid standards and regulations. In the future, Staff will approach the PDD with caution so those items that are health and safety related or items that we have found promote good urban design are not given away. Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing. r Commissioner Trapani motioned to approve. Commissioner White seconded the motion. There was further discussion among the Commission regarding the uniqueness desired through a PDD -H vs. the uniqueness of the property and the development that is proposed. Chairman Floyd asked if the details should be resolved at the time of the rezoning or during the platting stage. The PDD -H opens a question about the standards and conformities that are required. He expressed a desire for Staff to meet again with the developer to further discuss the concerns and issues. Commissioner Trapani withdrew his motion to approve and motioned to table the item until the December 12 meeting. Commissioner White withdrew his second to the motion to approve and seconded the motion to table. The motion to table carried 6 -0. FOR: Trapani, White, Floyd, Shafer, McMath, and Hall. AGAINST: None. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS December 12, 2002 6:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Floyd, McMath, Trapani, Hall, Shafer, Williams, and White. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Massey. STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planners Hitchcock, Flanery, and Reeves, Assistant City Engineer McCully, Graduate Engineers Thompson and Cotter, Assistant City Attorney Nemcik, Director of Development Services Templin, Development Review Manager Ruiz, Assistant Development Review Manager George, Transportation Planner Fogle, Action Center Representative Kelly, Senior Planner Battle, City Planner Kee, Development Services Secretary Macik, and Staff Assistant Hazlett. 1. Hear Visitors. None. 2. Public Comment for the Record. None. 3. Consent Agenda. 3.1 Approved the minutes for the Workshop Meeting held on November 14, 2002. 3.2 Approved the minutes for the Regular Meeting held on November 14, 2002. 3.3 Approved the Regular Agenda the Preliminary Plat for the Graham Corner Plaza located on State Highway 6 and Graham Road. (02 -243) 3.4 Moved to the Regular Agenda the Master Preliminary Plat for the Century Hill Development located at 1595 Sebesta Road and Earl Rudder Freeway. (02 -246) 3.5 Approved the Final Plat for the Simmons Addition, consisting of 3.12 acres located at 3435 Barron Cut -off Road. (02 -214) P &Z Minutes December 12, 2002 Page 1 of 7 3.6 Approved the Final Plat for the Edelweiss Business Center Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, located on Wellborn Road (FM 2154) south of Rock Prairie Road and north of Mortier Drive. (02 -220) 3.7 Approved the Final Plat for Oxburgh Drive Phase 1, consisting of 2.04 acres located at the Crowley Tract on State Highway 6. (02 -244) 3.8 Approved the Final Plat for Indian Lakes Subdivision Phase 1, consisting of 400 acres off Arrington Road in the City's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. (02 -236) 3.9 Approved the Final Plat for Autumn Chase, consisting of 19 residential lots on 8.4 acres located on Cornell Drive between Brentwood and Manuel. (02 -245) Regular Agenda. 4. Consideration, discussion and possible action on request(s) for absence from meetings. Commissioners Shafer and Trapani are requesting approval for absence at the January 2, 2003 meeting. Both requests were submitted in early September. Commissioner Shafer withdrew his request. Commissioner McMath motioned for approval and was seconded by Commissioner Shafer. The motion carried 7 -0. 5. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action. 3.4 Consideration, discussion and possible action the Master Preliminary Plat for the Century Hill Development located at 1595 Sebesta Road and Earl Rudder Freeway. (02 -246) Staff recommends approval with the conditions that staff review comments #2 be addressed. The plat proposes 15 lots. Lots 1 -8, 12, 14 zoned C -1 and labeled as phase 1. Remaining lots zoned M -1 and known as Phase 2. The developer proposes to construct 2 collector streets. Commissioner Trapani motioned to approve the Master Preliminary Plat. Commissioner Shafer seconded the motion. The motion carried 7 -0. FOR: Floyd, Williams, Hall, Shafer, McMath, Trapani, and White. AGAINST: None. 6. Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a Rezoning from R -3 Townhouse and A -O Agricultural Open to PDD -H Planned Development District - Housing for 16.316 acres of the Robert Stevenson Survey A -54 located 1 /2 mile north of Greens Prairie Rd., west of State Highway 6. (This item was previously tabled by the Commission on November 14, 2002.) (02 -225) This agenda item was moved and presented as Item No. 8. P &Z Minutes December 12, 2002 Page 2 of 7 Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report. Ms. Hitchcock stated that Staff recommends approval of the rezoning as proposed. She added that Staff met with Mr. Philips and Mr. Schultz and discussed the proposal. An amended concept plan has been submitted and staff feels this amended plan better balances the community benefit with the requested modifications. Also, Ms. Hitchcock reported that a significant portion of the land will be dedicated common areas and that these areas will allow for streetscaping. In addition, there will be grass paths and 6 -foot sidewalks, short-cuts through the subdivision, and open recreation areas. Ms. Hitchcock explained that the application still requests variance set -backs and parking in the right -of -way, but after further consideration, the main issue of parking in the cul -de -sac is that of maintenance which can be resolved at the time of platting. Also, the original request has been withdrawn and the request to plat two adjacent lots throughout the neighborhood has been reduced to one instance that is shown on the concept plan. In her closing remarks, Ms. Hitchcock stated that the plan offers an attractive pedestrian environment that will be even more beneficial as the whole tract develops. There was some concern about a precedence being set by allowing parking in the right -of -way. Ms. Hitchcock cited an instance where this has already been done in the Woodcreek Subdivision on a private street which has since been adopted and is now maintained by the City. In closing, Ms. Hitchcock stated that the parking would not interfere with emergency access vehicles. Commissioner Trapani motioned to move the item from the table. Commissioner White seconded the motion. The motion carried 7 -0. Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing. Joe Schulz and Wallis Philips displayed renderings of the proposed project. The parking areas were pointed out and briefly discussed. Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing. Commissioner White motioned to approve the rezoning. Commissioner Trapani seconded the motion. The motion carried 7 -0. FOR: Floyd, Williams, Hall, Shafer, McMath, Trapani, and White. AGAINST: None. 7. Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a Conditional Use Permit - Use Only for the Victory United Pentecostal Church located at 1808 -11 Brothers. (02 -247) Staff Planner Reeves presented the Staff Report. The request is made in order to allow for religious services. Ms. Reeves stated that Staff recommends approval of the request. She reported that the property is currently zoned as C -1 General Commercial and developed as a shopping center. The 1750 square feet of lease space for the church is allowed, according to the Fire Code, up to 50 seated people and 17 parking spaces. The shopping center currently has 70 parking spaces. The hours of operation for the church would be during non -peak times for the shopping center. Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing. P &Z Minutes December 12, 2002 Page 3 of 7 MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS November 14, 2002 6:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Floyd, McMath, Trapani, Hall, Shafer and White. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Williams. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Hazen and Maloney. STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Manager Brown, Staff Planners Hitchcock, Flanery, and Reeves, Assistant City Engineer McCully, Graduate Engineers Thompson and Cotter, Assistant City Attorney Nemcik, Director of Development Services Templin, Development Review Manager Ruiz, Assistant Development Review Manager George, Transportation Planner Fogle, Action Center Representative Kelly, Senior Planner Battle, and Staff Assistant Hazlett. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Hear visitors None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public Comment for the Record None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consent Agenda The following items were approved by common consent. 3.1 Approved the Minutes from the Workshop Meeting held on October 17, 2002. 3.2 Approved the Minutes from the Regular Meeting held on October 17, 2002. 3.3 Approved the Preliminary Plat for Autumn Chase, consisting of 18 R -5, Apartment/Medium Density, and 5 R -2, Duplex Residential, lots on 8.35 acres located at 2304 Cornell Drive. (02 -168) P &Z Minutes November 14, 2002 Page 1 of 7 FOR: Floyd, Trapani, McMath, Hall, Shafer, and White. AGAINST: None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a Rezoning for 16.316 acres for Spring Creek Townhomes, formerly the Crowley Tract, from A -O, Agricultural Open, and R- 3, Townhouse, to PDD -H, Planned Development Housing. (02 -225) Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report. She stated that Staff recommends denial of the rezoning request. She explained that the area is currently undeveloped and that the Land Use Plan designates this area as Single Family Residential Medium Density. She added that the subject property was rezoned to R -3 Townhouse, last year in compliance with the Crowley Master Development Plan. Even though the R -3 zoning district allows for Single Family and Townhomes, by right, and Duplexes by Conditional Use Permit. The applicant has proposed a PDD -H rezoning to develop a townhouse project. The goal of the a PDD -H zoning district is to promote and encourage innovative development that is sensitive to surrounding land uses and to the natural environment. She explained that Staff does not believe that the proposal meets the PDD Policy. The few elements of innovative design in the proposal does not in themselves constitute an innovative development. Additionally, processes are in place for the applicant to achieve many of the modifications that are being requested without going through a rezoning. Other items proposed are standards that are already required for development within the City or Staff does not see them as a benefit to the public. There are concerns regarding the meritorious modifications that have been requested. The proposal does not fill the purpose or the guidelines that the PDD sets forth. Commissioner Shafer asked Ms. Hitchcock to explain again the difference between the PDD -H vs. Townhomes. Ms. Hitchcock stated that the PDD was created for someone who came forward with something so unique that it could not fit within the requirements set forth in the zoning ordinance. It would then be up to the Commission to weigh these things and determine whether the design that is being proposed and what is being given up will be a true benefit to the community. A PDD needs more flexibility than your standard R -3. It is intended to promote a unique design. Chairman Floyd stated that it is understandable why a developer would be willing to submit to the PDD -H process. This process would provide the developer with some certainty that the project could progress forward. He added that there is more site control available to the Commission in this process. Commissioner McMath asked if the PDD were granted would a townhouse of 2 be valid in a PDD. Ms. Hitchcock explained that the ability to have duplexes within the development instead of townhomes would be granted. She added that the Commission could approve it without that condition if the developer is willing to accept it. The PDD now is moving away from the micro - management of every lot. However, when you grant some things in a PDD, you are granting a lot of flexibility. Commissioner Trapani pointed out that many of the points or questions discussed this evening can be addressed without micromanaging. Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing. Joe Schultz, 3208 Innsbrook, stated that a portion of the 16 acres was zoned A -O because the street right -of -way was zoned A -O. Therefore, a rezoning was already necessary. In addition to that, the need for a variance to the cul -de -sac and a setback variance, which cannot be considered until after platting would also be required. Also, the developer already has his buildings designed and can't be certain that he will be granted the variances needed to move forward with his plans on certain lots. P &Z Minutes November 14, 2002 Page 4 of 7 • Addressing the townhouse proposal, Mr. Schultz explained that the project is unique due to all the easements, pipelines, power lines, and sewer lines on the property which has made it difficult to get full use of all the lots. He also pointed out that this is the first development on the Crowley Tract and that the developer is trying to make it unique and has a good plan to maximize the use of it. Mr. Schultz stated that because townhouse lots are typically narrow, the 400 feet depth for the cul -de -sac should be acceptable. He added that it is not a safety problem and speed is not an issue of concern either. Also, parking will be provided on the bulb of the cul -de -sac adjacent to common areas. In closing, Mr. Schultz stated that this development is similar to others that have private streets. He explained that the developer prefers a 50' street right -of -way and a public street and the flexibility to create a unique subdivision. Wallace Philips, the developer, displayed conceptual drawings of the townhouses that he is proposing, which included a two car -two door garage and driveways for each one of them. Setbacks were discussed and he showed that more green space would be allowed with the plan that he is proposing. He added that the units would be upscale, affordable housing for South College Station, which is currently not available. Chairman Floyd asked Development Services Director Templin to explain what the new IJDO says about the PDD -H zoning district. Mr. Templin stated that you would be able to continue with townhouse developments in a PDD. He added that there are clustering provisions that have been included and other devices that could also be used. He stated that he shared Staffs concern that the PDD not be used as a device to avoid standards and regulations. In the future, Staff will approach the PDD with caution so those items that are health and safety related or items that we have found promote good urban design are not given away. Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing. Commissioner Trapani motioned to approve. Commissioner White seconded the motion. There was further discussion among the Commission regarding the uniqueness desired through a PDD -H vs. the uniqueness of the property and the development that is proposed. Chairman Floyd asked if the details should be resolved at the time of the rezoning or during the platting stage. The PDD -H opens a question about the standards and conformities that are required. He expressed a desire for Staff to meet again with the developer to further discuss the concerns and issues. Commissioner Trapani withdrew his motion to approve and motioned to table the item until the December 12 meeting. Commissioner White withdrew his second to the motion to approve and seconded the motion to table. The motion to table carried 6 -0. FOR: Trapani, White, Floyd, Shafer, McMath, and Hall. AGAINST: None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a Final Plat and Variance Request re: Access and Utilities, for Spring Meadows Phase 2, consisting of 87 lots on 32.07 acres located at 308 Greens Prairie Road. (02 -212) Development Manager Ruiz presented the Staff Report. She stated that recommendation for the Final Plat is for approval with Staff Comments #2. She also recommended approval of the proposed variance. She explained that the proposal is for a single - family subdivision for 87 homes on 32 acres. The variance request is to allow the subdivision of two non - buildable lots located primarily in the floodplain, namely lots 12B and 13B. These two lots do not have public sewer, water, or street access. P &Z Minutes November 14, 2002 Page 5 of 7