Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesStaff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director (arrived during Item #7); Peter Vanecek, Senior Park Planner; Ross Albrecht, Forestry Superintendent; Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations Superintendent; Kristin Lehde, Staff Assistant. Board Members Present: John Nichols, Chairman; Don Allison; Jodi Warner; Larry Farnswroth; Bill Davis. Board Members Absent: Glenn Schroeder; Glen Davis. Guest: Mike McClure, Engineer. 5. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning park land dedication requests for the •s Westfield Village, Phase 6 (Zone 10): Pete V. pointed to a location map of the proposed development, which is located on Victoria Avenue and Mountain Breeze Way. The land dedications for the Westfield Subdivision, totaling 4.299 acres, have already been met through prior park land dedications. The proposed Phase 6 development includes 30 single - family dwelling units, and would add three (3) parcels of land, totaling an additional .34 acres, to the existing park land dedication. The developer would also be required to pay the Park Development Fee, which is $10,740. Steve stated that the developer has aligned the streets to provide significant access to the park site. After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the three (3) proposed parcels of land for Westfield Village, Phase 6, in addition to the Park Development Fee. Don A. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, April 8, 2003 Page I of 1 Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director (arrived during Item #7); Peter Vanecek, Senior Park Planner; Ross Albrecht, Forestry Superintendent; Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations Superintendent; Kristin Lehde, Staff Assistant. Board Members Present: John Nichols, Chairman; Don Allison; Jodi Warner; Larry Farnswroth; Bill Davis. Board Members Absent: Glenn Schroeder; Glen Davis. Guest: Mike McClure, Engineer. 5. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning park land dedication requests for the Westfield Village, Phase 6 (Zone 10): Pete V. pointed to a location map of the proposed development, which is located on Victoria Avenue and Mountain Breeze Way. The land dedications for the Westfield Subdivision, totaling 4.299 acres, have already been met through prior park land dedications. The proposed Phase 6 development includes 30 single - family dwelling units, and would add three (3) parcels of land, totaling an additional .34 acres, to the existing park land dedication. The developer would also be required to pay the Park Development Fee, which is $10,740. Steve stated that the developer has aligned the streets to provide significant access to the park site. After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the three (3) proposed parcels of land for Westfield Village, Phase 6, in addition to the Park Development Fee. Don A. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, April 8, 1003 Page 1 of I MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS May 15, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15: Public hearing, discussion and possible action on a Rezoning to amend the concept plan and other elements of the PDD -H, Planned Development- Housing, for 7.15 acres in the proposed Westfield Village Phase 6, located east of the future Victoria extension, south of Westfield and north of Westfield Village Phase 1. (03 -96) Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report, recommending approval with the conditions that the eight -foot pathways be constructed by the applicant as part of the street section and that lots 1 and 30 be removed from the concept plan. She explained that the subject property is designed as single family, but that the applicant is requesting the new PDD -H in order to build a more traditional layout than was adopted with the first PDD -H concept plan. She added that the Parks Board has seen and approved the new proposal. The variances requested by the applicant are for lot widths, setbacks, and sidewalks and the applicant also proposes to dedicate additional parkland of the common areas adjacent to the park and greenway. Ms. Hitchcock said the change in the concept plan that removes lots 1 and 30 makes the most of visibility and access and would also continue the single - loaded street concept as well as allow the crossing for the eight -foot pathway to be at a street intersection rather than mid - block. The zoning is in line with The Comprehensive Plan, Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing Randy French, the developer, addressed the extraction of lots 1 and 30 and the widening of the sidewalks as recommended by Staff. He added that the new PDD -H proposal was that of less concrete and lots and is a development created to be an age- restricted area specifically for senior citizens. In closing, he asked Staff to reconsider some aspects of his proposed plans. Ms. Hitchcock stated that because of the numerous dedications that have occurred, Staff wants clarification that the development of the pathways is Mr. French's responsibility and not that of the City's. Commissioner Shafer pointed out the alignment reflected on the blueprint as the correct alignment. Chairman Floyd asked Staff to show what is gained in realigning the pathway through Lot 1. Ms. Hitchcock explained that because this is a suburban greenway, whose primary purpose is recreation and access, it should be well lit and may also have signage. By realigning the sidewalk this would realign with a residential street of a preliminary plat that has been previously approved by the Commission. There was further discussion regarding a compromise in the extraction of Lots 1 and 30. Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing. Commissioner McMath motioned to approve the rezoning keeping lots 1 and 30 intact, making designer modifications to lot 1 leaving it in a viable use condition as a saleable lot, and for the applicant to work with the City to address the pathway entrance off the street. The motion carried 7 -0. FOR: Floyd, Trapani, Shafer, White, Williams, Hall and McMath. AGAINST: None.