HomeMy WebLinkAbout Minutes •
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1101 Texas Avenue
April 3, 2003
7:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Floyd, Williams, McMath,
Shafer, White and Hall
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Trapani.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Maloney.
STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Manager Brown, Development
Services Director Templin, City Planner Kee,
Development Manager Ruiz, Civil Engineers
Thompson and Cotter, Staff Planners Reeves
and Hitchcock, Transportation Planner Fogle,
Assistant City Attorney Nemcik, Economic
Development Director Foutz, Action Center
Representative Kelly, and Staff Assistant
Hazlett.
Chairman Floyd called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Hear Citizens.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public Comment for the Record.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public Comment on the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO).
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consent Agenda.
4.1 Approved the Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on March 20, 2003.
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 1 of 6
4.2 Removed from the agenda the consideration, discussion, and possible action on
a Replat for Harvey Hillsides, Block 1, Lot 42, consisting of a 1.5 acre residential
lot and a 3.86 acre commercial lot. (02-233)
4.3 Approved a Preliminary Plat for West University Addition consisting of four lots
totaling 36.888 acres of land located on Raymond Stotzer Parkway in the City's
ETJ. (03-63)
Regular Agenda.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration, discussion and possible action of
request(s)for absence from meetings.
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the absence request. Commissioner
White seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, Hall, Shafer, White, Williams, and McMath.
AGAINST: None
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items
removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action to
consider a Land Use Plan Amendment for properties labeled Mixed-Use on the
City's Land Use Plan. (03-23)
City Planner Kee presented the Staff Report, reiterating the items discussed at the
March 20, 2003 P&Z meeting. She explained that the Commission voted to accept the
Mixed-Use Report and its concepts for College Station but delayed consideration at that
time in order to ensure adequate time for citizen input. As Ms. Kee pointed out specifics
regarding each area within the land use plan, Chairman Floyd opened the public
hearing portion of the meeting to receive public input. No one spoke during any of
those times.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
Commissioner White motioned to approve the Mixed-Use report and its concepts for
College Station. Commissioner Williams seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a
Rezoning from A-O Agricultural Open to R-1 Single Family for approximately 38.5
acres for Estates at Spring Creek, located at 2201 Barron Road (03-53)
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 2 of 6
Staff Planner Reeves presented the Staff Report. Ms. Reeves stated that Staff
recommends approval of the rezoning. She added that the subject property is shown
on both the Land Use Plan and on the recently approved Master Development Plan as
Single Family Residential. The subject property will also be bound on all sides with
thoroughfares. Ms. Reeves explained that the Parks Board accepted the three-acre
parkland dedication in conjunction with the acreage in the Spring Creek drainage way
with the condition that trails in the drainage way be part of the overall park development.
Staff recommends that the proposed townhome area be developed in such a way as to
not back lots up to the park and drainage way. In closing, Ms. Reeves stated that
during the platting state the subject property would again come before the Commission
allowing for other issues to be addressed at that time.
Chairman Floyd opened public hearing.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
Commissioner McMath motioned to approve the rezoning. Commissioner Williams
seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a
Residential Replat for the Carter's Grove, Second Installment located at the north
end of Shady Drive, and consideration, discussion and possible action on a
request for a variance to Section 18 of the Subdivision Ordinance. (03-54).
Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson presented the Staff Report, stating that Staff
recommends approval of both the variance and the final plat. He explained that the
applicant is seeking to subdivide the subject property, which consists of 12 acres and a
single residence, into three parcels, combining one of the parcels with another existing
lot and then constructing an additional home on the third lot. As a result, a variance is
required due to the resulting lot widths being less than the block average in this area.
Development Manager Ruiz pointed out the lots that were considered in defining the
block average used to calculate the frontage requirement. She added that an extension
or provision of any public infrastructure would not be required due to the usable
connections to Shady Drive and Lincoln Avenue and the existing utility infrastructure.
Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing.
The following spoke in favor of the replat and variance request:
• Mr. and Mrs. Clifford Fry, 100 Shady Drive.
Mr. Fry stated that their objective is to preserve the rural nature of the tract and the
integrity of the neighborhood.
• Don House, 108 Shady Drive.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 3 of 6
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the final plat and the variance request as
stated by Staff. Commissioner White seconded the motion.
Some discussion ensured regarding protecting the property from further development in
the future.
Chairman Floyd called the question. The motion to approve both the final plat and
variance request carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a
Rezoning for Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 of the Pooh's Park Subdivision from WPC Wolf
Pen Creek Development Corridor to C-1 General Commercial. (03-60)
Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report stating that Staff recommends
approval of the rezoning. Ms. Hitchcock explained that previous rezonings in the area
have isolated this small area, requiring much stricter standards when making any
changes to their sites. She added that the property owners of the subject property
support the rezoning. In closing, Ms. Hitchcock reported that The Design Review Board
recommended that the City pursue the rezoning at their March 6, 2003 meeting. On
March 20, 2003, The Commission instructed Staff to begin the rezoning process.
Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the rezoning and was seconded by
Commissioner Shafer. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11: Consideration, discussion and possible action on a
Preliminary Plat for Crescent Pointe Tract One located at 3300 University Drive
East consisting of 4 lots on 55.5 acres. (03-66)
Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson presented the Staff Report, recommending approval
of the Preliminary Plat with the condition that Staff Comments #2 be addressed. He
stated that additional infrastructure requirements including sewer and water are being
extended to the subject property at this time. There was some discussion regarding
private streets and public access. Sidewalks are proposed for Copperfield Parkway and
will be required on First American Blvd.
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the Preliminary Plat and was seconded by
Commissioner Shafer. The motion carried 5-0-1.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
ABSTAINED:McMath
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 4 of 6
•
AAFNOA ITEM NO. 12: _. A, • •:• ible action on a
Development Ptd` �
Master �' �� �'�
' M ` . ,
consisting of 146.7 acres and located south and west of existing Shenandoah
subdivisions. (03-68)
Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report, recommending approval of the
Master Development Plan with Staff Comments #2. She explained that the plan is a
continuation of the Shenandoah Subdivision and is in compliance with the Thoroughfare
Plan. Also, the proposal is for a predominantly single family development with parkland
and greenbelt, a small area of office, and the extension of three minor collectors and
one major collector. Ms. Hitchcock pointed out that the majority of the land is already
zoned for the uses proposed. Finally, she reported that the Parks Board voted to
support the parkland dedication at their February 11, 2003 meeting.
There was some discussion regarding the street alignments and access.
Mike McClure 9222 Brookwater Circle, engineer for the project, stated that the streets
are stubbed-out and will be extended and then linked to and through the large area
labeled as R-1. He added that a Master Preliminary Plat will be submitted that will show
the different phases of the project and that access issues will be worked out with TxDot.
In addition to that, Mr. McClure has met with the Parks Board, who is in favor of the plan
and is continuing to meet with them in developing the details of the park. He hopes to
build the park immediately and then develop the different phases of the project around
the park.
Commissioner McMath motioned to approve the Master Development Plan.
Commissioner Shafer seconded the motion, which carried with a vote of 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 13: Consideration, discussion and possible action on a
Preliminary Plat for the Gateway Subdivision Phases 2-4, located at 1401
University Drive East. (03-69)
Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson presented the Staff Report. Mr. Thompson stated
that Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with the condition that Staff
Review Comments #2 be addressed. The proposed plat consists of Phases 2-4,
consisting of 3 lots and is in an overlay district. He explained that a 60-ft. private access
easement on Phase 3 would extend access to Phases 2 and 4. However, the applicant
wants to reduce the easement to 40-ft. According to traffic study required by TxDot, the
pavement section can be reduced to a minor collector, which is 38-ft., to serve the multi-
family area to the rear of the subject property. Mr. Thompson also reported that Staff is
working with the applicant and all parties concerned to obtain a functional intersection
design for the site. Additionally, a LOMR is being reviewed by FEMA at this time to
establish the boundaries of the floodplain and floodway. Efforts are being coordinated
with the engineering company with keeping in compliance with FEMA requirements.
Further discussion regarding the 60 and 40-ft access private access easement ensued.
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 5 of 6
Mr. Thompson stated that the site plan is proceeding. Also, he stated that a CLOMR
was approved by FEMA to allow for a bridge structure crossing the creek to Phase 4
and channel improvements. He added that there are two entrances to Home Depot and
that there is talk of a gated emergency entrance to Home Depot from the apartments.
Development Manager Ruiz added that there is a Master Plan for the entire area and
that the overlay district extends 500-feet into the entire strip.
Because of the questionable access issues, the Commission discussed taking a closer
look at the entire area and coming up with a plan that better fits the master plan.
Commissioner White motioned to table the item until the April 17, 2003 Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting, to allow for further development of a plan. Commissioner
Shafer seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
Commissioners Shafer and Williams volunteered to work with Staff and the applicant on
better developing this plan. A new plan will be brought before the Commission on April
17, 2003 for consideration.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14: Discussion of future agenda items.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15: Adjourn.
Commissioner Williams motioned to adjourn the meeting which was seconded by
Commissioner McMath. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
The meeting adjourned at 8:17 P.M.
APPROVED:
Chairman, Rick Floyd
ATTEST:
Staff Assistant, Susan Hazlett
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 6 of 6
,
r
Minutes ,�..
Parksand Recreation Advisory Beard
Tuesday,February 11,2003.
The,EXIT Tee Center 3 '
1600 Rock Prairie Road ; ;
College Station,Te s
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director;
Peter Lamont, Recreation Superintendent; Peter Vanecek, Senior Park Planner;
Kristin Lehde, Staff Assistant; Jane Kee, City Planner (Development Services); Natalie Ruiz,
Development Review Manager(Development Services).
Board Members Present: John Nichols, Chairman; Larry Farnsworth; Jodi Warner; Bill Davis;
Glen Davis.
Board Members Absent: Glenn Schroeder; Don Allison.
Visitors:
Mike McClure, 9262 Brookwater Circle, College Station, Texas
Joe Gattis, 413 Walton Road, College Station, Texas
Pustin Pratho, 1105 S. Dexter Drive, College Station, Texas
John Lacy, 1105 Sal Ross, Bryan, Texas
Allison Zarcaro, 1904 Dartmouth P-3, College Station, Texas
Jason Fikes, 1309 Danville Court, College Station, Texas
Edward Froehling, 3887 High Lonesome, College Station, Texas
Lindsey Davis, 2531 Ashford, College Station, Texas
Keristin Campbell, 1508 Rockhollow, Bryan, Texas
1. Call to order: Chairman John Nichols called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
2. Pardon — possible action concerning requests for absences of members from meeting:
Bill Davis made a motion to accept the absences of Glenn Schroeder and Don Allison as
excused. Jodi Warner seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Hear visitors: No visitors spoke on this item.
4. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of minutes from the regular meeting of
January 14, 2003: Glen Davis made a motion to approve the minutes from
January 14, 2003. Bill D. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed
unanimously.
5. Discussion, consideration, and ossible action concerning park land dedication requests
defor th (Zone 10), Spring Creek Subdivision (Zone 10), Richey
Development (Zone , one rook Subdivision (Zone 9), and Fox Run Condominiums
(Zone 7):
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February 11,2003
Page 1 of 7
r
Eric Ploeger referred to an aerial photograph of the
Zone 10 area. He pointed to the Shenandoah Subdivision and stated that there is already
an existing eight-acre park within that subdivision (Shenandoah Park). The item up for
consideration is the possible acceptance of 6.4 acres just to the south that would serve as
the land dedication for additional phases of Shenandoah. The land requirement would be
4.36 acres. The proposed development will have approximately 440 single-family
dwelling units, although that number may change depending upon the final plat. Eric said
that staff recommends acceptance of the 6.4 acres of park land because it would
significantly add to the existing park.
Glen D. asked if there would be a detention area included as part of the dedication. Eric
responded that there would be. He introduced engineer Mike McClure and owner
Edward Froehling who are developing the property. Mike McClure pointed out that in the
existing eight-acre park, there are approximately two acres of detention. The detention
was designed in such a way that the only thing disturbed was the part to build a dam, and
all the trees were left. Mr. McClure anticipates a similar design in the proposed
dedication, although the road embankment would he the dam, and there would not be a
wet pond because it will be drained dry.
Bill D. asked what the depth of the detention area would be. Mr. McClure responded that
it wouldn't be over six feet. Eric pointed out that that the proposed dedication is just over
two acres in excess of what the dedication requirement is. He added that it is a heavily
wooded tract of land. Steve Beachy stated that the tract would be comparable to Thomas
Park, and would give a very nice-sized neighborhood park with good street frontage and
connectivity to the south.
Glen D. made a motion to accept the park land dedication for the Shenandoah
Subdivision. Larry Farnsworth seconded the motion.
John N. expressed concern about access from the east side of the property. He asked if
there was the possibility of creating a walkway or an easement into the park from that
side. Mr. McClure stated that he intends to provide access, and has been working out the
details with the Development Services Department. However, they have not yet
determined where that access should be.
John N. asked where the playground would be located within the dedication. Eric stated
that there is some open area within the dedication that could be used to construct a
playground.
All were in favor of the motion presented by Glen D., and the Board unanimously passed
it.
• Spring Creek Subdivision (Zone 10): Eric stated that Southern Plantation Street, which
runs through the Shenandoah Subdivision, is expected to extend through to the Spring
Creek Subdivision. The developers are proposing to build approximately 340 single-
family dwelling units. The proposed dedication is a three-acre tract of land. The
developer is also proposing to dedicate an additional thirteen acres of greenway that
extends through the Crowley property and has frontage on Southern Plantation. The total
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February II,2003
Page 2 of 7
land requirement for the development would be 3.37 acres. The developers have
indicated a desire to dedicate the greenway as a park, with the intention of developing
trails and outdoor lighting in that greenway. Staff recommends acceptance of the
proposed park land dedication. However, Eric added that the Board may chose to delay
taking action on this item until a tour of the site can be done.
Glen D. asked what would be planned for the three-acre dedication. Steve said that
nothing has been determined at this point, but that there would certainly be amenities
such as basketball courts, tennis courts, and playgrounds (those amenities typically found
in neighborhood parks). There was some concern that the proposed three acres did not
meet the requirement of five acres for a neighborhood park. Steve responded that in this
case, the developer is also proposing to dedicate an additional thirteen acres of greenbelt,
with walking areas that would connect to an access point to the units at Shenandoah, and
that would tie into the park to make approximately sixteen acres of park land.
Mr. Gattis is the engineer representing the developer. He recommended developing the
trails and outdoor lighting within the greenways as part of the proposed development. His
intention is to work with the Parks and Recreation Department staff to develop the park
and greenway in lieu of paying the development fee, and include them as selling points
for the initial phases of development. Steve added that any designs for the park and
greenway would be presented to the Board for approval prior to development.
After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the proposed park land dedication
and the greenway for the Spring Creek Subdivision, with the understanding that the park
will be developed in conjunction with the trails and lighting within the greenway.
Glen D. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
• Richey Development (Zone 9): Eric pointed to a preliminary master development of the
property as well as to a small area plan that showed various land uses. Mr. Gattis is also
the engineer for the proposed Richey Development. Eric stated that there are
approximately 680 single-family dwelling units. This piece of park property is primarily
in the floodplain, and there are also major roadways that run through the property that
would limit access to any potential park by residents. However, there is park property that
adjoins the dedication (the Southeast Community Park and an approximate five-acre
portion of the Luther Jones Landfill), which could potentially serve some of the residents.
Eric added that the Board might wish to tour the site before making a decision.
Mr. Gattis stated that there were still some land use and greenway issues that would need
to be worked out, but that the item was being presented to the Board at this time so that
he could get an indication of what the Board is looking for, as well as to find out what the
Board plans for the adjoining properties.
Natalie Ruiz added that Mr. Gattis and the Development Services Department were also
looking for feedback from the Board concerning the location of the land dedication, so
that their recommendation could be taken to the Planning and Zoning Commission to get
land use, thoroughfare, and floodplain issues worked out. After that time, the master
preliminary plat could be brought back to the Board so they could work out the details or
visit the site.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February II,2003
Page 3 of 7
Steve stated that staff is recommending that the dedication be located in the upper left-
hand quadrant (north of Barron Road, and south of Lakeway). The Board was in
consensus on taking a tour of the site. Glen D. encouraged the developer to try to comply
with the Park Land Dedication Ordinance to have at least five acres for a neighborhood
park, and have at least 50% of the perimeter abutting a public street.
There was no action taken on this item.
• Stonebrook Subdivision (Zone 9): Peter Vanecek stated that this proposed multi-family,
90 dwelling-unit development is located near Rock Prairie Road and Texas Avenue. The
total land dedication requirement would be .45 acres. The total cash dedication
requirement would be $20,340. Staff is recommending the acceptance of the fee in lieu of
land.
After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the fee in lieu of land for the
Stonebrook Subdivision. Glen D. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion
passed unanimously.
• Fox Run Condominiums (Zone 7): Peter V. stated that this proposed multi-family, 128
dwelling-unit development is located on Luther Street. The total land dedication
requirement would be 1.024 acres. The total cash dedication requirement would be
$57,856. Staff is recommending the acceptance of the fee in lieu of land.
Bill D. made a motion to accept the fee in lieu of land for the Stonebrook Subdivision.
Jodi W. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
6. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning a request from residents of the
Alexandria Subdivision for a neighborhood playground: Steve stated that this item was
an update from the January 14, 2003, meeting (Item #6). Eric pointed out that there were
several items requested by the Board during that meeting. One item was to provide
information showing how the developer had dedicated the Alexandria Subdivision. Eric said
that it was determined that the dedications in the Shenandoah Subdivision had taken care of
all the needed dedications for the Alexandria Subdivision. He added that cash dedications of
approximately $45,000 had been dedicated for phases four and five of Shenandoah. He added
that there had not been any dedications for development fees, because the dedications were
made prior to the establishment of that fee. Another item that the Board had requested was
clarification of the developer's intention concerning the letter to the Alexandria
Homeowner's Association. Natalie R. stated that the original plat for the Alexandria
subdivision showed a greenway running through the property, that was to be dedicated to the
City through the City's greenways program. The greenway has not been dedicated to date
because the developer's intention is to extend Alexandria Street through that piece of
greenway in future phases of development. Mr. McClure referred to a location map. He
stated that Alexandria Street has not been extended because they have been trying to time the
project to tie into the School District's new elementary school project.
After some discussion, Steve said that staff would prepare a comprehensive graphic that
would detail the sidewalks, thoroughfares, safety crossings, park sites, and greenbelts within
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February 11,2003
Page 4 of 7
Steve stated that staff is recommending that the dedication be located in the upper left-
hand quadrant (north of Barron Road, and south of Lakeway). The Board was in
consensus on taking a tour of the site. Glen D. encouraged the developer to try to comply
with the Park Land Dedication Ordinance to have at least five acres for a neighborhood
park, and have at least 50% of the perimeter abutting a public street.
There was no action taken on this item.
• Stonebrook Subdivision (Zone 9): Peter Vanecek stated that this proposed multi-family,
90 dwelling-unit development is located near Rock Prairie Road and Texas Avenue. The
total land dedication requirement would be .45 acres. The total cash dedication
requirement would be $20,340. Staff is recommending the acceptance of the fee in lieu of
land.
After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the fee in lieu of land for the
Stonebrook Subdivision. Glen D. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion
passed unanimously.
• Fox Run Condominiums (Zone 7): Peter V. stated that this proposed multi-family, 128
dwelling-unit development is located on Luther Street. The total land dedication
requirement would be 1.024 acres. The total cash dedication requirement would be
q q
$57,856. Staff is recommending the acceptance of the fee in lieu of land.
Bill D. made a motion to accept the fee in lieu of land for the Stonebrook Subdivision.
Jodi W. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
6. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning a request from residents of the
Alexandria Subdivision for a neighborhood playground: Steve stated that this item was
an update from the January 14, 2003, meeting (Item #6). Eric pointed out that there were
several items requested by the Board during that meeting. One item was to provide
information showing how the developer had dedicated the Alexandria Subdivision. Eric said
that it was determined that the dedications in the Shenandoah Subdivision had taken care of
all the needed dedications for the Alexandria Subdivision. He added that cash dedications of
approximately$45,000 had been dedicated for phases four and five of Shenandoah. He added
that there had not been any dedications for development fees, because the dedications were
made prior to the establishment of that fee. Another item that the Board had requested was
clarification of the developer's intention concerning the letter to the Alexandria
Homeowner's Association. Natalie R. stated that the original plat for the Alexandria
subdivision showed a greenway running through the property, that was to be dedicated to the
City through the City's greenways program. The greenway has not been dedicated to date
because the developer's intention is to extend Alexandria Street through that piece of
greenway in future phases of development. Mr. McClure referred to a location map. He
stated that Alexandria Street has not been extended because they have been trying to time the
project to tie into the School District's new elementary school project.
After some discussion, Steve said that staff would prepare a comprehensive graphic that
would detail the sidewalks, thoroughfares, safety crossings, park sites, and greenbelts within
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February 1I,2003
Page 4 of 7
Lincoln Center Advisory Committee held a public hearing to seek input from citizens on
what they would like to see in the revised Master Plan. Eric stated that some of the main
items recommended were
- additional parking;
- additional space for Lincoln Center programming;
- outdoor recreation space; and
- a "spray" park.
Eric added that the original master plan had included a one-stop social services area.
However, the Community Development Office presented this concept to the City Council,
and Council decided not to pursue it.
Eric said that there would be a joint meeting between the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board and the Lincoln Center Advisory Committee to discuss the details of the plan on
February 18, 2003.
Glen D. asked how the implementation of the plan would be funded. Eric responded that the
plan would be long-range, and that funding would probably come from Community
Development and future bond funds.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
9. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the future Capital Improvement
Program: Steve stated that a list of the citizen committee members and a schedule of
meeting dates was included in the Board packets. Kristin Lehde will check with the City
Secretary's Office to determine agenda posting requirements in the event members from the
Board attend those meetings.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
10. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the current Capital Improvement
Program: Eric updated the Board on the Bee Creek Lighting Project. He said that after
having discussions with Steve B., and the athletic staff, as well as receiving input from
some of the users of the facility, the decision was made to delay the lighting project and to
bid it out in the fall, and start construction in the winter. Glen D. asked if staff could
communicate to the user groups the date that the project will begin once rescheduled.
Eric stated that there were some corrections to the park land dedication sheet, and that a
new one was distributed to the Board before the meeting. The new list has updated zone
funds, as well as target dates for completion for some of the projects.
During the January 14, 2003, meeting the Board requested staff to obtain a report from the
committee that is working on the Northgate Master Plan, concerning the possibility of
acquiring land in the Northgate area for a park. Bill D. asked if staff had received feedback
concerning the Board's request. Steve responded that he had spoken to the Economic
Development Director, and that she was going to check on the status, but that he had not
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February 11,2003
Page 6 of 7
had a chance to follow up with her at this time. John N. asked for discussion of this item to
be on the March 4, 2003, agenda.
11. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning Board and Departmental Goals
and Objectives, and City Council Strategies: This is a standing report item, and there was
no discussion.
12. Discussion of next meeting dates and possible agendas:
- Joint Meeting between the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Lincoln
Center Advisory Committee on Tuesday, February 18, 2003, at 5:45 p.m., at the
Lincoln Recreation Center.
- Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting on Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at
7:00 p.m., at the EXIT Teen Center.
- Joint Meeting between the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Planning and
Zoning Commission on Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., at the City Hall
Training Room.
- Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting on Tuesday, April 8, 2003, at
7:00 p.m., at the Central Park Conference Room.
- Joint Workshop Meeting between the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the
City Council on April 24, 2003 (had originally been scheduled for April 10th),
tentatively at 3:00 p.m., at the City Hall Council Chambers.
13. Adjourn: Bill D. made a motion to adjourn. Jodi W. seconded the motion. All were in
favor, and the meeting adjourned at 9:42 p.m.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February 11,2003
Page 7of7
Minutes
larks and Recreat on Advisory Board
Tuesday,February 11,2003
The EXIT Teen Center
1600° ck Prairie Road
College t ion,Texas
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director;
Peter Lamont, Recreation Superintendent; Peter Vanecek, Senior Park Planner;
Kristin Lehde, Staff Assistant; Jane Kee, City Planner (Development Services); Natalie Ruiz,
Development Review Manager(Development Services).
Board Members Present: John Nichols, Chairman; Larry Farnsworth; Jodi Warner; Bill Davis;
Glen Davis.
Board Members Absent: Glenn Schroeder; Don Allison.
Visitors:
Mike McClure, 9262 Brookwater Circle, College Station, Texas
Joe Gattis, 413 Walton Road, College Station, Texas
Pustin Pratho, 1105 S. Dexter Drive, College Station, Texas
John Lacy, 1105 Sal Ross, Bryan, Texas
Allison Zarcaro, 1904 Dartmouth P-3, College Station, Texas
Jason Fikes, 1309 Danville Court, College Station, Texas
Edward Froehling, 3887 High Lonesome, College Station, Texas
Lindsey Davis, 2531 Ashford, College Station, Texas
Keristin Campbell, 1508 Rockhollow, Bryan, Texas
1. Discussion, consideration, and possible action10), Spring concerniCreekng parkSubdivision land dedication(Zone10), quests
for the Shenandoah Subdivision (Zone
Development (Zone 9), Stonebrook Subdivision (Zone 9), and Fox Run CondominiumsreRichey
(Zone 7):
• Shenandoah Subdivision (Zone 10): Eric Ploeger referred to an aerial photograph of the
Zone 10 area. He pointed to the Shenandoah Subdivision and stated that there is already
an existing eight-acre park within that subdivision (Shenandoah Park). The item up for
consideration is the possible acceptance of 6.4 acres just to the south that would serve as
the land dedication for additional phases of Shenandoah. The land requirement would be
4.36 acres. The proposed development will have approximately 440 single-family
dwelling units, although that number may change depending upon the final plat. Eric said
that staff recommends acceptance of the 6.4 acres of park land because it would
significantly add to the existing park.
Glen D. asked if there would be a detention area included as part of the dedication. Eric
responded that there would be. He introduced engineer Mike McClure and owner
Edward Froehling who are developing the property. Mike McClure pointed out that in the
existing eight-acre park, there are approximately two acres of detention. The detention
was designed in such a way that the only thing disturbed was the part to build a dam, and
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February 11,2003
Page 1 of 2
all the trees were left. Mr. McClure anticipates a similar design in the proposed
dedication, although the road embankment would be the dam, and there would not be a
wet pond because it will be drained dry.
Bill D. asked what the depth of the detention area would be. Mr. McClure responded that
it wouldn't be over six feet. Eric pointed out that that the proposed dedication is just over
two acres in excess of what the dedication requirement is. He added that it is a heavily
wooded tract of land. Steve Beachy stated that the tract would be comparable to Thomas
Park, and would give a very nice-sized neighborhood park with good street frontage and
connectivity to the south.
Glen D. made a motion to accept the park land dedication for the Shenandoah
Subdivision. Larry Farnsworth seconded the motion.
John N. expressed concern about access from the east side of the property. He asked if
there was the possibility of creating a walkway or an easement into the park from that
side. Mr. McClure stated that he intends to provide access, and has been working out the
details with the Development Services Department. However, they have not yet
determined where that access should be.
John N. asked where the playground would be located within the dedication. Eric stated
that there is some open area within the dedication that could be used to construct a
playground.
All were in favor of the motion presented by Glen D., and the Board unanimously passed
it.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,February 11,2003
Page 2 of 2