Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/20/1995 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES C7 Planning & Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Apri120, 1995 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Hawthorne and Commissioners Lane, Smith, Gribou, Hall, Garner, and Lightfoot. • COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, Senior Planner Kuenzel, Planning Technician Thomas, Assistant City Engineer Morgan and Development Coordinator Volk. (Council Liaison Nancy Crouch was in the audience.) AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: The Consent Agenda consists of non-controversial or "housekeeping" items required by law. Items may be removed from the Consent Agenda by any citizen, City staff member, or Commissioner by making such a request prior to a motion and vote on the Consent Agenda. (1.1) Approval of minutes from the meeting of April 6, 1995. (1.2) Consideration of a final plat of the Spencer's Cove subdivision which is in the E.T.J. (95-212) (1.3) Consideration of a final plat for the Camelot Section Three replat of lots 34, 35 and 36 of block 2. (95-210) Chairman Hawthorne informed the Commission that consent agenda item 1.3 was withdrawn from the agenda prior to the meeting at the request of the applicant. Consent agenda items 1.1 and 1.2 were approved by common consent. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing to consider a rezoning request of approximately 2.315 acres within the E.T.J. Carter Lakes Acres subdivision, located generally at the northwest corner of the Rock prairie Road and Bradley Road intersection, from A-O Agriculture-Open Space to R-1 Single Family Residential. (95-108) Senior Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report and recommended approval of the rezoning request. The subject property is in the process of being subdivided into a single lot in the Carter • Lake Acres subdivision, the majority of which is located in the E.T.J. The proposed northerly property line is the same as the city limits line. In order to be allowed to build a single family home on the new lot within the current zoning restrictions, the lot would need to be a minimum of five acres. The rezoning request is in compliance with the Land Use Plan and with land use patterns in the area. Eight surrounding property owners were notified with no response. Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. • Project Engineer Mike McClure of McClure Engineering approached the Commission and stated that the applicant could not be at the Commission meeting; however, there is a letter from Mr. Munro in the packet concerning the preliminary plat.. Mr. McClure offered to answer any questions pertaining to the proposed rezoning request or preliminary plat. Chairman Hawthorne closed the public hearing. Mr. Gribou moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request of approximately 2.315 acres within the E.T.J. Carter Lake Acres Subdivision, located generally at the northwest corner of the Rock Prairie Road and Bradley Road intersection, from A-O Agriculture-Open to R-1 Single Family Residential. (95-108) AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration of a preliminary E.T.J. plat for the Carter Lake Acres subdivision. (95-307) Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report and recommended approval of the preliminary plat with the condition that Harris and Bradley Roads be upgraded, the additional right-of--way along Rock Prairie Road be dedicated with the final plat and with the remaining comments as outlined in the Presubmission Conference Report. Carter Lake Acres is an E.T.J. subdivision located at the northwest corner of the Rock Prairie Road and Bradley Road intersection. Due to the fact that these lots take their sole access from Harris Road and Bradley Road, staff recommended that these existing streets be brought up to County rural road standards. The Subdivision Regulations state within the Special Conditions in Area of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction that, "Streets...does not require a curb and gutter, but requires all-weather, gravel or crushed stone base, road surface with not less than a two course inverted penetration asphalt • surface." This description would meet the County rural standards. Both roads as existing do not meet these standards. Commissioner Hall questioned staff concerning annexing the entire Carter Lake Acres subdivision into the city limits. City Planner Kee informed the Commission that the subject property is not included in the 1995 potential annexation area. She stated that the Commission may see other cases similar to this one because of the annexation along the center line of Rock Prairie Road. There is a current policy that if those lots outside the city limits wanted city services, they would have to petition for annexation prior to getting those services. City Planner Kee stated that City Council could give staff policy direction in dealing with cases such as the Carter Lake Acres subdivision. Commissioner Hall stated that if a developer wants to develop property for profit, they should take the time to annex that property into the city limits so that services can be provided to those lots. The proposed subdivision allows city services to one lot and no city services to the remaining lots. Commissioner Garner moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat of the Carter Lake Acres E.T.J. subdivision with staff recommendations. Commissioner Lane seconded the motion which passed (6 - 1); Commissioner Hall voted in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a final plat for the Lacour Subdivision in the Wolf Pen Creek zoning district. (95-206) City Planner Kee presented the staff report and recommended approval of the final plat with the • following conditions of the plat and development agreement: P&Z Minutes April 20, 1995 Page 2 of 6 The applicant is asking: (1) To defer the design and construction of a 12" water line. • (2) To defer the submission of impact studies addressing the reserve tract until it final plats. (3) To defer the payment of back taxes on the property until the final plat is filed and the sale can occur. (4) To defer the design and construction of a sidewalk along Highway 30 until the site plan is submitted for the lot being final platted. (5) To pay only part of the City's administrative costs for the preparation of this development agreement. (6) City shall not make any future assessments against the developer for design or construction of Kyle Street where the right-of--way is being dedicated. In consideration~or these items staff recommends that the ollowing be accomplished: (1) Developer shall design and construct a 12" water line within 12 months of the date of the agreement. (2) The Kyle Street right-of--way through the Wolf Pen Creek dedication and the reserve tract shall be dedicated with this final plat. (3) An access easement shall be granted to Taco Bell with this final plat and their • easternmost curb opening closed within thirty days of the Certificate of Occupancy for the buyer of the lot being final platted. (4) An access easement shall be granted with this final plat giving access to the Wolf Pen Creek dedication area. (5) When the City purchases right-of--way through the lot that is being platted now and constructs Kyle Street through the entirety of the property, the City reserves the right to assess the lot currently being platted for improvements. (6) Developer pays 50% of the administrative costs of this agreement up to $2,500. City Planner Kee stated that the Wolf Pen Creek dedication on lot 1 will be dedicated with the site plan for that lot. The access easement for the adjacent Taco Bell site may need to be adjusted at the time of site plan review and staff would suggest that this adjustment not be required to come back before the Commission and City Council. If the sale of lot 1 does not occur within ninety days of the development agreement, the agreement expires. Representative of the applicant Greg Taggart with the Municipal Development Group approached the Commission and stated that the back taxes on the property will be paid upon the sale of lot 1. He urged the Commission to take into consideration that Taco Bell is a third party to this agreement and if they do not sign the agreement, the owner of the subject property cannot plat the property in order to sell lot 1. City Planner Kee stated that the applicant approached staff asking for deferments of ordinance • requirements and staff began negotiating items that were in the best interest of the City. Closing the existing Taco Bell driveway will improve the safety of that intersection. P&Z Minutes April 20, 1995 Page 3 of 6 Commissioner Lightfoot stated that if the developer and the owner are interested in developing the property, then they will work together to get Taco Bell to sign the agreement. It is not the • responsibility of the City. Commissioner Lightfoot moved to recommend approval of the final plat with all staff recommendations. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Public hearing to Ordinance (Ordinance No. 1638) pertaining structures other than single family. (95-802) consider an amendment to the Zoning to parking requirements for residential Senior Planner Kuenzel presented the proposed ordinance amendment recommendations. At a recent meeting of the City Council, staff was directed to prepare an ordinance amendment relating to multi-family parking requirements. Specifically, Council is concerned with the parking problems and appearance problems associated with multi-family development. The amendment draft that is currently being prepared by out legal staff will do the following: (1) Require 2 parking spaces for each 1 bedroom duplex unit. (2) Require 3 parking spaces for each 2 bedroom duplex unit. (3) Require 3.5 parking spaces for each 3 bedroom duplex unit. (4) Impose a green space percentage requirement to allow more flexibility for the placement of parking lots and limit the amount of concrete. (5) Require 250 points of landscaping per duplex unit and that these plantings consist ofdrought-resistant species. • (6) Require 1.5 spaces for each 1 bedroom apartment unit. (7) Require 2.5 spaces for each 2 bedroom apartment unit. (8) Require 3 spaces for each 3 bedroom apartment unit. Senior Planner Kuenzel stated that these changes and other possible solutions were discussed at a Focus Group meeting on April 5, 1995. This group was made up of builders, bankers, architects, engineers, apartment owners and managers and City staff. Several more complex issues were also discussed. However, most of these will be left for the Community Enhancement Study that is currently under way. That study headed by Dr. Charles Graham, will address additional parking and site requirements for duplexes and effects a change in the parking required for apartments. The study will be much more in depth than is possible at this time. Staff is therefore making the above recommendations to address the largest concerns and will forward suggestions to the parking subcommittee of the Community Enhancement Steering Committee on the more complex issues. That subcommittee will be made up of several of the people that were present at the Focus Group meeting. The interim ordinance amendment will remain in place until the Community Enhancement Study is implemented. Commissioner Hall expressed concern with "grandfathering" existing duplexes in town. In order to be fair and equitable and achieve the City's goals, the City should look at the possibility of requiring existing duplexes to come into compliance with local codes and ordinances at some point such as the sale of the property. As College Station continues to grow, there will be duplexes that meet our ordinances and duplexes that become further and further out of compliance. At a minimum, the existing duplexes should be required to meet the landscaping • requirement. P&Z Minutes April 20, 1995 Page 4 of 6 Senior Planner Kuenzel stated that staff deals with that issue everyday in dealing with non- conforming uses. Legally, there is not much case law to guide staff; however, staff is working • with other cities, Texas Municipal League and Planning Advisor Services to determine at what point code compliance can be obtained. Staff is also currently working with the legal department to establish some reasonable policies in dealing with non-conforming uses. Commissioner Lightfoot stated that the main problem seems to be enforcement of existing codes and policies; however, with the "grandfathenng" of existing duplexes is not the issue with the proposed ordinance amendment. Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. Charles Graham approached the Commission and stated that he is the consultant hired by the City to look at this particular issue in conjunction with overall community appearance. Mr. Graham expressed concern that once an interim requirement is established, the City will have to live with the multi-family units built under that requirement for a long time. In working with other cities, the main issue seems to be strict enforcement of existing codes and ordinances. Some cities with large rental populations have required additional parking when the unit changes from a family residency versus unrelated persons. Mr. Graham also expressed concern with requiring parking in the rear of duplexes. The rear parking is a trend for new development but may not necessarily be the best alternative for security, garbage collection, etc. Adding additional parking may alleviate some of the immediate problems; however cost and design criteria should also be considered. Tony Jones, a local builder and member of the focus group, approached the Commission and stated that the parking problem stems from the duplexes that were built under the old ordinance requirements. He stated that the duplexes built in the last two years have adequate parking and are aesthetically pleasing. However, the ordinance should be revised to make duplex and apartment requirements the same based on the number of bedrooms. Mr. Jones also expressed • concern that economics as well as aesthetics should be examined before the ordinance is changed. Many of the builders are currently installing landscaping and irrigation systems on the new duplexes. The builders are also installing additional parking that is currently not required by the ordinance. Mr. Jones stated that the local development community has civic pride and is concerned with building a quality product. Glen Thomas of Thomas Properties approached the Commission and stated that he agrees with Mr. Jones in that most of the quality construction in College Station has come out of civic pride and not strict ordinance requirements. There are still duplexes that are built as cheaply as possible but there are other extremes as well. Mr. Thomas suggested the City look into providing incentives for building quality and aesthetically pleasing products. The Good Cents program is an example of incentives provided to the builder for building an energy efficient home. The City could provide a similar program such as providing wholesale landscaping supplies to the builders for duplexes or apartments if they install a certain amount. Commissioner Hall stated that if the City is genuinely concerned about this issue, incentive programs could be provided. The City could even give tax credits. For every dollar spent on landscaping, the City could reduce the property tax one dollar. Once a property is brought into compliance, it is more likely that it will be kept m compliance. Chairman Hawthorne closed the public hearing. Commissioner Gribou expressed concern that the numbers presented in the ordinance amendment are not based on some facts or independent studies but instead an estimate of what we think we need. He suggested staff consider the size of the bedrooms or the bedroom and bathroom mix. • Commissioner Gribou stated that other criteria could be used or explored before an ordinance amendment is adopted. P&Z Minutes April 20, 1995 Page 5 of 6 C Chairman Hawthorne explained that code enforcement issues, such as removing the trash cans off of the street, are the main problem. Providing more concrete per unit will not solve these existing problems or make the development more attractive. He stated that he liked the idea of incentives as a way to encourage quality development as well as reach the existing, grandfathered areas. Chairman Hawthorne also requested that staff look into the possibility of limiting the number of cars in the lease agreement. The City could provide incentives for the landlord to limit the number of cars per unit. He stated that he is not convinced that the current ordinances and requirements in place now can not work with additional programs like the incentive programs. Chairman Hawthorne stated that he would rather address these problems through incentives instead of legislating the cost of a development. Mr. Jones suggested that the Commission take thirty days to work with staff and the local building community to come up with a solution. There are very few duplex lots available in College Station and the thirty day delay should not have a negative impact on the City. Senior Planner Kuenzel stated that these solutions and incentive programs will be studied in depth as part of the Community Enhancement Study. Staff is trying to get something in place now to address the main issues of parking numbers and aesthetics. The ordinance amendment was never intended to address a full range of issues such as code enforcement. Commissioner Gribou stated that adding more parking does not address community enhancement and is not the only solution to the existing problem. He moved to delay action until such time that the ordinance amendment more carefully addresses aesthetics and community enhancement. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed (4 - 3); Chairman Hawthorne and Commissioners Lightfoot and Hall voted in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Other business. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn. Commissioner Gribou moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). APPROVED: Chairman, Kyle-€E~~ Wt.;~~~ ~„ • ATTEST: Plannin Technician, atalie omas P & Z Minutes April 20, 1995 Page 6 of 6 i• I~ r1 ~.J ame ~ cfrfress Manning ~' Zoning Commission Guest ~eBister l w _ Date ~~ 1. ~K ~, ~~vT ~ l ~,1? 4. ~~ 11C~--~.W~ ~ ~ ~~,c~-ems ice. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 1z. 13. 14. ZS. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 2S.