Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/20/1995 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission~~ MINUTES Planning & Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS July 20, 1995 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Hawthorne and Commissioners Lightfoot, Smith, Garner and Hall. • • COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Lane and Gribou. STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, City Engineer Laza, Assistant City Engineer Morgan, Graduate Civil Engineer Homeyer, Development Coordinator Volk, Senior Assistant City Attorney Nemcik, Fire Marshal Mies and Fire Lieutenant O'Connor. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes from the meeting of July 6, 1995. Commissioner Garner moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of July 6, 1995 as written. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing to consider a final replat of lots 34, 35 and 36, block 2 of the Camelot Section Three Subdivision. (95-210) Assistant City Engineer Morgan informed the Commission that the proposed replat is to shift interior lot lines. The applicant has complied with the conditions outlined in the Presubmission Conference Report and staff recommended approval of the final plat as revised. Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. Seeing no one present to speak in favor of or in opposition to the final replat, he closed the public hearing. Mr. Smith moved to recommend approval of the final replat of lots 34, 35 and 36, block 2 of the Camelot Section Three Subdivision with staff recommendations. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Public hearing to consider a final amending plat of lots 27 and 28, block 22 of the Pebble Creek Phase 4A Subdivision. (95-222) Assistant City Engineer Morgan informed the Commission that the purpose of this amending plat is to increase the lot sizes for additional building area. Staff recommended approval of the final plat as submitted. Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. Seeing no one present to speak in favor of or in opposition to the final replat, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Lightfoot moved to recommend approval of the final amending plat of lots 27 and 28, block 22 of Pebble Creek Phase 4A Subdivision as submitted. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). • AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a preliminary plat of the Crystal Park Subdivision. (95-308) City Planner Kee presented the staff report and informed the Commission that the property is being platted in order to reflect a sale and division that has occurred. Part of the Dartmouth Street extension south from F.M. 2818 to Texas Avenue is reflected on this plat. Staff has worked with this property owner and adjacent property owners in achieving an alignment that meets City standards and is acceptable to all affected property owners. The property currently has R-1 and A-P zoning. The R-1 has been there since annexation, while the A-P was recently rezoned. The current land use plan reflects the area for office commercial uses. Lot 1, block 3 is an R-1 lot that does not meet the Zoning Ordinance requirements for a single family lot. The applicant has placed a note on the plat indicating that this is not a buildable lot. It has sufficient size to meet R-1 requirements but it does not have adequate width or depth to meet minimum requirements. Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat as revised after the Presubmission Conference meeting. Commissioner Lightfoot moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat of the Crystal Park Subdivision with the staff recommendations. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Consideration of a preliminary plat of the Parkway View • Addition. (95-309) City Planner Kee presented the staff report and informed the Commission that the subject property was included in a master preliminary plat that was submitted in 1976. Most of the existing developed area has been built in accordance with that plat and consists of a mix of duplex and fourplex dwellings. Currently, Southwest Parkway dead-ends in front of the five proposed duplex lots. The reserve tract shows the extension of Southwest Parkway in conformance with the Thoroughfare Plan. This extension should include sidewalks and staff recommended that at a minimum, there be wide outside lanes provided in order to be bicycle friendly. The impact studies for the preliminary plat were received after the staff report, therefore it is incomplete. At the time the reserve tract is final platted, the entire right-of--way for Southwest Parkway will be required, with one-half coming from the reserve tract and one-half from the adjoining property owner. Before construction on the five lots, a temporary turnaround at the end of the existing Southwest Parkway must be built and can be covered by an easement conveyed by separate instrument with this plat. The 8" water line may need to be upgraded and the sewer line is adequate for the five lots on this plat. There may be sewer problems for the reserve tract and the City's waste water staff is studying this area now. Commissioner Garner moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat of the Parkway View Addition with staff recommendations. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). • P & Z Minutes July 20, 1995 Page 2 of 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Presentation and discussion of Rural Subdivision • Regulations. Assistant City Engineer Morgan informed the Commission that during the annexation proceedings, concerns were expressed by citizens that there were ordinances and regulations that they did not want imposed on them. Concerns ranged from the standards required in the Subdivision Regulations, street, water and sewer standards to livestock, firearms and other quality of life issues. As a result, the City Council directed staff to begin looking at current ordinances to see if their concerns could be addressed. Staff has had two focus group meetings with local developers, engineers and citizens to hear concerns, discuss them and try to formulate ideas to address them. Staff found that the concerns could really be broken down into two categories. One being those that are more development related issues such as standards that are addressed within the Subdivision Regulations and two, what staff termed as "quality of life" issues such as livestock, animals, firearms, weeds and grass, etc. Tonight, the focus is primarily on the first area, development standards. Most of the concerns expressed with the street discussion was the desire to have rural type cross sections within the subdivision. In researching this topic, staff looked at existing rural type subdivisions to see the quality of streets and cross sections used. The width of the roadway should be a minimum 70' right-of--way with a 24' wide paved section to allow a 20' fire lane and some parking along the street. There was a concern with roadway geometry and the minimum radius requirements and staff is still researching this aspect. However, the current standards may still be effective in these rural sections. Staff recommended that smaller streets interior to the rural subdivision be allowed with open ditches, but the larger arterials outside the subdivisions, or those which run through the subdivision will be required to have curbs and • gutters which is standard inside the City limits now. With respect to water systems staff has explored the extension of the public system, private systems and even private wells that may be allowed in these rural subdivisions. Fire protection is also an area of concern when dealing with rural subdivisions. One alternative that staff is exploring is the use of dry fire hydrants like the ones installed in the Sweetwater Subdivision in the City's E.T.J. There are several considerations with the use of dry hydrants such as maximum spacing and the water supply sources available. Assistant City Engineer Morgan also presented information regarding septic systems including the option for an aerobic system. With respect to drainage, staff recommended a minimum 18" deep ditch with an 18" culvert with some flexibility built in to address special conditions of the land in certain areas. The City would require that vegetation be established before the open drainage ditch is accepted to help avoid high maintenance due to erosion of raw dirt. Staff recommended the use of overhead electrical lines in the rural subdivisions instead of underground utility service. A rural or agricultural/residential zoning district is also being considered. This district is intended to provide areas for single family residential development that are rural in character. These developments would contain large lots with a minimum of one acre in size. Drainage features, easements, floodplain or other features that may limit the use of the property for use as a septic field would not count toward the one acre minimum. Areas should contain a minimum of 100 acres and should be developed as a single unified development. Areas of less than 100 acres may be considered if adjacent to existing rural residential areas. Staff also recommended that as a part of the zoning request, a development plan showing the layout of the lots, roadways and other infrastructure must be submitted. • P & Z Minutes July 20, 1995 Page 3 of 5 Chairman Hawthorne expressed some reservations about allowing septic systems inside the City limits and how these "pocket" areas will be addressed when sewer lines have been extended near the neighborhood. He suggested that there must be a better way to address the problem other than requiring the home owner to pay twice -once for a septic system and again for connecting to a sewer line. Chairman Hawthorne also stated that he could not support the use of overhead electrical lines unless the cost of the underground service is astronomical. Commissioner Hall agreed that underground electrical service should be required. He suggested that staff explore the possibility of placing a maximum acreage size for lots in a rural subdivision to preclude large lots which could be subdivided in the future; and by doing so, change the nature of the original subdivision. Chairman Hawthorne invited the public to address the Commission. O. J. Beard, Jr. of 13813 Renee Lane in College Station approached the Commission and expressed concern about the use of overhead electrical lines. He also stated that Barron Road is substandard and a safety problem that the City should correct immediately. Phyllis Hobson of 1415 Harpers Ferry Road in Nantucket informed the Commission that she is concerned with the possibility of even allowing rural subdivision within the City limits. The City should not take in land to the point of having to create a new subdivision standard. Ms. Hobson stated that the different standards would create problems that perhaps no one has thought of. Subdivisions built within the City limits should be built to current standards. She cautioned the Commission and staff to remember that the Engineering Department has reported that 75% of the septic systems in Brazos County are not working properly part of the time. Norman Cotter of 1414 Harpers Ferry Road in Nantucket stated that he is very much opposed to annexation because of the controls and restrictions the City would place on the subdivision. If an ordinance is developed which addresses quality of life issues, then deed restrictions in existing subdivisions should be used as the starting point for developing that ordinance. Mr. Cotter also informed the Commission that he opposes to dual standards for fire protection and sewer systems for areas within the City limits. Robert Weir of 5650 Raymond Stotzer Parkway approached the Commission and stated that the proposed regulation changes appear to be a way to keep the City from providing service to the recently annexed areas of College Station. He suggested that the new ordinances allow the people in the newly annexed areas to keep doing what they have been doing before being annexed into the City. Mr. Weir suggested that staff give additional thought to the proposed water and sewer requirements in these rural subdivision plans. Bert Hermann of 2401 East Bypass in College Station informed the Commission that he is in favor of allowing rural type subdivisions within the city limits and that he would not recommend a maximum size. P & Z Mrrrutes July 20, 1995 Page 5 of 5 Fain McDougal of 2801 Meadowbriar in Bryan thanked the staff for preparing a proposal which allows rural subdivisions within the City and stated that he thinks the new subdivisions will simply • allow another choice for people coming into the City. Mr. McDougal stated that the proposed rural subdivisions would be much like the Memorial Subdivision in Houston. He stated that he checked into the 75% figure pertaining to septic systems within the County and found that that figure pertains to systems installed prior to the inspection and regulations recently activated by the County. Chairman Hawthorne informed staff that he would like the concerns expressed throughout the meeting passed along to others including the following: (1) The requirement of underground versus overhead electrical service and the associated costs. (2) Determine whether a maximum acreage limit will be advantageous. (3) Look at the possibility of establishing development standards for roads based on acreage. Perhaps there is something better than asphalt with open ditches inside the subdivision. (4) Determine whether to allow rural subdivisions within the City and whether or not the City wants to create these types of "pockets" of different standards. r~ LJ Commissioner Hall added that he is encouraged by the step forward in trying to address the rural subdivision issue. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Other business. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Adjourn. Commissioner Hall moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). ., APP ~3VE~: r' sy __. i ~c-. ~ _. • ATT~ST: ~/ - - , r' ~~ ~/ri, ~~;~ Planning Technician, Natalie Thomas P & Z Minutes July 20, 1995 Chairman, Kyle Hawthorne Page 5 of S • Registration Form (For persons who wish to address the Commission) Date of Meeting %~~~ ~%'S Agenda Item No. Name ~~'"~ ~.'i~~/~ n;' ~'c~ ~~ `' Address ~/y~Y fff~~'i-'f_ ~S r ~-f"~'~ /~i7 If speaking for an organization, Name of organization: Speaker's offj~ial capacity: Ce..~ it.' l-. Subject on ch person wishes to speak: Please remember to step to the podium as soon as you are recognized by the chair, hand your completed registration form to the presiding officer and state your name and residence before beginning your presentation. If you have written notes you wish to present to the Commission, PLEASE FURNISH AN EXTRA COPY FOR PLANNING FILES. • • REGISTRATION FORM (FOR PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL) ,'' j~~~~__`~' Date of Meeting ~ ~ _ ~~-- ~ ~'~ City Council Agenda Item No. --z- .~ r ,-- Address .~ ~~ ~ ~ ~.' ~ ~ YI ~~' '° Yi House No. ~ Street Gty IF SPEAKING FOR AN ORGANIZATION, Name of Organization: And, • Speaker's Official Capacity: Subject on which Person Wishes to Speak: __-. Please remember to step to the podium as soon as you are recognized by the chair, hand your completed registration form to the presiding of ficerand state your name and residence before beginning your presentation. The Council will appreciate each speaker limiting an address on any one item to three minutes. Thank you for your cooperation. ~Cannin~ ~' Zoning Commission Guest ~,eBister Date ame n 2. 3. /~~ Y wt, ~ ~ Z/ 4. ~ 1 ,j ~ ~,,,~ ~~ ~~~~ 6. ~ ) ~.~ ~ ~ ~ti' _o ~ r v r. 8. ~~' ._ 9. 10. • 11. 12. 13. 14. 1S. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. • 24. 2S. ;~t~frfress r l ~~~ , ~ L ~~U ,~L° h~~t' ~c ~C t is ~G/ ~ ~ ~----. 1 (/ f S'