HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/16/2000 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
March 1 , 2000
7:00 P.I.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Mooney, Commissioners Floyd, H rl n, and
Parker.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Chairman Rife, Commissioners Kaiser and Warren.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Member Hazen.
STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner McCully, Staff' Assistant Charanza, Assistant
Development Coordinator George, City Planner Kee, Assistant City
Engineer Mayo, Director of Development Services Callaway, Graduate
Engineers T and Thmspn, Transportation Planner Hard, Staff'
Planners Hitchcock and Anderson, Assistant City Manager Brown, and
Assistant City Attorney N m it .
AGENDA ITEM N. 1: Hear visitors
There were no i s it r s present w ishing to address the Commission.
The fohowi g items were approved y common consent,
AGENDA ITEM N. : Consent Agenda.
Agenda Item No. 2.1: Approved the minutes from the Workshop p Me ting held on March 2, 2000.
Agenda Item No. 2.2: Approved the minutes from the Regular Meeting hold on March 2, 2000.
REGULAR AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. : Public hearing and consideration of a Rezoning from R -4 Apartment
Low Density and R -1A Single Family Residential to PIT -H Planned Development District —
H using for 3.51 acres located in the Henton-Lincoln Subdivision. (00-18)
City Planner Kee presented the staff report and stated that in November of 1999, Council rezoned the
tract adjacent and to the north from A -P Administrative Professional to C -B Business Commercial. At
P&ZMinutes March 16, 2000 Page I of 5
that time the property owner indicated that a rezoning for PDD -H would be forthcoming on these 3.5
acres. The land use plan show this area for retail commercial uses along the University Drive frontage
and high density single family uses along the Lincoln Avenue frontage. The rezoning to C -B did not
alter this pattern. The proposed rezoning will eliminate the R -4 that is between the C -B and single
family and place C -B zoning immediately adjacent to residential zoning with not step down effect.
However, through the use of the PDD district, the impacts of this adjacency can be mitigated. With the
recent request for C -B on the tract to the north, the applicant and the City accounted for this future
adjacency by requiring a landscape buffer on the C -B tract.
Ms. Kee pointed out that the pattern of development along Lincoln has been a single rove of individual
homes fronting Lincoln with any higher density development north being required to access only
University Drive. This particular tract presently has a condition for an impenetrable wall to be along the
zone line between the I -1 A single family on Lincoln and the R-4 tract to the north. However, in 1995
the Commission and Council rezoned this I -4 tract to R-1A in order for it to be consolidated with the
I -1 A along Lincoln, with the condition that "The wall that was to separate the I -1 A along Lincoln from
the I -4 behind shall be moved northward to separate the new I -1 A (rezoned from I- from the
office /commercial to the north. This was never finalized because of a development agreement that was
never executed. But this decision did allow for some additional traffic from development behind the R-
1A fronting Lincoln to access directly to Lincoln. In 1995, surrounding property owners opposed this
r o f the wall but the rezoning was granted due to the lessening of the density on what was the
R-4 tract." Ms. Kee also said that this "still zoned" R-4 tract is sandwiched between the single family
on Lincoln and commercial to the north. If this tract were to develop at multi - family densities, access
should be limited to University Drive. This was clearly stated in the 1995 rezoning case when the
Commissioner mating the motion state "... through traffic should not be allowed from Lincoln Avenue
to the intense commercial and multi- family uses [to the north] ." She stressed that the questions before
the Commission presently is whether there is a residential district that can be placed on this I -4 tract
whose density is such that it is appropriate for access to be taken to Lincoln rather than through a
commercial development to University Drive. In 1995 the decision was that it would be appropriate for
R-1 A. The P11 -H is proposing an overall density of 8 dwelling units per acre, which is less than the
10 units per acre allowed in R-1 A. In reality, because of the R-1A lot size requirements, the number of
units that could be placed on this property under R-1A zoning would be somewhat less than with this
PIT -H proposal. Lincoln Avenue is a major collector o the thoroughfare plan and is designed to carry
51 to 10,000 vehicles per day. This proposal would add approximately 260 -280 grips per day t o
Lincoln. The last counts done in 1996 show an average daily total of 5,446 and 7,114 (two locations).
This PIT -H proposal will increase this by roughly 4.5 percent.
Acting Chairman Moony opened the public hearing.
Mr. Chuck Ellison, 2902 Camille Drive, was present to represent the applicant. He felt that the impact
of the proposed PDD -H would be less than a R -1A development. He said that the proposal would
provide the step -down zoning approach as desired by the City. He told the Commissioners that the
applicant met with residents and property owners. He stressed that PDD requests involve extensive time
and money investments.
The following people spore in opposition to the request:
Peter Hugill (College Woodlands HOA President) — 904 Francis
Benito Flores -Meath — 901 Val Verde
Timothy Hall — 104 Rose Circle
P&ZMinutes March 16, 2000 Page 2 of 5
Bob I r l s1 y
— 1109 Ashburn
Cary Tshirhart
— 903 Foster
Daum Aberth —
1203A Munson
Suzanne Irlsly — 1109 Ashburn
Inn B urlbaw —
10 0 1 Dose Circle
The concerns expressed were:
Additional traffic since this development would probably be rental property for students.
No areas designated as "play areas" for children.
Erosion o f th residential area.
Increased density in a low-density area.
Increased traffic on Lincoln, no information to satisfy the concern with higher traffic volumes.
No balance between rental (student housing) and "permanent" residents (family housing).
Acting Chairman Mooney closed the public hearing.
Acting Chairman Mooney asked if staff could elaborate on traffic issues. Transportation Planner Hard
said that it would be reasonable to assume that the majority of the traffic would travel on Lincoln.
Commissioner Floyd moved to approve the rezoning request (for discussion purposes only).
Commissioner Parker seconded the motion.
Commissioner Floyd felt that with the PDD zone, the City would have some say as to what type of
development would occur, as opposed to the R -4 and the R -lA districts, which would allow any type of
development as long as the minimum requirements were met. He said that the previous P &Z and City
Council wanted the barrier where it was, which would send traffic to Lincoln with any type of
residential development.
Ms. Kee said that when the C -B district was approved, the wall was placed where it is shown but she
felt the P &Z and Council realized the zoning of the R -4 tract would eventually be rezoned. She did not
think the R -4 density could be met because of parking and landscaping requirements.
Acting Chairman Mooney pointed out that the PDD -H zoning allows the P &Z and City Council to have
some say as to what is developed. He said that the R -4 zoned would not give them the authority to
control development as long as the plan meets minimum requirements and is in compliance with all city
standards.
Commissioner Floyd pointed out that it is important for the homeowners to understand that there is no
control over developments under the current zoning districts. He felt that the PDD -H would ease most
concerns. He then asked if each R -1A unit would have access onto Lincoln. Ms. Kee explained that
there would be combined access per City ordinances.
Acting Chairman Mooney expressed his concern with the safety of children residing in the R-1A R-1 tract.
He asked if there were any designated areas as open space. Mr. Chuck Ellison said that there would be
no back yards, but there would be 15 feet on the sides, and there would be a designated detention pond.
After discussion among the Commissioners regarding the parting configuration and unit layout,
Commissioner Farber withdrew his second to the motion to recommend approval of the request made by
Commissioner Floyd.
P&ZMinutes March 16, 2000 Page 3 of 5
Commissioner Horin moved to approve the request with the site plan modified as follows:
- Replace pro posed parting area along Lincoln with landscaping.
- Move unit #20 to be contiguous with 17, 18, and 19.
- Eliminate units 21 and 22 and utilize the area for parking.
Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 4-0.
AGENDA ITEM No. 4: Consideration of a Preliminary Flat for Fairfield at Luther Street
located at the south corner of Harvey Mitchell Parkway and Luther Street west on 20.63 acres.
(00-40)
Graduate Engineer Tondre presented the staff report and stated that the proposed Preliminary Flat is for
a single lot, 20.63 acre, subdivision located at the southeast corner of Harvey Mitchell and Luther. The
applicant is planning to construct a multi - family apartment complex on the site. The Land Use Flan
reflects the tract and the rest of the property to the south toward Holleman as high - density single family.
However, in the last few years, the development trend for the area bound by Marion Pugh, Luther, and
Harvey Mitchell Parkway has been infill in the form of apartment complexes. The duplex portion of the
request is compatible with the existing land use pattern in the area, that of duplexes, fourpl x s, and
apartment complexes. The subject property was rezoned PI -H Planned Development District —
Housing in February 2000. The plan of the P I -H rezoning shoved a single -phase project which will
consist of fifteen 1 buildings, one leasing office, which will double as a clubhouse, a swimming pool,
a basketball court, and two volleyball courts. The applicant is requesting oversized Participation on
improvements to Luther Street, domestic waterline improvements, and possibly sewer improvements.
The applicant will extend a 16-inch waterline along Luther Street to the intersection at Harvey Mitchell
Parkway. The line will be capped for future extension across Harvey Mitchell. An internal loop will
extend through the property and stub -out to provide water service to the Gorzyli property. A gravity
sewer system is not available to the subject property. There are two options for the developer:
Option 1 Construct a private sewer system to collect, store and pump wastewater to the
existing City sewer system on the Walden Pond site. The owners will maintain the sewer
system and sewer billing from the City will be to the owner of the complex and not to the
individual users.
Option 2 The developer will construct a sewer system, including lift station and force main
as per the City's proposed Master Plan. The new lift station will serve this development as well
as future development along Harvey Mitchell Parkway. oversize participation funds for
construction of the lift station and force main are available.
As part of the development agreement between the Melrose Apartments and the City, Metros
Subdivision is responsible for improving Luther Street from Marion Pugh through the Melrose
development. The improvements include widening of the ROW and pavement section to major-
c ollector standards. Phase L from Marion Pugh to the main entrance of Melrose., has been completed.
These improvements were constructed as a -feet pavement section with curb and gutter on the south
side as required by the de velopment agreement. Phase 11, from the entrance of Melrose to the northeast
portion of this subdivision, ROW acquisition is still pending. The City is pr acquiring the
necessary ROW. The developer of Fairfield at Luther has agreed to complete Phase 11 of the Melrose
development agreement. Fairfield will enter into a private agreement with Melrose to be reimbursed for
P&ZMinutes March 16, 2000 Page 4 of 5
these improvements. They will continue the extension o Luther to Harvey Mitchell. Street section for
Phase II and the Fairfield improvements will match the section in Phase I of Melrose. Oversize
participation will likely he requested for the street improvements.
Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with the following condition: (the applicant agreed to
all of the following conditions)
➢ The PUE adjoining the Gorzycki property should be 20' wide.
➢ The PUE along Harvey Mitchell Parkway should be 10' wide.
➢ Sewer issues must be resolved prior to submittal of the Final Plat.
Mr. Paul Johnston, developer and applicant for Fairfield Residential idential, informed the Commission that he
concurred with all of staff recommendations and conditions.
Commissioner Parker moved to approve the preliminary plat with staff conditions. Commissioner
Horlen seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (4 -0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. : Update to the Commission of any new Minor r Amending Plats
approved by Staff.
Senior Planner McCully told the Commission that there were no minor plats approved at Staff level.
AGENDA ITEM NO. . : Discussion of future agenda items.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. : Adjourn.
Commissioner Parker moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Commissioner Hrlen seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 4-0.
LI W W : 1111 DI DI
I 0 0 D0 9
Chairman, Wayne Life
Staff Assistant, Debra Charanza
P&ZMinutes March 16, 2000 Page 5 of 5