Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/18/2001 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS January 18, 2001 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Mooney, Floyd, Harris, Warren, Horlen, Happ, and Williams. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Members Massey and Maloney STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Manager Brown, Economic and Community Development Director Foutz, Staff Planners Jimmerson, Reeves, Hill, and Hitchcock, Assistant City Engineer Mayo, Graduate Engineers Thompson and Vennochi, Assistant City Attorney Nemcik, Director of Development Services Callaway, Neighborhood Senior Planner Battle, City Planner Kee, Senior Planner Kuenzel, Development Review Manager Ruiz and Staff Assistant Hazlett. Chairman Mooney called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Hear visitors None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consent Agenda The following items were approved by common consent. 2.1 Approved minutes from the Workshop Meeting held on November 6, 2000. 2.2 Approved minutes from the Regular Meeting held on January 4, 2001. 2.3 Approved minutes from the Workshop Meeting held on January 4, 2001. 2.4 Moved to the Regular Agenda the Consideration of a Final Plat- Replat for Fairfield at Luther - Williams Addition consisting of 20.237 acres located on the south side of Luther Street West at FM 2818. (00 -71) P &ZMinutes January 18, 2001 Page I of 2.5 Approved the Final Plat for Sun Meadows, Phase I consisting of 100 R -2 lots on 34.6 acres located on South Graham Road at Schaffer Street. (00 -229) 2.6 Moved to the Regular Agenda the Consideration of a Preliminary Plat for The Gateway, Phase 2 consisting of 2 C -B Business - Commercial lots on 5.7 acres located at 1401 University Drive East. (00 -232) 2.7 Approved the Final Plat for 2 lots in Southwood Plaza on 1.22 acres and located on Brothers Boulevard. (00 -233) 2.8 Approved the Final Plat for Castlegate Subdivision Section III Phase I consisting of 28 PDD -H lots on 16.26 acres and located north of Greens Prairie Road and west of the future State Highway 40. (00 -237) REGULAR AGENDA AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.4 Consideration of a Final Plat - Replat for Fairfield at Luther Williams Addition consisting of 20.237 acres located on the south side of Luther Street West at FM 2818. (00 -71) Graduate Engineer Thompson reported that the issue on this project is the off -site easement. He indicated that the applicant is present and would like to make a verbal agreement with the commission regarding the plat and easement. The applicant Paul Johnson, 2045 N. Hwy. 360, addressed the commission, asking that the plat be approved this evening to be filed later when the easement is in place. Chairman Mooney opened the item for public comment. Because there were no comments, the item was moved for discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner Floyd motioned to approve the plat with the condition as stated by the applicant. Commissioner Harris seconded the motion. Assistant City Attorney Nemcik clarified for the Commission that the off -site easement is already approved. She also stated that the filing of the easement is being delayed to coincide with the plat because the applicant is the equitable interest holder. Chairman Mooney called the question. The motion passed 7 -0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.6 Consideration of a Preliminary Plat for The Gateway, Phase 2 consisting of 2 C -B Business - Commercial lots on 5.7 acres located at 1401 University Drive East. (00 -232) Graduate Engineer Vennochi presented the staff report. He opened by stating that Staff recommends approval of the final plat with the following three conditions: • Only one access drive for the entire 5.700 -acre tract. • Access through the subject tract to serve both the R -5 tract to the north and the A -P tract to the west. • A 100' landscape buffer between the C -B and R -5 tracts. P &ZMinutes January 18, 2001 Page 2 of 8 He explained that this property is a 5.700 -acre track to be platted as two separate lots and is part of the 25.566 -acre parent tract. The subject property was rezoned from R -1 to R -5 in 1995 along with the 20 R -5 zoned acres to the north. At that time, the intent was for all of the R -5 area to become a single multi- family development. In 1997, the property was rezoned to C -B, which essentially disconnected the future multi - family property from any street frontage. That rezoning included 4 conditions, three of which were indicated earlier in my report and should be shown on the plat at this time. Commissioner Floyd asked if the staff was agreeing to the single access point as being where it is currently shown on the plat and how does that access point line up with Forest Drive? Mr. Vennochi stated that the access point lines up exactly with Forest Drive according to TX DOT and may be considered for possible future signal -light installation. Opened the meeting for public comment. Danny Miller, 1101 Capital of Texas Highway, Austin, stated that the conditions are acceptable. He added that the intent of this development is to locate the driveway and a site plan has been prepared that reflects the access point and it's exact alignment with Forest Drive for signalization by TX DOT at the time of widening the road. Chairman Mooney opened the meeting for public comment. No one came forward with a comment. The item was moved to discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner Floyd motioned for approval with conditions as stated by staff. Commissioner Horlen seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 -0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consider request(s) for absence from meetings. None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of report to City Council: Protocol Issues. (00 -221) Chairman Mooney stated that this item was originally tabled at an earlier Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting and was discussed previously this evening during the Workshop Meeting. He opened the item for public comment. Benito Flores- Meath, 901 Val Verde stated that he agreed with the Commission about better explaining the platting process, receiving public comments, and perhaps revising ordinances accordingly. He encouraged the Commission to consider the ramifications of not allowing public comment on items not posted as public hearings. Finally, Mr. Flores -Meath suggested the Commission use the same process the City Council uses to hear public comments on items that are not posted as public hearings by requiring the completion of a request form prior to the meeting. The Commission would then call forward to hear the comments from only those who completed and turned in the forms. Chairman Mooney closed the public comment portion of the meeting. He explained that during the workshop meeting Part 3 was deleted from the original report. Also, in the discussion of Exhibit A, Item E, it was determined that a statement, which requires the Commission to accept a plat if it meets all the criteria requirements, is needed to clarify the Commissions' restrictions with regards to their decision on whether to accept or deny a plat. This should help to alleviate any misleading or confusion for the applicant or others in attendance at the meetings. Additionally, in the final report to City P &Z Minutes January 18, 2001 Page 3 of 8 Council, the recommendation for this portion of Exhibit A would encourage individuals in attendance to make public comment and become part of the public record. In cases where an item were to be accepted by the Commission and those in attendance felt an ordinance needed to be changed, this would allow the forum for that to be stated. In other cases, Exhibit A, Item A would be a form, easily read and disseminated. Item B the P &Z liaison will present to City Council from the written report. Item C would give applicants the opportunity to best present their proposal before the Commission. Item D refers to the appeal process when the Commission has denied an applicant's request. Item E has been stricken from the report. The Commission has asked Mr. Callaway, Director of Development Services, to format a document containing the terminology that would easily explain how the Commission will receive public comment on agenda items that are not scheduled as a public hearing. Commissioner Floyd clarified that public comment would be received on items only on the regular agenda that do not require a public hearing. While referring to Item C of Exhibit A, Commissioner Floyd explained that currently staff makes the case presentation on behalf of the applicant. Item C would allow the applicant the opportunity to make the presentation. He suggested not using the term "will require" in Item C. Chairman Mooney pointed out that Item C also states "prior to opening the public hearing ". Commissioner Floyd added that it also reads "or in cases that do not require public hearings ". Chairman Mooney suggested changing the wording to say "items that are on regular agendas." Commissioner Warren stated that if the applicant is satisfied with the staff report, that's their decision. Requiring the applicant to make the case presentation could prove to be a burden on the applicant and may possibly be more time consuming. Commissioner Harris reiterated that allowing the applicant to present their case would be a much more desirable situation than requiring it of them. Commissioner Horlen agreed that the wording should be changed from "will require applicants" to "allow ". Commissioner Warren pointed out that this situation is being discussed because there have been instances when a case is presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by staff, while the applicant makes the presentation to City Council and sometimes includes or excludes important details and information that was or was not presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission. There were several attempts by the Commission at rewording the Item for approval. Commissioner Floyd motioned to table and move the agenda item to the next workshop agenda. Commissioner Warren seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 -0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing and consideration of a rezoning for HEB located at 1900 Texas Avenue South and consisting of 9.1916 acres from A -P Administrative - Professional and C -3 Planned Commercial to PDD -B Planned Development- Business. (00 -124) Staff Planner Jimmerson presented the staff report. Ms. Jimmerson opened by stating that Staff recommends approval of the rezoning with the following conditions: • A median in Holleman must either be constructed or the developer must have paid the City their prorated share prior to the issuance of a C/O (Certificate of Occupancy) for any structure on the property. • At the time of platting an access casement must be provided across the HEB tract for the proposed water tower. • Standard C -1 zoning requirements apply for anything not expressly modified by the proposal. And last, that additional lighting detail is provided prior to going before Council. P &Z Minutes January 18, 2001 Page 4 of 8 Ms. Jimmerson explained that the applicants are requesting the zoning change to enable the development of a shopping center and the relocation of the City's water tower. The uses proposed for the shopping center include a grocery store, gas pumps, and retail use including the relocation of the existing printshop. She added that the developer has chosen to submit very detailed plans for the rezoning request to enable them to address the issues and concerns raised by staff and the neighbors. At least three neighborhood meetings were held regarding this project. The concerns voiced by area residents primarily involve • Use of Park Place • Lighting • Landscaping along Park Place and landscaping of the proposed water tower. The plans submitted reflect almost all of the solutions negotiated at the meetings. In addition, Ms. Jimmerson reports that the Land Use Plan shows the subject property as Retail Regional and Institutional surrounded by Retail Regional and High Density Residential. Most of the surrounding property is existing development, with the exception of the new shopping center being built across Texas Avenue. Taking this and the condition of the existing streets and intersections into consideration, staff has been concerned about the traffic impacts since the onset of discussions about this project Ms. Jimmerson said. At the request of staff, the developer hired a traffic engineer to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for this site. The City contracted with a traffic- engineering consultant to evaluate the TIA. These reports confirm what staff already believed about existing problems at the intersections of Holleman and Texas Avenue and of Holleman and the first driveway into the Hastings shopping center (Intersection A). Even without the new development, drive intersection A is rated Level of Service 7 ", which is the lowest possible classification. Ms. Jimmerson said that it is the view of the consultants that the new development will cause the level of service at intersection A to become marginally worse. To improve the existing situation and lessen the impact of the new development the consultant recommends a threefold solution. • Long -term intersectional improvements will need to be made over time to remove the "jog" in Holleman Drive and to allow the intersection to operate more efficiently. This is not something that should be the responsibility of the developer. • More immediate improvement recommendations include a signal to be located at the intersection of Texas and the Manual Drive /Outback Steakhouse driveway, and installation of a median in Holleman, to better control the access to the existing and proposed driveways. • The City already has a signal planned and designed for the Manual Drive/ Outback Steakhouse intersection, which is slated for installation after the TXDOT improvements to Texas Avenue are complete. Ms. Jimmerson stated that City staff, the developer, and the consultants have determined that prorating the costs of the installation of the median in Holleman between the City and the developer is the solution to mitigating the affects of the new development on the existing infrastructure. A development agreement may need to be executed between the City and the Developer to finalize this agreement. She said that Staff is recommending that a condition of the rezoning is that the median P &Z Minutes January 18, 2001 Page 5 of 8 must either be constructed or the developer must have paid the City their prorated share prior to the issuance of a C/O (Certificate of Occupancy) for any structure on the property. The property, which was annexed in 1956 has portions that are currently platted. However, Ms. Jimmerson stated that the property will need to be replatted for this project. In closing, Ms. Jimmerson reports that this site has frontage on three roadways. She explained that Park Place, which is a substandard residential street, runs along the north side of the property while Texas Avenue, which is a major arterial, bounds the property to the east. Additionally, Ms. Jimmerson stated that Texas Avenue is a TXDOT roadway and is in the beginning stages of a major expansion project from north of Harvey Rd. south past the connection with Earl Rudder Freeway. The widening project will include the installation of controlled access medians in the center of Texas Avenue. It also includes some minor changes to improve the intersection of Texas Avenue and Holleman which borders the subject site to the south. The T -fare plan shows this to be a minor arterial, however it is not currently built to that standard. At the time of platting, additional ROW will be dedicated for Holleman to enable future expansion. Finally, Ms. Jimmerson stated that the expansion of Holleman is not on the list of the City's proposed CIP projects at this time. Commissioner Warren asked what the long -term plans for Holleman in regards to the potential widening of it and in respect to the development of Wolf Pen Creek. Ms. Jimmerson stated that Holleman is classified as minor arterial and is not currently built to those standards nor is it on the list of the City's proposed CIP projects at this time to be widened. At the point of platting, additional right-of-way land will be dedicated to the future widening project. Chairman Mooney asked if there would be a median when Texas Avenue is widened. Ms. Jimmerson stated that there would be a median placed on Texas Avenue at the time of widening. Chairman Mooney asked if the intersection would be signalized. Ms. Jimmerson stated that she could not answer that question. Commissioner Harris asked about signage. Ms. Jimmerson stated that there are options that the applicant has to choose from but have not made that determination as yet. Commissioner Harris asked if there was going to be a new water tower or an attempt to move the old one. Ms. Jimmerson explained that a new water tower will be erected. Chairman Mooney opened the public hearing. Chuck Ellison, a representative for one of the applicants, stated that H.E.B. would agree to do whatever they could to mitigate the impact of this development to the residents of Park Place. In fact, H.E.B. representatives met with the Park Place residents on three different occasions to discuss the issues of concern. He introduced the H.E.B., Montana Microgroove, and private sector staff that is working on the project and is available to answer any questions. He urged the Commission to vote in favor of H.E.B. Commissioner Happ asked how the Park Place residents would return to their homes if the only turn direction out of the H.E.B. development is right. Mr. Ellison explained that the residents stated that they would prefer going to Anderson Street to return back to their homes rather than having traffic directed back onto Park Place. Commissioner Horlen asked if the service station would include only pumps. An H.E.B. representative stated that the only merchandise that would be sold would be chips, candy bars, soft drinks in minimum amounts and varieties. Mr. Gross, 1632 -B Park Place, expressed great concern over the traffic congestion at Park Place, Texas Avenue, and Holleman, including the traffic feeding into the already congested intersection from Harvey Road as well as the negative impact the development would have on the neighborhood. P &ZMinutes January 18, 2001 Page 6 of 8 Benito Flores - Meath, 901 Val Verde, stated that he was present at the City Council Meeting when the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) was brought forward. The MOU was conditional rezoning. The neighborhood was not notified of the memorandum. Any contracts or MOU's that are issued that would require rezoning, the P &Z and the neighbors be notified. He pointed out on the picture of the site plan the size of the water tower and the shadow that is casts over the neighborhood in the area that the water tower is going to be placed. He suggested that the profit gained from the sale of the land be fed back into the neighborhood to upgrade by remodeling or repairing the homes within the notification area. Chairman Mooney closed the public hearing. Commissioner Horlen motioned for approval with the conditions as stated by staff, addressing the lighting issues. Commissioner Harris seconded the motion. Commissioner Warren stated that she was concerned over the traffic impact on Holleman. She stated that the infrastructure would not be in place to handle this level of development. The two outlets on Parkplace would increase the impact on Holleman. She stated that A -P would be an appropriate use, having a lower impact on the area. Kim Foutz, Economic and Community Development Director stated that the City is planning to reposition the water tower further to the south on the subject lot. She explained that there were only two locations within the region that can support and accommodate the 308' elevation requirements. The other location is in the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor. She also pointed out that the water department was consulted with in regard to the elevation and lot size criteria for the water tower project. Commissioner Happ questioned the need of having two exits onto Park Place rather than only one exit to the west, which would be sufficient. Commissioner Horlen asked if one of the exits onto Park Place is a cross - easement with Aggicland Printing. Commissioner Harris stated that until the City completes the widening and upgrading on the streets the traffic congestion for this area will remain whether H.E.B. or another project goes in on this lot. It's a timing issue for the City and we should not require H.E.B. to cease in it's desire to relocate and in the City's attempt to acquire and relocate a much needed and larger capacity water tower. Commissioner Floyd reiterated the need for the water tower and the limitation of sites that can accommodate the elevation requirements. He commended H.E.B. for its efforts as a good corporate citizen in agreeing to assist the City in it's need to upgrade and also relocate the water tower. He stated that the PDD zoning is appropriate. He pointed out that the vote tonight is not important, since the City Council has already signed the MOU. The Commission has been consistently confronted with this kind of in -fill question. Commissioner Floyd closed by saying that this is a significant piece of property as well as a difficult one. However, he encouraged each Commissioner to share their thoughts in regards to this piece of property. He encouraged each Commissioner to share their thoughts in regards to this piece of property. Commissioner Williams echoed the thoughts of the other commissioners in regards to the traffic issues and the shadowing of the tower on the neighborhood expressed by another individual during the public hearing. Chairman Mooney stated his disappointment in the lack of representation from the neighborhood. He was not clear on the reason why the water tower was being relocated or when the MOU was signed. Ms. Jimmerson clarified the notification process of the neighborhood as well as the opportunity for them to attend several meetings to discuss their concerns. She did not have a comment to address the other concerns regarding the tower relocation or the date the MOU was signed by City Council. P &ZMinutes January 18, 2001 Page 7 of 8 Commissioner Happ stated that the positioning of the shadow from the water tower over the neighborhood would be early morning when the sun is low and in the southeast portion of sky. During the hottest portion of the date and the longest period of time when the sun is setting, the shadow will be over the loading docks rather than the neighborhood. Commissioner Warren suggested closing the access point to Park Place completely. Commissioner Happ asked staff if that was a feasible option. Ms. Jimmerson stated that it is an option that the Commission could recommend as a condition. However, she reminded the Commission that the one access point is a joint access easement with the print shop. Commissioner Floyd asked Ms. Jimmerson to address the parking requirements for the project. Ms. Jimmerson stated that the site is treated as a shopping center and has it's own parking requirements. This is the only variance from the existing C -1 standards. The normal parking requirements for this size of a development would be 1 to 200. To enhance the greenery in the area and to address some of the neighborhood concerns about the greenery along Holleman and Park Place, we indicated to the applicant that staff would be in favor of a slight alteration in that. Their parking is planned as 1 to 219. Commissioner Floyd asked if a pullover lane could be designed in order to help to alleviate possible accidents. The H.E.B. representative stated that the owner of the print shop required the deed to the property and ample property for parking not only for the print shop but also for the adjoining lease -space with access points on both Texas Avenue and Park Place. Commissioner Floyd asked about the materials being used to construct the building. The architect for H.E.B. explained that they are using a metal wall panel which is a galvanized, corrugated, metal siding, along with concrete panel, painted plaster, and limestone. He indicated that the same materials and colors would be used for the print shop also. H.E.B. strives to create buildings that blend regionally rather than constructing "cookie cutter" stores. With the choice of these materials, we're hoping to create an agricultural - industrial look. Chairman Mooney called the question. The motion failed 3 -3 -1 with Commissioners Warren, Williams, and Chairman Mooney voting in opposition and Commissioner Floyd abstaining. Commissioner Floyd requested the opportunity to change his vote. He specified his vote as being in favor of the rezoning request. The motion passed 4 -3 with Commissioners Warren, Williams, and Chairman Mooney voting in opposition. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Discussion of future agenda items. None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn. Commissioner Happ motioned to adjourn the meeting that was seconded by Commissioner Williams. The motion carried 7 -0. The meeting adjourned at 8 :48 p.m. APPROVED: ATTEST: Staff Assistant, Susan Hazlett Chairman, Karl Mooney P &ZMinutes January 18, 2001 Page 8 of 8