HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/18/2001 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission (2)MINUTES
WORKSHOP
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
1101 Texas Avenue
January 18, 2001
6:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Mooney, Floyd, Harris, Horlen, Williams,
and Happ.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Warren.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planners Jimmerson and Hitchcock, Senior Planner
Kuenzel, Neighborhood Senior Planner Battle, City
Planner Kee, Assistant City Engineer Mayo, Graduate
Engineers Thompson and Vennochi, Assistant City
Attorney Nemcik, Director of Development Services
Callaway, Development Review Manager Ruiz, and Staff
Assistant Hazlett.
Chairman Mooney called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Discussion and possible action of Unified Development Code and
Associated Issues - Chapters 4, 5, and 6.
Development Services Director Callaway briefed the Commissioners on the report from the code
consultants. He explained that the materials received in their packets represent the code sections and
recommendations that have been received from the consultants to date. He pointed out that the
sections in regards to General Development Standards, Subdivision Design and lmprovements,
Nonconformity's Enforcement and Definitions are expected in about three weeks. Mr. Callaway
continued by stating that the consultants recommended a single design review board to be used
throughout the city for that purpose rather than having multiple boards. Another recommendation was
in respect to consolidating zoning districts A -O, R, and AOX into a single district, eliminating R1A
and R6 requiring any apartments over 24 units per acre to be a PDD. In addition, the consultants'
recommendations in respect to commercial districts had to do with problems in the C -1 zoning district
P &Z Workshop Minutes January 18, 2001 Page 1 of 3
The indication from the consultants was that the problem with the code is that our alternative districts
have been severely limited such as C -3 with three -acre maximum tract size. They suggested that we
not alter the C -I district but rather expand the C -3 district combined with the C -B district and make
that available without those restrictive measures as an alternative to the C -I district. Another
significant recommendation in respect to district and district standards had to do with cookie cutter
development patterns without variety. The consultants recommended different techniques, such as
allowing lot averaging in all residential developments citywide and cluster development in residential
districts particularly in respect to greenways implementation. Also, another significant
recommendation had to do with the PDD process. The recommendation was that the Commission and
the City Council initially see more of a conceptual plan, not necessarily including elevations, fully
detailed site plans, with no engineering work done until the concept plan is approved and the PDD
zoning is approved. At that time, the detailed plans would then be approved by one of three groups,
(Staff, Design Review Board, or the Planning and Zoning Commission) rather than approved by the
City Council.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Discussion of Protocol Issues.
Commissioner Floyd clarified with the Commission and Mr. Callaway that Part 3 is to be deleted from
the report document with the change in Exhibit A. The Commissioners reviewed and discussed the
revisions. Commissioner Floyd recommended that the Commission implement Items A, B, C, and D
and requested that Mr. Callaway reword Item E to establish a public comment basis for input. Mr.
Callaway said that the Commission could give this instruction in their motion during the regular
meeting.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3:
Discussion of Agenda Items.
Commissioner Floyd stated that Agenda Item 2.6 should be moved from the consent agenda to the
regular agenda.
Assistant City Attorney Nemcik stated that Agenda Item 2.4 should also be moved from the consent
agenda and placed on the regular agenda. She explained that the applicant has the property under
contract and has an equitable interest. She added that the applicant has obtained an off -site easement
and has requested that they not be required to file the plat until they have closed on the property,
sometime in February.
Commissioner Floyd asked for clarification on Agenda Item No. 5, H.E.B., regarding the staffs
recommendation that the Holleman median be complete. He questioned if this requirement would be
appropriate for a rezoning. City Planner Kee said that the staff report also contains a comment that
states that a development agreement may be necessary to accomplish this criteria. Mr. Callaway stated
that this could be handled as an item related to the applicant's replat. Ms. Nemcik stated that the
applicant has agreed to the replat and the PDD process. She added that both the City's and H.E.B.'s
traffic engineers have requested the configuration and have provided the technical evidentiary reports
needed to substantiate the request. Commissioner Horlen clarified that the water tower on this site is
also being considered with the PDD rezoning.
Development Review Manager Ruiz pointed out that the Staff Report for Item 2.5 on the consent
agenda states that it is a public hearing. However, she stated that the item is posted correctly on the
agenda.
P &Z Workshop Minutes January 18, 2001 Page 2 of 3
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Subcommittee Reports.
a. Wolf Pen Creek Oversight
b. East Bypass Overlay
C. Neighborhood Plan - College Hills
d. Small Area Plan - College Station Business Center
No reports.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Minor and Amending Plats Approved by Staff.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Future Agenda Items.
Chairman Mooney requested an updated Liaison Schedule.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn.
Commissioner Harris motioned to adjourn the meeting and was seconded by Commissioner Williams.
The motion carried 6 -0.
APPROVED:
Chairman, Karl Mooney
ATTEST:
Staff Assistant, Susan Hazlett
P &Z Workshop Minutes January 18, 2001 Page 3 of 3