Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/05/2001 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission (2)MINUTES WORKSHOP Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS City Hall Training Room July 5, 2001 6:30 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Mooney, Floyd, Happ, Harris, Trapani, and Williams. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner McMath. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Member Massey. STAFF PRESENT: Development Services Director Callaway, Senior Planner Kuenzel, Assistant Development Review Manager George, Staff Planner Hitchcock, Assistant City Engineer Mayo, Assistant City Attorney Nemcik, and Development Services Secretary Macik. Chairman Mooney called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Swear in newly appointed Commissioners. The new Commissioners were sworn in prior to the workshop meeting. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Discussion of Unified Development Code and Associated Issues. Commissioner Floyd reported that his group reviewed Section 8, Subdivision Regulations. He said a number of recommendations for changes were submitted. He also said questions were presented that deal with the respective role of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council, and the significant role the Design Review Board plays. He indicated that land use issues, in regard to planning and compliance, is the area in which they would like to concentrate on. Commissioner Harris reported that his group discussed the City Council's desire for more input from the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the review process of site review plans. Particularly, a higher number of site plans will not receive staff only approval but will be sent to the Design Review P &Z Workshop Minutes July 3, 2001 Page 1 of 3 Board which will increase this board's case level. Senior Planner Kuenzel added that only the special cases should be sent to the Design Review Board. Commissioner Floyd stated that the governing principal is to put as much information as possible into the standard to make the requirements clear in advance so that there is not a lot of debate over an issue. Development Services Director Callaway said that a significant concept that was discussed in a staff workshop with the consultants is one that would require a Preliminary Development Plan or Master Development Plan to be approved before an application can be submitted for a new development with platting and zoning changes. This plan would have to be approved based solely on whether or not it complies with the comprehensive plan. If it does not comply with the comprehensive plan before the development proposal could be submitted, a plan amendment request would have be submitted and presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. If the request is granted by the City Council, then the rest becomes the more technical review process through Planning and Zoning, staff, Design Review Board, depending on the item. If it is not approved by the City Council there would not be a forthcoming application. This seems to be a good way to have the City Council involved and ensure that the cases that are going through the process either complied with the plan or that the plan was examined and changed. This will allow issues to be resolved before reaching the platting stage. This process is being developed further. Council Member Massey added that City Council wants a more active role in reviewing the site plans. When a project is submitted that does not comply with the current comprehensive plan, the City Council would have the opportunity to review the proposed plan and determine if it is a better plan than at the point the comprehensive plan was first conceived and developed. The end product would be affirmation that the original plan is good or should be changed. This would keep the comprehensive plan clean and ensure that the premises by which we are trying to plan from rather than trying to adhock the processes. Mr. Callaway stated that a flowchart depicting the new process is forthcoming. He also reported that an agenda for the Joint Meeting on the Unified Development Code will be sent via e -mail. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Discussion of Ordinance Revisions affecting the PDD, Planned Development District. Senior Planner Kuenzel stated that staff received direction from the City Council that they would like the Planned Development District reinstated before the Unified Development Code is finalized. It is scheduled for public hearing and consideration at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting July 19 as well as the first City Council meeting in August. The Planned Development District was adopted approximately three years ago. It is a flexible district. The City at the time was very interested in this district because it is the only way that certain development proposals can be linked to the zoning. Staff is working with the Unified Development Code consultants and there are now some performance criteria in the zoning ordinance. Further discussions with the consultants are expected. Additionally, the actual ordinance that adopted the PDD stated that it would expire. Staff was unaware of this. Ms. Kuenzel stated that there were three PDD's approved this year after the expiration date and presumed valid because the City Council approved these cases and they have a legislative role. The mitigation of incompatible uses is not being done through a PDD but rather through the Unified Development Code. We also recommend that we have a policy that would go to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council for review. That policy would be used by Staff to advise and make recommendations to developers. The ordinance would allow a creative approach without requirement an applicant to go before the Zoning Board of Adjustments for variances. It reduces the P &Z Workshop Minutes July 5, 2001 Page .2 of 3 requirements to a conceptual plan only rather than a very specific one. By doing this, the more technical review is left for Staff. A third ordinance will be presented for consideration because Staff had to amend the subdivision regulations to tie subdivisions back to the zoning through a more general approach. Two areas where these may be used is in an infill area adjacent to an existing residential area or to gain flexibility in a true mixed -use development. Commissioner Floyd asked if anything has been done to give Staff more flexibility in the PDD process. Ms. Kuenzel stated that there has always been some variations allowed to be approved by staff. However, on a single -site approach there were so many specific concerns that Staff chose to have the Planning and Zoning Commission make those decisions. This policy will allow the Staff to make those decisions in a multi -site approach. Mr. Callaway added that a certain amount of increased flexibility built in by the nature of their submission being more conceptual now as well. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Discussion of agenda items. Commissioner Floyd pointed out that the minutes have become an actual transcription during the course of typing. Planner Hitchcock informed the Commission that the Regular Agenda Item No. 7 has been pulled from the agenda. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: None. Subcommittee reports. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Minor and amending plats approved by Staff. None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Future agenda items. Commissioner Williams would like a workshop item to update the Commission on any improvements on streets that are currently on -going or approved. Mr. Callaway suggested inviting someone from the public works /capital improvements department to present this. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Adjourn. Commissioner Happ motioned to adjourn the meeting and was seconded by Commissioner Harris. The motion carried. The meeting adjourned. APPROVED: Chairman, Karl Mooney ATTEST: Staff Assistant, Susan Hazlett P &Z Workshop Minutes July 3, 2001 Page 3 of 3