HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/18/2002 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission (2)MINUTES
WORKSHOP
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Administrative Conference Room
April 18, 2002
5:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Floyd, Hawthorne, Happ, Trapani, and
Williams
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners McMath, and Kaiser.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Member Maloney.
STAFF PRESENT: Economic Development Director Kim Foutz,
Development Services Director Templin, City Planner
Kee, Senior Planner Battle, Development Review
Manager Ruiz, Assistant Development Review Manager
George, Staff Planner Hitchcock, Graduate Engineer
Thompson, Assistant City Attorney Nemcik,
Transportation Planner Fogle, and Staff Assistant Hazlett.
Chairman Floyd called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Discussion of Unified Development Code and related issues.
Development Services Director Templin announced the Joint UDO meeting tomorrow.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Discussion, consideration, and possible action of the Rock Prairie
Greens Prairie Planning Study.
City Planner Kee addressed traffic issues that were raised by Commissioner Kaiser at an earlier
meeting. Ms. Kee reported that the commercial frontage and the impact on the bypass is designed to
handle the traffic that will be generated by the plan. Transportation Planner Fogle pointed out that
both of the commercial frontage road lanes will go in one direction. In addition to that, he said that the
ramp relocation and reconfiguration project will also improve the traffic flow. Buffering issues and the
step -down approach for development in the area was briefly discussed. Ms. Kee reported having met
P &Z Workshop Minutes Apnl 18, 2002 Page 1 of 3
with Mr. Uvacek, a property owner in the area. She addressed concerns that he voiced at an earlier
meeting. He currently has a copy of the report and plan.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: General discussion and briefing of issues pertaining to platting,
replatting, and /or vacating as related to zoning issues.
Chairman Floyd asked if the Commission's authority differed on a replat involving a new subdivision
as that of a normal replat. Assistant City Attorney Nemcik explained that the basic rules for plat &
replat standards are the same with regard to lot sizes and subdivision requirements. All the
requirements that apply to plats also apply to replats and all regulations are the same as well. The
difference between a replat, when vacating a final plat is that a public hearing is required prior to
approving the replat. Although the property owner pointed out that the subdivision regulations didn't
specifically require any additional construction or access requirements, these can be imposed without
having subdivision regulations containing those requirements, basically relying on a certain provision
of the local government code that generally talks about standards for approval. The standard for
approval applies to platting and replatting.
Additionally, Ms. Nemcik pointed out to the Commission that during a public hearing, the
Commissioners are entitled to listen and give credit and weight to anything that you desire. You can
listen to experts, members of staff, which are also considered as experts, and public comments. From
that your decision should be based on your discretion and the law.
As the Planning and Zoning Commission, you have a dual function, both as a planning commission
and a zoning commission. Your powers and duties are different in these functions. There are different
sets of rules, legislation, ordinances, and different discretionary power and authority to make decisions.
There was further discussion regarding replatting without vacating.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Discussion of agenda items.
A discussion regarding telecommunication towers ensued. Several issues were briefly discussed;
Denial of service
Harmful effects from the wattage /power
Questionnaire with standard questions for the applicant to use in preparing project presentation
Burden of proof on the applicant for the required and necessary information
Protection of the utility; cell phones less expensive
RF and transmissions and range
Satellite
Graduate Engineer Thompson explained that the Indian Lakes Master Preliminary Plan and
Preliminary Plat is returning to the Commission for consideration because there was some question
about the placement of the arterial and the connectivity of it to Arrington. The location of the
thoroughfare has been negotiated with the developer. The Master Preliminary Plan meets all
requirements of the Thoroughfare Plan.
The Small Area Plan presentation was briefly discussed.
Consent Agenda Items. 3.2 and 3.3 will be removed from the Regular Agenda for discussion and
consideration.
P &Z Workshop Minutes Apnl 18, 2002 Page 2 of 3
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Subcommittee reports.
a. Wolf Pen Creek Oversight,
No discussion or report.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Minor and amending plats approved by Staff.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Future agenda items.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Adjourn.
Commissioner Happ motioned to adjourn the meeting and was seconded by Commissioner Trapani.
The motion carried. The meeting adjourned.
APPROVED:
Chairman, Rick Floyd
ATTEST:
Staff Assistant, Susan Hazlett
P &Z Workshop Minutes April 18, 2002 " Page 3 of 3