Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/19/2005 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionI~IIIV UT~S Regu~~r Meeting Planning and honing Commission }' thursday~ May 19, 2Clt~l5, `at ~e~4 p.m. A,dmrtis~tra#ivo Conference Room College Station Ci#y Hall 1141 Texan.Avenue College Station, Teas Czx~ a~ Cc~~.~,~c~ ~rATZO~r 1'Iumai~ag ~ Uevelo,~rment Services CC)MM~SSIUNE~:S ~'R~SENT; Acting Chairman John. Nichols, Ken. Reynolds, Bill Davis and John Fedora. COMIVIISSIO-NERS ABSENT; Chairman Scott Shafer, Marilyn Hooton andBen ~Uhite. CI1"Y CUUNCIL 1V~EEMBERS PRESENT; Nancy Berry, PLANNiNf.~'& DEYELf}PM~NT SEIt~tICIES 5TAFF PRESENT: Staff Planner Jennifer Reeves, Senior Planner Tree. Fletcher, Director,Joey I)7unn, Assistant City Engineer Alan Gibbs, Graduate Civil Engineers Carol Cotter. and Josh Norton, Transportation Planner Ken Fogle, Assistant Director Lance Simams and Staff Assistant Lisa Lindgren. OTHER CITY STAFF PRESENT: First Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, and Brian Cooke, C~TIS. 1. Heir Citizens. ^~ Nnne 2. Cdnse~t Agenda. 2.1 Discussion and possible action on: Minutes - Mai 5, 2005, Workshop Meting Minutes. -May 5, 2005, Regular Meeting Commissioner Davis mvtion~ to approve the crnsent 2tgenda. Coa~.tmissioner F'~c1or:1 secondedt, the motion passed (4-fi}. ~e,lar Agenda. 3. Consideration, discussion and possible action on requests} for absence from meetings, None P&Z Workshop Minutes M;ay 19, X005 Page ]. of 5 4. Consideration, discussion, and possible action an items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action. None 5. Consideration; discussion, anal possible action on a Master. Plan for. Crescent Pointe consisting of 192.64 acres and located between FM 60 and SI3 30, across from Linda Lane. Case #05-80 (MH) Mr. Fletcher,presented on the Master Plan for Crescent :Pointe, stating that the proposed plan was in compliance with fine comprehensive plan. Staff recommended approval of the request. Caznmissioner Davis had. questions far the applicant regarding the detention. plan and the access to Veteran's Park. Mr. Fletcher stated that the applicant was showing detention off- site and leas been in contact with the property`owner, "Texas A&M; in order to negotiate off site detention. If the desired outcome' cannot be met, the detention -would be required on ..their awn property. The requirement is .:the same for pedestrian access. Stuart Kling, 4101 Texas Avenue, Bryan, Texas. Mr. Kling, Engineer; stated that there have: been discussions between the developer and Texas A&M regarding both issues stated above. At that .point there had not been a resolution. Commissioner Davis asked what would happen if there was not a resolution. M~. Kling stated the detention would rrxove onxo the Crescent Pointe. property. Mr. Fling stated that if the pedestrian crossing access, was a key component -for .the City, then the. applicant would like. to be able to communicate that to .Texas A&M. All Commissioners agreed that theywouldlike. to see work progress along the lines: of access being gained to the park through Texas A&M. Commissioner 1Davis motioned for approval of the Master flan. Commissioner .Davis stated that he would like to add to his motion that the Commission feels that it would be highly desirable for pedestrian access to be gained to the park from Texas A&M. Commissioner Reynolds seconded, the motion passed {~-0j. 6. Public .hearing, presentation, discussion;. and possible action on a Replat for Gateway Subdivision Phase 1, bats 1AR and 12 ofl3lock 1, consisting of 2 lots on 14.4 acres generally located at University Drive East and. Forest Drive. Case #05-60 ('jRj .Carol Cotter, .Graduate Civil Engineer, presented .the Replat for Gateway Subdivision, Phase 1. Ms. Cotter stated that the Replat was in compliance with the City's Subdivision Regulations and the Unified Development Ordinance. Staff recommended approval of the Replat as submitted. Commissioner Davis .asked for clarification regarding. the traffic flaw. and development. Ms. Cotter stated that the site plan was currently under review and that staff was reviewing traffic circulabjon. Commissioner Fedora motioned to approve the Replat. Commissioner Davis seconded, the motioned passed (4-Oj. 7. Public hearing, presentation;discussion, and possible action on a Rezoning for 9500 Rock Prairie Road from A {~ Agricultural Open to A-C+R Rural Residential Subdivision; consisting of approximately 117' acres generally located on Rack Prairie Road just south of'Greens Prairie Road. Case #Oar-53 (JR) Jennifer Reeves, Staff Planner, presented the zoning request for a future phase of this current development. Sh;e stated that the subject property is shown on the Land. Use Plan as PAZ Workshop. Minutes May 19, 2005 Page 2 of 5 Single-Family Low Density. The property to the North is floodplain; to the south is Rock .Prairie Road which is classified as a major collector. on the City's Thoroughfate Plan.. To the _ east the property is .shown as .Single-Family Low Density and is currently zoned A-O Agricultural Open and undeveloped. To the west are phases 1 through 4 of Williams. Creek Subdivision.. Phases l and 2 are currently under construction. The property is shown as Single-Family Low Density and is recently rezoned to A-QR Rural R:esdentiai. Williams Creek has an access off of Greens Prairie Road from a paved 'rural residential street. According to the street design criteria and the Subdivision Regulations, a rural residential street is designed to handle no more than 1,000 trips per day. If the rezoning is .approved .the resulring density could produce traffic in excess of the design standards. A paved secondary. access to the subdivision would be required to handle the additional traffic. Since the previous rezoning. of the adjacent 211 acres from A-O to A-OR of the Williams Creek Subdivision, staff has concerns about the additional traffic impact on Rock Prairie Road. (Jn May 6, 2004, t11e Commission expressed concerns about Rock Prairie Road and it being an unpaved surface. T'he secondary access required to bandle the additional lots allowed under the proposed A-C+R zoning would put additional traffic on the unppaved Rock Prairie Road. Although the zoning request is in compliance with the City's Land Use Plan, Section 3.2 of the Unified Development (Jrdinance contains review criteria for zoning map amendments. One of-the criteria is availability of transportation facilities. At this time staff contends that transportation facilities are not suitable and adequate for this proposed use. Since the time of preparation of the staff report and:. packets, staff determined that .conditioning the rezontng~ is not appropriate and changed their .recommendation to denial. Staff based their recommendation of denial on health, safety and welfare issues regarding the additional traffic that would be added: to Williams Creek Drive in the current condition of Rock Prairie Road. Ken Fogie, Transportation Planner, presented the traffic study.. Mr. Fogle discussed with - ~ the Commissioners the trips per day ratio and how the estimated. trips were calculated. At the time of the. preliminary plat there were 120 lots which calculate to approximately 1200 trips per day that would be .applied to Williams Creek Drive. If the rezoning is approved that would add an additional 70 .lots and that would make it approximately 1800, trips per day, that would be applied to Williams. Creek Drive which is double what the street is designed for. Mr. Fogle a1sQ stated that when traffic increases to than nature, neighborhood streets are not designed. for traffic of that level and. it: will increase vehieµlar conflicts and possibly pedestrian conflicts, Joe Schulz, 320$ Ensbrook. Mr. Schulz stated that according to the Unified Development Ordinance in regards to .the different zoning classifications, AC3R fits what is proposed in .this case and fits the. Land Use Pian. Mr. Schulz stated :that they are following their plan for the property and spoke in favor of the rezoning, Mike Gentry, Attorney for Applicant, 1515 Emerald Plaza,: College Station, Texas. Mr. Gentry spoke in reference to .the issues of Government taking and Government reliability. Mr. Gentry stated that the applicant had a contract to buy the 210-acre tract and the 120- acre tract .and came before the Planning ar}d Zoning Commission. and presented a Master Development Plan for the property, Mr. Gentry stated. than. the applicant relied on information received. from the Commission and staff and stated that the. applicant relied on the expectation plan of the City that there would. be a capital improvement plan to pave Rock Prairie Road. Mr. Gentry stated that the applicant met with City staff to review the zoning application and the two basic issues were how to interpretthe City's Ordinance and the power of the City to require off-site improvements, He stated that in the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 8-G2, states that no tract lot or parcel shall be sub-divided unless the required internal street system adjoins an existing paved public .right-of--way. ""here has been discussion over the past. that this particular requirement is not applicable, that it does not apply to A-OR zoning, and that the belief was that the applicant was attempting to get A-UR zoning in order to avoid the .application of the Ordinance, Mr. Gentry stated that it does not matter if it applies to A-(~R zoning because the particular P&Z Workshop Minutes May X9, 2Q0$ Page 3 of 5 .property is in full compliance. Mr. Gentry stated that the internal street system does connect to an adjoining public nght-of--way. Joe Johnson,. Developer, 14x0 Commercial Avenue, Coleman, Texas. Mr. Johnson spoke in favor of the rezoning. and stated that they are still on course far the development and spoke of the improvements made to the property. Dr. Fred Anderson, 2504 Riverforest, $ryan, Texas. Mr. Anderson asked Commissioners to consider what`is fair.. Cammssianer Reynolds` motioned. for the Commissioners to adjourn to executive session. Commissioner Fedora seconded, the motion passed. {4-0)p Commissioner Nichols called the executive. session to order at 8:0~ p.m. Commissioner Reynolds motioned to adjourn the executive session, Commissioner Fedora- seconded the motion. commissioner Nichols adjourned the executive seasion ax $:23 p:m. Commissioners returned frons executive session. Commissioner -Davis stated that his understanding was that the :faster Plan has changed from '.the: original version and asked for clarifxcanon. Joey. Dunn, Director, reminded the. Commission that platting. is noC an the agenda, but that there have been two of the phases final platted and that the Master Plan has not been changed. Mr, Dunn stated that there are Preliminary Plats fvr Phases 1, 2, 3 and 4 and two Final Plats for Phases 1 and Z and the Mater Plan instill the 'same as it was last year when approved. Comnussianer Reynolds motioned to app-ro~e the rezoning from to A-(~ to A-OR. Commissioner Fedora seconded the motion. Commissioner. Davis stated that the concern for the rezoning was the maximum capacity. Commissioner Davis stated that it was apparent that if the maximum number of lots were put on fhe reserve tract, that will create a problem. He also stated that "he does not believe the paving of Rock Prairie will be an issue, but he was concerned about the length of the subdivision and the :limited number. of egress points and would like to see good efforts put in fnr fire, police and safetyaccess. Commissioner Reynolds stated that he .felt when the anticipated entry point was complete, that a .substantial nuz'nber of residents will go to the intersection of Greens Prairie and Rack prairie and enter from that direction. Connmissioner Reynolds encouraged the applicant to continue to work with the City ' on paints of ingress and egress to the development to optimize and make the internal flaw as safe and efficient as possible. Commissioner Fedora stated that he agreed with Commissioner Reynolds. He stated that he feels that at some point Rock prairie .will extend- and will be paved and that he felt it would. be in the best interest of the developer to have another access point that was not gravel. Commissioner Nichols stated that he respected the guidance of the earlier Commission but that he also listens closely when staff indicates that there is a significant traf~xc and safety problem. He statedthat he is not convinced that individuals will turn dawn a gravel road when they can go a little further and go on a paved road and tarn onto another paved road and should this be developed to a .maximum density then there will be a serious overload on ~ Williams Creek Drive. The 1Vlotian of the rezoning from A-O to A-tJR passed (3-d; Approve -)Et.eynolds, Fedora and Mavis; Deny -- Nichols) P&Z Workshop Minutes May 19, 2045 Page 4 of 5 `: 8. Discussion and possible action on fi.~ture agenda items. ~- A Plaxning and Zoning Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not. been,given...A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy map be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the. sulaject tin an agenda for a subsequent nneeting. 9. Adjourn. Commissioner .Davis motioned to aci~nunn .the meeting. Commissioner Fedora seconded tT~e motion, motion passed (4-U), Approved: Scott Shafer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Attest. ~.~~, Lisa Lindgren, staff Assis Planning & Developrrient Services 1 P&~ Workshop Minutes. P'fdy 19, 2Qt)5 Page 5 of 5