HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/28/2011 - Regular Agenda Packet - City CouncilTable of Contents
Agenda 3
Item 2a - Minutes
Coversheet revised 7
April 14 Workshop Minutes 8
April 14 Regular Meeting Minutes 14
Item 2b - Contract Renewal for Crushed Stone
Coversheet revised 20
Renewal Letter 21
Item 2c - Annual Price Agreement for Micro-Sufacing
Coversheet revised 25
Resolution 26
Item 2d - Project Number WF1325560 Barron Road Water
Services Construction Contract
Coversheet revised 27
Resolution 28
Location Map 29
Item 2e - Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 200 – Water
Oversize Participation Request
Coversheet revised 30
Location Map 31
Ordinance 32
Request Letter 46
Item 2f - Debt Reimbursement Resolution for 2008 GOB
Projects – Lick Creek Nature Center and East District
Maintenance Shop
Coversheet revised 48
Resolution 49
Item 2g - Acceptance of Engagement Letter to Provide
Representation for a Joint Research Valley BioCorridor
Development Project
Coversheet revised 52
Attachment 1: Engagement Letter 53
Item 2h - Water Meter Purchase Contract
Coversheet revised 55
Water Meter Price Quote 56
Item 2i - RadioIP upgrade in EnRoute
Coversheet revised 59
Customer Order Form 60
No. 1 - Public Hearing and Consideration of Budget Amendment
# 2
Coversheet revised 66
Ordinance 67
No. 2 - Longmire Drive On-street Parking Removal
Coversheet revised 68
1
Ordinance 70
Location Map 73
No. 3 - Impact Fees for Water/Wastewater
Coversheet revised 74
No. 4 - 100 Graham Road Rezoning
Coversheet revised 76
Background 79
Maps 80
P&Z Minutes 82
Ordinance 83
No. 5 - Rezoning for 3180 Cain Road
Coversheet revised 86
Background 89
Maps 90
P&Z Minutes 92
Ordinance 94
No. 6 - Scott & White Rezoning
Coversheet revised 101
Background 104
Maps 106
Ordinance 108
No. 7 - Rezoning for 1400, 1402, 1404, 1406, 1408, 1410, 1500,
1502, & 1504 Airline Drive
Coversheet revised 143
Background 145
Maps 146
P&Z Minutes 148
Ordinance 149
No. 8 - Rock Prairie Marketplace Rezoning
Coversheet revised 152
Background 156
Maps 157
Ordinance 159
No. 9 - UDO Amendment for Corridor Overlay Signage
Requirements
Coversheet revised 168
P&Z Minutes 169
Red-Lined Version 171
Ordinance 172
No. 10 - UDO Amendment to the Non-Residential Architecture
Standards for Non-Residential Accessory Structures
Coversheet revised 175
P&Z Minutes 176
Red-Lined Version of Ordinance 178
Ordinance 180
2
Mayor Council members
Nancy Berry Jess Fields
Mayor Pro Tem Dennis Maloney
John Crompton Katy-Marie Lyles
City Manager Dave Ruesink
David Neeley Jana McMillan
Agenda
College Station City Council
Regular Meeting
Thursday, April 28, 2011 at 7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chamber, 1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
1. Pledge of Allegiance, Invocation, Consider absence request.
Presentation:
· Proclamation recognizing Kerry Maxwell for Water Operator of the Year.
· Proclamation recognizing National Bike Month
· Proclamation recognizing Patrick Reilly for donation of Vietnam War maquette.
Hear Visitors: A citizen may address the City Council on any item which does not appear on the posted
Agenda. Registration forms are available in the lobby and at the desk of the City Secretary. This form should
be completed and delivered to the City Secretary by 5:30 pm. Please limit remarks to three minutes. A timer
alarm will sound after 2 1/2 minutes to signal thirty seconds remaining to conclude your remarks. The City
Council will receive the information, ask staff to look into the matter, or place the issue on a future agenda.
Topics of operational concerns shall be directed to the City Manager. Comments should not personally attack
other speakers, Council or staff.
Consent Agenda
Individuals who wish to address the City Council on a consent or regular agenda item not posted as a public
hearing shall register with the City Secretary prior to the Mayor’s reading of the agenda item. Registration
forms are available in the lobby and at the desk of the City Secretary. The Mayor will recognize individuals
who wish to come forward to speak for or against the item. The speaker will state their name and address for
the record and allowed three minutes. A timer will sound at 2 1/2 minutes to signal thirty seconds remaining for
remarks.
2. Presentation, possible action and discussion of consent agenda items which consists of ministerial or
"housekeeping" items required by law. Items may be removed from the consent agenda by majority vote of the
Council.
a. Presentation, possible action, and discussion of minutes for April 14, 2011 Workshop and Regular Council
Meeting.
3
City Council Regular Meeting Page 2
Thursday, April 28, 2011
b. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the renewal of Bid 10-44 with Brazos Site Works
for crushed stone in an amount not to exceed $162,919. The renewal includes an 8% increase, the maximum
increase allowed by the contract.
c. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the approval of Bid 10-55 and the award of an
annual price agreement for the installation of micro-surfacing to Viking Construction, Inc. in an amount not
to exceed $310,000.
d. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Construction Contract with Kieschnick General
Contractors, in the amount of $139,787.50, for the construction of the Barron Road Water Services Project.
e. Presentation, possible action, and discussion for Oversize Participation (OP) for a water line improvement
in the Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 200 being made per City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Unified
Development Ordinance, Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements, Section 8.5, Responsibility for
Payment for Installation Costs, Oversized Participation for a total requested City participation of $29,730.00.
f. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding approval of a “Resolution Declaring Intention to
Reimburse Certain Expenditures with Proceeds from Debt” for expenditures related to projects authorized as
part of the 2008 General Obligation Bond (GOB) package, specifically the Lick Creek Nature Center and
East District Maintenance Shop.
g. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the authorization of the City Manager to accept an
Engagement Letter from the law firm of Nichols, Jackson,Dillard, Hager & Smith to represent the Cities of
College Station and Bryan in regards to the Joint Research Valley BioCorridor Development Project; and
consideration of a General Fund Contingency transfer in the amount of $16,000.00.
h. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the approval of the water meter purchase contract
with Aqua-Metric Sales Company for the amount of $63,024.00.
i. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding approval of a supplement to the original contract
with EnRoute Public Safety, purchasing services to upgrade the RadioIP software for the Public Safety
Systems for an amount not to exceed $10,950.
Regular Agenda
Individuals who wish to address the City Council on a regular agenda item not posted as a public hearing
shall register with the City Secretary prior to the Mayor’s reading of the agenda item. The Mayor will
recognize you to come forward to speak for or against the item. The speaker will state their name and address
for the record and allowed three minutes. A timer will sound at 2 1/2 minutes to signal thirty seconds remaining
for remarks.
Individuals who wish to address the City Council on an item posted as a public hearing shall register with the
City Secretary prior to the Mayor’s announcement to open the public hearing. The Mayor will recognize
individuals who wish to come forward to speak for or against the item. The speaker will state their name and
address for the record and allowed three minutes. A timer alarm will sound at 2 1/2 minutes to signal thirty
seconds remaining to conclude remarks. After a public hearing is closed, there shall be no additional public
comments. If Council needs additional information from the general public, some limited comments may be
allowed at the discretion of the Mayor.
4
City Council Regular Meeting Page 3
Thursday, April 28, 2011
If an individual does not wish to address the City Council, but still wishes to be recorded in the official minutes
as being in support or opposition to an agenda item, the individual may complete the registration form provided
in the lobby by providing the name, address, and comments about a city related subject. These comments will
be referred to the City Council and City Manager.
1. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an ordinance Budget Amendment #2
amending ordinance number 3290 which will amend the budget for the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year in the amount of
$1,600,000.
2. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion of an ordinance amending Chapter 10 “Traffic
Code”, to remove parking along the east side of Longmire Drive between FM 2818 and Valley View Drive and
on Valley View Drive west of the Longmire intersection.
3. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the possible implementation of
“system capacity” impact fees for Water and Wastewater.
4. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to Chapter 12,
“Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City
of College Station, Texas by rezoning 1.70 acres located at 100 Graham Road near the intersection of Graham
Road and F.M. 2154 from M-1 Light Industrial to C-3 Light Commercial.
5. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion regarding a Rezoning for 3180 Cain Road of
19.575 acres from A-O Agricultural Open to C-1 General Commercial, R-3 Townhouse and R-4 Multi-Family
located at 3180 Cain Road and more generally located west of the intersection of Old Wellborn Road and Cain
Road.
6. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to Chapter 12,
“Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City
of College Station, Texas by rezoning 37.12 acres located at 3210 Rock Prairie Road, from PDD Planned
Development District to PDD Planned Development District to modify standards for the development of a
hospital and clinic.
7. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to Chapter 12,
“Unified Development Ordinance”, Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City
of College Station, Texas by rezoning 2.2257 acres located at 1400, 1402, 1404, 1406, 1408, 1410, 1500, 1502,
& 1504 Airline Drive from C-1 General Commercial and R-6 High Density Multi-Family to R-6 High Density
Multi-Family.
8. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to Chapter 12,
“Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City
of College Station, Texas by rezoning Lot 1, Block 1 of the Rock Prairie Marketplace Subdivision, being 9.014
acres located at 2000 Rock Prairie Road, from C-1 General Commercial to PDD Planned Development District.
9. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an ordinance amendment to Chapter 12
“Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 5.8.A(2) “Corridor Overlay District, Signs” specifically related to
sign requirements.
5
City Council Regular Meeting Page 4
Thursday, April 28, 2011
10. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an ordinance amendment to Chapter 12
“Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 7.9.B.2 “Building Mass and Design,” of the College Station Code
of Ordinances, specifically related to architecture standards for non-residential accessory structures.
11. Adjourn.
If litigation issues arise to the posted subject matter of this Council Meeting an executive session will be held.
APPROVED:
________________________________
City Manager
Notice is hereby given that a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of College Station, Texas will be
held on the Thursday, April 28, 2011 at 7:00 PM at the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue,
College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda.
Posted this 21st day of April, 2011 at 5:00 p.m.
________________________________
City Secretary
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of
College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of said
notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City’s website,
www.cstx.gov . The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said Notice
and Agenda were posted on April 21, 2011 at 5:00 p.m. and remained so posted continuously for at least 72
hours proceeding the scheduled time of said meeting.
This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following
date and time: __________________________ by ________________________.
Dated this _____day of ________________, 2011 By______________________________________
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the _____day of ________________, 2011.
______________________________
Notary Public – Brazos County, Texas My commission expires: ___________
The building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made
48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on
www.cstx.gov . Council meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channel 19.
6
April 28, 2011
City Council Consent Agenda Item No. 2a
City Council Minutes
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Sherry Mashburn, City Secretary
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion of minutes for April 14, 2011
Workshop and Regular Council Meeting.
Attachments:
· April 14, 2011 Workshop Minutes
· April 14, 2011 Regular Minutes
7
WKSHP041411 Minutes Page 1
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
APRIL 14, 2011
STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF BRAZOS §
Present:
Nancy Berry
Council:
John Crompton
Jess Fields
Dennis Maloney
Katy-Marie Lyles
Jana McMillan
Dave Ruesink
City Staff:
David Neeley, City Manager
Kathy Merrill, Assistant City Manager
Carla Robinson, City Attorney
Sherry Mashburn, City Secretary
Tanya McNutt, Deputy City Secretary
Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present
With a quorum present, the Workshop of the College Station City Council was called to order by
Mayor Nancy Berry at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2011 in the Council Chambers of the
City of College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas 77842.
1. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on items listed on the consent agenda.
Items 2b, 2c, and 2d were pulled from the Consent Agenda.
2b: David Gwin, Director of Economic Development, explained the amendment to bury the
overhead lines was expected and stated it was in the City’s long-term vision. Scott and White
will pay $1.2 million for any additional cost to bury the lines, and the City will bear the cost of
the bore under State Highway 6 in the amount of $77,000. This will set the tone for burying the
lines in that general area. There is no requirement for Scott and White to bury the lines, but it is
in the City’s long-term interest. BTU lines will be conjoined with College Station’s lines as
well.
8
WKSHP041411 Minutes Page 2
2c: David Gwin, Director of Economic Development, stated this property was purchased under
a previous program. The home is estimated at $130,000 and is comparable to homes being built
in that neighborhood. A family of four with an income of $40,000 could qualify for that home.
2d: David Gwin, Director of Economic Development, stated the cap is a backhand cap under
HUD guidelines. The number moves. The current maximum value of a house purchased under
FHA is $190,000. The price of our market has gone up so much, and we have not adjusted that
number. When a house is sold, the city is repaid; it is no longer a forgivable loan.
2. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a summary of the current status
of the capital projects included in the City’s FY 2011 Capital Plan. Staff is seeking
direction on two projects included in the FY 2011 Capital Plan – Lick Creek Nature Center
and East District Maintenance Shop.
Chuck Gilman, Director of Capital Projects, updated the council on the FY2011 capital projects.
The capital plan consists of projects included in the 2008 bond authorization and projects
identified by staff. The planning process begins in October and is typically completed in July.
At the June 17, 2010 Council Retreat, the O&M cost for projects was discussed. It was decided
to defer those projects with a high O&M. He reminded Council that they had approved a debt
reimbursement resolution at the February 24 meeting. Staff reviews the projects and estimates
what they think they will spend over a twelve-month period. Staff has proceeded with the
implementation plan approved by Council last summer. They issued an RFQ for projects
scheduled to begin in FY 2011. They have received numerous Statements of Qualification for
the Lick Creek Nature Center and the East District Maintenance Shop. Staff is seeking direction
on whether to proceed with these two projects.
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Fields and a second by Councilmember
Ruesink, the City Council voted six (6) for and one (1) opposed, to include these two projects in
the FY 2011 Capital Plan. The motion carried.
3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding approval of resolutions awarding
landscape maintenance contracts to multiple vendors in a total amount of $453,254, and
approval of a budget transfer from the Parks and Recreation Department to the Public
Works Department of $26,350 and the transfer of three positions from the Parks and
Recreation Department to the Public Works Department including salary and benefits for
half a year totaling $57,392.
Chuck Gilman, Director of Capital Projects, and David Schmitz, Assistant Director of Parks and
Recreation, reported that in 2009 the sum of all landscape maintenance contracts was $497,000.
They reduced operating expenses in 2010 to $443,000 through the elimination of pre/post
emergence on turf, and eliminating fertilization and aeration. In an effort to revise their
approach to landscape maintenance six vacant landscape positions were eliminated in the 2011
budget. After other minor adjustments, $578,000 was budgeted. Currently, Public Works
manages the landscape maintenance contracts. They have dedicated two irrigation specialists to
city irrigation systems at city facilities and in the right of way; two more irrigation specialists
were dedicated to city irrigation systems at city athletic fields and park facilities. They will
9
WKSHP041411 Minutes Page 3
provide pre/post emergence in beds, but not turf; they will provide additional services as bid
alternatives. They have reduced base cuts to eighteen per year, with ten optional cuts if
necessary. An RFP was issued for all landscape maintenance (except athletic fields) even those
services historically done in-house so the proposals can be compared to city costs. The benefits
of this revised approach include a reduction in operating costs, with an increased level of service
in neighborhood parks. They have been able to add twenty-six neighborhood parks to the
contract and increased the level of service at each of these facilities with the eighteen cuts and
ten additional cuts available. This allows existing park staff to focus more on the maintenance of
assets in the parks such as water fountains, fences, and play structures. PARD staff is more
available to further assist with tournaments and special events that bring tourism to College
Station. Proposal categories were divided into seven categories: neighborhood parks, facilities,
electric, water/wastewater, economic and community development, right of way finish mowing,
and right of way rough cut mowing. Three of the six landscape maintenance positions
eliminated in FY 2011 were public works positions. PARD currently has three vacant landscape
maintenance positions. Staff is recommending transferring these positions from PARD to public
works. Currently, they are $125,000 under budget
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Maloney and a second by Councilmember
Lyles, the City Council voted seven (7) for and none (0) opposed, to adopt resolutions awarding
landscape maintenance contracts to multiple vendors in a total amount of $453,254, and approval
of a budget transfer from the Parks and Recreation Department to the Public Works Department
of $26,350 and the transfer of three positions from the Parks and Recreation Department to the
Public Works Department including salary and benefits for half a year totaling $57,392. The
motion carried unanimously.
· Resolution 04-14-11-03: approving a contract with Green Teams, Inc. and authorizing
the expenditure of funds for landscape maintenance of City facilities.
· Resolution 04-14-11-03-a: approving a contract with Landscape USA and authorizing
the expenditure of funds for landscape maintenance of City facilities.
· Resolution 04-14-11-03-b: approving a contract with Rainbow Gardens and authorizing
the expenditure of funds for landscape maintenance of City facilities.
· Resolution 04-14-11-03-c: approving a contract with Jones Lawn Care and authorizing
the expenditure of funds for landscape maintenance of City facilities.
· Resolution 04-14-11-03-d: approving a contract with Pro-Green Landscape and
authorizing the expenditure of funds for landscape maintenance of City facilities.
4. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on the scope of the Citizens Charter Review
Commission and provide direction regarding the charter revisions to be reviewed.
This item was not discussed.
5. Presentation, possible action, and discussion of city procedures and requirements for
locating a cellular tower on city property.
Ben Roper, IT Director, reported there are currently no cell towers located on city property. The
City has been working with a provider. The Council adopted a policy regarding providers
10
WKSHP041411 Minutes Page 4
locating on City property. The City has two roles, as a regulator and as a lessor. Planning and
Development is responsible for the zoning and permitting process. The provider must follow the
UDO. IT negotiates the lease of city facilities, and Council approves each on a case-by-case
basis. Rent will be based upon various factors.
6. Council Calendar
· April 15 Ribbon Cutting-New Whataburger-Hwy. 6/Wm. D. Fitch at 10:00 a.m.
· April 18 IGC Meeting at BVCOG, 12:00 p.m.
· April 21 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting in Council Chambers at 4:00 p.m.
· April 21 Joint Meeting-City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission in
Council Chambers at 4:00 p.m.
· April 22 City Offices Closed – HOLIDAY
· April 28 City Council Workshop/Regular Meeting at 3:00p.m. and 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Berry reported the Sister Cities delegation will be arriving tomorrow. A Tail Gate party
is scheduled for Saturday, April 16, at 11 a.m. There will be a Welcome Dinner that evening at
the Higgins residence, and the Farewell Dinner will be on Tuesday, April 26, at the Outback
Steak House.
7. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on future agenda items: a Council 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 may be given. Any deliberation shall
be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting.
There were no future agenda items.
8. Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Animal Shelter
Board, Arts Council of the Brazos Valley, Audit Committee, Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Advisory Board, Brazos County Health Dept., Brazos Valley Council of
Governments, Brazos Valley Wide Area Communications Task Force, BVSWMA,
BVWACS, Cemetery Committee, Code Review Committee, Design Review Board, Historic
Preservation Committee, Interfaith Dialogue Association, Intergovernmental Committee,
Joint Relief Funding Review Committee, Landmark Commission, Library Board, Mayor’s
Council on Physical Fitness, Mayor’s Development Forum, Metropolitan Planning
Organization, National League of Cities, Outside Agency Funding Review, Parks and
Recreation Board, Planning and Zoning Commission, Research Valley Partnership,
Regional Transportation Committee for Council of Governments, Signature Event Task
Force, Sister City Association, TAMU Student Senate, Texas Municipal League,
Transportation Committee, Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee, Zoning Board of
Adjustments.
Councilmember Money reported on the Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Advisory Board
discussed charging a fee for bicyclists to use bike paths, and it was determined it was not
feasible. The Bike Race scheduled for May is receiving lots of registrants, and it appears the
race will be a success.
11
WKSHP041411 Minutes Page 5
Councilmember Lyles reported the Health Board evaluated the Health Director, and he received
a high evaluation. The Arts Council unveiled their benches. This is a great example of them
raising their own funds.
Mayor Berry reported the MPO did not meet this month. She asked that anyone with available
seats for leadership training contact Alison Seals.
9. Executive Session
In accordance with the Texas Government Code §551.071-Consultation with Attorney, and
§551.087-Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations, the College Station City
Council convened into Executive Session at 5:02 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2011 in order to
continue discussing matters pertaining to:
A. Consultation with Attorney to seek advice regarding pending or contemplated litigation; to
wit:
· City of Bryan’s application with TCEQ for water & sewer permits in Westside/Highway
60 area, near Brushy Water Supply Corporation to decertify City of College Station and
certify City of Bryan
· Clancey v. College Station, Glenn Brown, and Kathy Merrill
· Rachel Rahn v. Alma Martinez, The Arkitex Studio, Inc. et al, cause No. 09-000656-
CV361
· Weingarten Realty Investors v. College Station, Ron Silvia, David Ruesink, Lynn
McIlhaney, and Ben White
· Chavers et al v. Tyrone Morrow, Michael Ikner, City of Bryan, City of College Station, et
al
· Water CCN / 2002 Annexation / Wellborn Water Supply Corporation
B. Consultation with Attorney to seek legal advice; to wit:
· Legal issues regarding possible revenue sharing and legislation in bio-corridor
· Legal Issues Related to Wellborn Annexation
C. Deliberation regarding economic development negotiations; to wit:
· Blinn College
The Executive Session adjourned at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2011.
No action was required from Executive Session.
10. Adjournment
MOTION: There being no further business, Mayor Berry adjourned the workshop of the
College Station City Council at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2011.
________________________
Nancy Berry, Mayor
12
WKSHP041411 Minutes Page 6
ATTEST:
_______________________
Sherry Mashburn, City Secretary
13
RM041411 Minutes Page 1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
APRIL 14, 2011
STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF BRAZOS §
Present:
Nancy Berry
Council:
John Crompton
Jess Fields
Dennis Maloney
Katy-Marie Lyles
Jana McMillan
Dave Ruesink
City Staff:
David Neeley, City Manager
Kathy Merrill, Assistant City Manager
Carla Robinson, City Attorney
Sherry Mashburn, City Secretary
Tanya McNutt, Deputy City Secretary
Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present
With a quorum present, the Regular Meeting of the College Station City Council was called to
order by Mayor Nancy Berry at 7:11 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2011 in the Council Chambers
of the City of College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas 77842.
1. Pledge of Allegiance, Invocation, consider absence request.
Mayor Berry presented a proclamation recognizing Lemonade Day.
· Citizen Comments
There were no Citizen Comments.
14
RM041411 Minutes Page 2
CONSENT AGENDA
2a. Presentation, possible action, and discussion of minutes for March 22, 2011 Executive
Session and Special Meeting and March 24, 2011 Workshop and Regular Council Meeting.
2b. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the existing
Economic Development Agreement between the City and Scott & White Healthcare.
2c. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Resolution approving a
conveyance agreement to transfer ownership of 6810 Appomattox, an undeveloped
property, to Brazos Valley Community Action Agency.
2d. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the proposed changes to the
City’s Down-Payment Assistance Program (DAP) Guidelines.
2e. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on the rejection of RFP #11-36, Retail
Commercial Lease Space Opportunity in the Chimney Hill Shopping Center, specifically
the wooden kiosk previously occupied by Shakes.
2f. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding the extension of an Interlocal
Agreement with the Texas A&M University Department of Atmospheric Sciences through
December 31, 2011 for an air quality monitoring station located in Lick Creek Park.
2g. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding the approval of Resolution 04-
14-11-2g, participating in a Clinical Affiliation Agreement with the College Station Medical
Center for the Emergency Medical Services Program.
2h. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding the approval of Resolution 04-
14-11-2h, updating the Interlocal Agreement for Emergency Medical Ambulance Service to
respond to emergencies in Brazos County and to establish the annual fee for FY 2011 at
$216,230.
2i. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding amending the Interlocal
Agreement (ILA) with the College Station Independent School District (CSISD) regarding
School Resource Officers (SRO).
2j. Presentation, possible action, and discussion recommending approval for the water
meter purchase contract with Aqua-Metric Sales Co. for the amount of $149,432.70.
Items 2b, 2c, 2d, and 2g were pulled from the Consent Agenda.
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Crompton and a second by
Councilmember Maloney, the City Council voted seven (7) for and none (0) opposed, to approve
the Consent Agenda, less items 2b, 2c, 2d, and 2g. The motion carried unanimously.
15
RM041411 Minutes Page 3
(2b)MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Crompton and a second by
Councilmember Lyles, the City Council voted six (6) for and one (1) opposed, with
Councilmember Fields voting against, to approve an amendment to the existing Economic
Development Agreement between the City and Scott & White Healthcare. The motion carried.
(2c)MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Crompton and a second by
Councilmember Fields, the City Council voted seven (7) for and none (0) opposed, to table this
item until a later time. The motion carried unanimously.
(2d)MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Crompton and a second by
Councilmember Lyles, the City Council voted four (4) for and three (3) opposed, with Mayor
Berry and Councilmembers Fields and McMillan voting against, to approve changes to the City’s
Down-Payment Assistance Program (DAP) Guidelines. The motion carried.
(2g)MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Crompton and a second by
Councilmember Maloney, the City Council voted six (6) for and none (0) opposed, with Mayor
Berry abstaining, to adopt Resolution 04-14-11-2g, to participate in a Clinical Affiliation
Agreement with the College Station Medical Center for the Emergency Medical Services
Program. The motion carried.
REGULAR AGENDA
1. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding Ordinance 2011-
3332, amending Chapter 12, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official
Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning
Lot 14, Block 3 of the Hrdlicka Subdivision, being 0.22 acres located at 1013 Eleanor
Street, from R-1 Single-Family Residential to PDD Planned Development District for a
community services center.
At approximately 7:34 p.m. Mayor Berry opened the Public Hearing.
Jason Fikes, 1309 Danville Court, expressed his appreciation of the staff and the P&Z. He also
stated his thanks to the friends in the Lincoln Center community who have accepted them. The
work that is being done is significant, and he is glad staff and P&Z can see this as well. The
three-year time window to provide a pitched roof is a challenging requirement to meet. The
current building is a temporary structure, and they envision a more permanent structure as the
ministry grows. Aesthetics do matter and contribute to neighborhood integrity, but the
neighborhood is better served with GED’s, groceries, and other tangibles. A 4:1 pitched roof is
not their strength. It is important to move ahead.
There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed at 7:40 p.m.
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Fields and a second by Councilmember
McMillan, the City Council voted two (2) for and five (5) opposed, with Mayor Berry and
Councilmembers Crompton, Maloney, Lyles and Ruesink voting against, to adopt Ordinance
2011-3332, amending Chapter 12, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official
16
RM041411 Minutes Page 4
Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning Lot
14, Block 3 of the Hrdlicka Subdivision, being 0.22 acres located at 1013 Eleanor Street, from R-
1 Single-Family Residential to PDD Planned Development District for a community services
center, removing the requirement for a pitched roof. The motion failed.
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Maloney and a second by Councilmember
Fields, the City Council voted seven (7) for and none (0) opposed, to adopt Ordinance 2011-
3332, amending Chapter 12, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning
Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning Lot 14, Block
3 of the Hrdlicka Subdivision, being 0.22 acres located at 1013 Eleanor Street, from R-1 Single-
Family Residential to PDD Planned Development District for a community services center. The
motion carried unanimously.
2. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding three non-annexation
development agreements associated with the Wellborn annexation.
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Maloney and a second by Councilmember
Crompton, the City Council voted six (6) for and one (1) opposed, with Councilmember Fields
voting against, to approve three non-annexation development agreements associated with the
Wellborn annexation, contingent upon annexation of the proposed area. The motion carried.
3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding Ordinance 2011-3331 annexing
approximately 649 acres located in the ETJ on the southwest side of the City generally
known as the Wellborn area.
Mayor Berry allowed a total of ten minutes for persons within the proposed annexation area to
speak.
Mike McCleary, 3649 Barron Cutoff, Wellborn, stated he was speaking on behalf of the citizens
of College Station and Wellborn as well. He asked the Council to table this item in order to do a
more complete study to determine the true cost of services to Wellborn. Citizens of Wellborn
don’t want to be annexed into College Station, and many College Station residents do not want
to annex Wellborn. This should be decided by a vote of the people. The sewer main on
Wellborn Road will cost $3.3 million. 160 people cannot pay for that. College Station residents
will have to pay. This will create an inflation of property taxes. Wellborn has a little over two
miles of dirt roads, which means the City will have to mow bar ditches, pick up trash, and
maintain the fence line. College Station started maintenance on the road on Monday this week.
He observed two tractors, three riding lawn mowers, two people on weed eaters, and six people
picking up trash. These little expenses add up. He bought diesel this morning and paid $150 to
fill his truck. It is harder for people to make ends meet. The cost of living is going up, and the
economy is getting harder for governmental entities and citizens alike. When College Station
residents find out how much it will cost to get service to Wellborn, they will not want to annex.
It makes more sense to put this to a vote and allow citizens to vote on this.
Linda Hale, Cheyenne, reported on the myths regarding the annexation of Wellborn, first being it
will stop the growth of College Station and will cause chaos between the two. However, working
17
RM041411 Minutes Page 5
together and recognizing the uniqueness will bring the two cities closer. Another myth is there
will not be a cost to College Station residents, but there are widely divergent estimates of how
much this will cost. College Station residents will not profit from this. The statement that
Wellborn was not willing to bring a new map is a myth. There were two maps, a large one and a
small one. They asked the Council for input on a map and did not get any. It has been said
Wellborn has done nothing to incorporate in the past. She stated they were asking for help and
have been pursuing incorporation since 2008. They believed previous councils when they were
told not to worry about it. Another myth is that Wellborn citizens do not want to create their
own city. In her neighborhood, 14 out of 17 households want to incorporate. The council only
represents the citizens of College Station, but the purpose of a municipal ETJ is to protect the
health, safety, and welfare of the citizens and those residing in the ETJ.
The ten minute period being over, Carol Fountain (14380 Cheyenne) and Jane Cohen (3655
McCullough) did not speak.
The following individuals provided written comments in opposition to the annexation, attached
to the minutes:
Greg Taylor Don Gain JoLeigh Turner
Mary Ann Nagyvary Joseph Nagyvary Dan Hale
Robert Cohen Robert Fountain Lois Rockwell
Jane Cohen Elaine Miller Billy Miller
Lisa Cantrell Bette Smith Todd Cantrell
Alan Smith Jan Collins Rabevra Ofczarzak
Hugo Hein Dolores Hein Evelyn Harmel
Aubrey Harmel Linda Hale Keith Franze
Vicki Franze Marilyn Greene David Royder
Michael McCleary Mary Walker Kim Tarr
Carol Fountain Mark Lucy Ronald Hall
Lynn Ruoff Cherie Veuzey Ynosensio Rangel
Martha Royder Donald Royder Robert Holsinger
Tammy Holsinger Amanda Boone Justin Lagan
Mike Fulfer Karen Fulfer Chelsea Denning
Jordan Denning Jose Luis Guerrero James Ellis
Gloria Johnson Bob Johnson Darrell Ambler
Melissa Ambler Andrew Daily Bonita Simpson
Lonnie Simpson Tommie Chanbes Reinald Browder
Lena Stone Elizabeth Terry Mike Gerst
Terri Gerst Laura King
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Crompton and a second by
Councilmember Maloney, the City Council voted five (5) for and two (2) opposed, with
Councilmembers Fields and McMillan voting against, to adopt Ordinance 2011-3331 annexing
approximately 649 acres located in the ETJ on the southwest side of the City generally known as
the Wellborn area. The motion carried.
18
RM041411 Minutes Page 6
4. Adjournment.
MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Maloney and a second by Mayor Berry,
the City Council voted seven (7) for and none (0) opposed, to adjourn the Regular Meeting of the
City Council at 9:56 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2011. The motion carried unanimously.
________________________
Nancy Berry, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Sherry Mashburn, City Secretary
19
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2b
Contract Renewal for Crushed Stone
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Chuck Gilman, P.E., Public Works Director
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the renewal of Bid
10-44 with Brazos Site Works for crushed stone in an amount not to exceed $162,919. The
renewal includes an 8% increase, the maximum increase allowed by the contract.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Financially Sustainable City Providing Response to Core
Services and Infrastructure – Spending taxpayer money efficiently.
Recommendation(s): Approval of the renewal agreement.
Summary: The current agreement for 2010 is to not exceed $150,850. The contract and
City Purchasing procedures allow for up to an 8% increase in the amount of the original
contract amount. This is the first renewal for this contract which allows for two renewals (a
maximum of three years). If the contract is approved with the 8% increase this year, then
an additional increase will not be permitted in the future.
Brazos Site Works agrees to renew the purchase agreement for an additional year with the
8% increase to $162,919. Based on our review of industry price increases, staff concluded
that the 8% price increase is reasonable.
Crushed stone products are used by several City Departments. The Street and Drainage
Division uses crushed stone to repair roadway base failures and for street reconstruction.
College Station Utilities relies on this material to maintain the gravel roads leading to sites
such as substations and water wells, which are required to be accessible in all weather
conditions. Also, gravel is used to backfill the excavations created when making point
repairs to utilities beneath sidewalks and roadway pavement. Crushed gravel is an essential
material for several critical City operations, and since Brazos Site Works’ performance has
been good, and their price is reasonable, staff recommends renewal of the contract.
Budget & Financial Summary: Funds to purchase crushed stone are budgeted and
available in the General and Utilities Funds with the Operations Budgets.
Attachments:
1. Renewal Letter
20
21
22
23
24
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2c
Annual Price Agreement for Micro-Sufacing
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Chuck Gilman, P.E., Public Works Director
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the approval of
Bid 10-55 and the award of an annual price agreement for the installation of micro-surfacing
to Viking Construction, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $310,000.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Financially Sustainable City Providing Response to Core
Services and Infrastructure – Spending taxpayer money efficiently.
Recommendation(s): Approval of the contract.
Summary: The contract is for the installation of micro-surfacing as a thin overlay material
which will restore the original service properties to worn but structurally sound pavements.
The micro-surfacing process is used for similar preventive maintenance tasks that the seal
coat (chip seal) application is currently used. It reseals the surface to reduce moisture
infiltration which contributes to loss of strength and deterioration of the base. Weathering,
raveling, and surface cracking is less likely. It also restores a skid resistant surface on
asphalt pavement. The advantages of micro-surfacing are:
1. A Smooth Surface with no loose stones,
2. A6-8 Year Life Span
3. Environmentally friendly – cold process and all material stays on the street.
Other cities in Texas to use this process are Austin, Burleson, Waco, Lubbock, Arlington, El
Paso, and Round Rock. The Street Maintenance Division began searching for alternatives to
the seal coat process due to citizen dissatisfaction with loose rock and the two to three week
curing process. This process will be used by the Street Maintenance Division to maintain
and extend the life of asphalt pavement streets.
Budget & Financial Summary: Funds to provide for the installation of micro-surfacing are
budgeted and available in the General Fund with the Operations Budget. The cost of this
micro-surfacing contract is $3.10 per sq. yd. Similar quotes have been given for contracted
seal coat projects. The range of this contract is from $155,000 for 50,000 sq. yds.(2.5
miles) to $310,000 for 100,000 sq. yds. (5 miles) depending on the total number of miles of
streets that are included in the project.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
25
26
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2d
Project Number WF1325560
Barron Road Water Services Construction Contract
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Chuck Gilman, P.E., Public Works Director
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Construction Contract
with Kieschnick General Contractors, in the amount of $139,787.50, for the construction of
the Barron Road Water Services Project.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Goal I, Financially Sustainable City Providing Response
to Core Services and Infrastructure.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends approval of this resolution.
Summary: The scope of this project includes the construction of 2,155 linear feet of 12-
inch water line, replacing 9 water meters, and associated appurtenances. This is the second
phase of this water line extension project. A previous phase of this project included the
design and construction of an 18-inch water line along Barron Road from Victoria Road to
Wellborn Road. This 18-inch water line is a dead end line that terminates at the intersection
of Barron Road and Wellborn Road. To ensure a high level of water quality inside the City’s
water distribution system this line is routinely flushed, resulting in the loss of thousands of
gallons of potable water each year. This project will loop the 18-inch line on Barron Road
with the system in the Southern Trace Subdivision eliminating the need to flush the 18-inch
line along Barron Road.
This second phase of this project, the 12-inch water line along Wellborn Road from Barron
Road to Southern Trace Subdivision, was delayed because of a longer than anticipated land
acquisition process. The water line is necessary to provide water service and fire flow to the
Brazos Valley Church of Christ, which will start construction this summer.
With the projected construction budget of $139,787.50, Kieschnick General Contractors was
selected to construct the project because they were the lowest responsible bidder in
response to the city’s solicitation of bids.
Budget & Financial Summary: The current budget for the Barron Road Water Services
project is $1,691,863. $1,247,802 has been expended or committed to date. Previous
expenditures paid for the 18" water line along Barron Road from Victoria Road to Wellborn
Road. The PO for the project construction is $139,787.50. It is anticipated that this project
will come in under budget and that the remaining funds will be reallocated to other Water
Department capital projects.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Project Location Map
27
28
29
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2e
Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 200 – Water Oversize Participation Request
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: David Coleman, Water Services Director
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion for Oversize Participation
(OP) for a water line improvement in the Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 200 being made
per City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 8,
Subdivision Design and Improvements, Section 8.5, Responsibility for Payment for
Installation Costs, Oversized Participation for a total requested City participation of
$29,730.00.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends approval.
Summary: Associated with the development of Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 200,
the City required the construction of a 12 inch water line for the larger City system.
Subsequently, the developer’s engineer demonstrated that an 8 inch water line was
adequate for the developer’s specific development. This oversized participation request is
the construction cost difference for upsizing an 8 inch water line to a 12 inch water line for a
2,113 linear feet section thru the proposed Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 200.
Budget & Financial Summary: Funds for this oversized participation request are
budgeted and available in the Water Capital Improvement Projects Fund. A total of
$100,000 is included in the FY11 CIP for Water oversized participation, of which $29,730 is
being recommended for this project.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Ordinance approving Participation Agreement
3. Request Letter
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2f
Debt Reimbursement Resolution for 2008 GOB Projects –
Lick Creek Nature Center and East District Maintenance Shop
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Jeff Kersten, Chief Financial Officer
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding approval of a
“Resolution Declaring Intention to Reimburse Certain Expenditures with Proceeds from
Debt” for expenditures related to projects authorized as part of the 2008 General Obligation
Bond (GOB) package, specifically the Lick Creek Nature Center and East District
Maintenance Shop.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends approval of the “Resolution Declaring
Intention to Reimburse Certain Expenditures with Proceeds from Debt”.
Summary: At the April 14, 2011 Council meeting, Council gave direction to move forward
with the preliminary planning/design work on the Lick Creek Nature Center project and to
move forward with the design and construction of the East District Maintenance Shop. These
projects were authorized as part of the 2008 General Obligation Bond (GOB) package. The
debt that was authorized for these projects has not yet been issued. On projects for which
spending will occur in advance of the debt issue, a “Resolution Declaring Intention to
Reimburse Certain Expenditures with Proceeds from Debt” must be approved by Council.
Typically, the resolution is brought to Council along with the initial contract for the project
(i.e. the engineering contract). In the case these projects, however, spending will take place
before the initial contract is brought to Council (i.e. staff time charged to the project for
initial planning). This “Resolution Declaring Intention to Reimburse Certain Expenditures
with Proceeds from Debt” is being brought to Council to cover the expenditures that are
estimated to occur in advance of the debt issue scheduled for FY11 and FY12.
As the amount covered by this resolution only covers a portion of the debt scheduled to be
issued for the Lick Creek Nature Center, depending on the timing of future debt issues, an
additional “Resolution Declaring Intention to Reimburse Certain Expenditures with Proceeds
from Debt” may be necessary in the future.
Budget & Financial Summary: The “Resolution Declaring Intention to Reimburse
Certain Expenditures with Proceeds from Debt” is necessary for this item because the long
term debt has not been issued for these projects. This resolution is intended to cover debt
that is estimated to be issued in FY11 and FY12.
Attachments:
1. Resolution Declaring Intention to Reimburse Certain Expenditures with
Proceeds from Debt
48
49
50
51
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2g
Acceptance of Engagement Letter to Provide Representation
For Joint Research Valley BioCorridor Development Project
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: City Manager’s Office
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the authorization
of the City Manager to accept an Engagement Letter from the law firm of Nichols, Jackson,
Dillard, Hager & Smith to represent the Cities of College Station and Bryan in regards to the
Joint Research Valley BioCorridor Development Project; and consideration of a General Fund
Contingency transfer in the amount of $16,000.00.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: III. Diverse Growing Economy
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Summary: At the request of the BioCorridor Policy Committee, the law firm of Nichols,
Jackson, Dillard, Hager & Smith was asked to act as a third party legal counsel to assist in
the negotiation and development of the Inter Local Agreement(s) between the Cities of
College Station and Bryan in regards to the Joint Research Valley BioCorridor Development
Project.
As such, the law firm provided the Cities with an engagement letter on April 6, 2011 stating
that the firm will provide the required legal services necessary and that each City will
commit to paying for its 50% share of the fees and costs.
Budget & Financial Summary: Based on the legal services rate of $160.00 per hour, staff
recommends authorizing the engagement of Nichols, Jackson, Dillard, Hager & Smith with a
not-to-exceed cost of $16,000.00 for College Station’s 50% share of the fees and costs.
This amount will come from a General Fund Contingency transfer.
Attachments: Nichols, Jackson, Dillard, Hager & Smith Engagement Letter
52
NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAGER & SMITH, L.L.P.
ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS AT LAW ROBERT L. DILLARD, JR. (1913-2000)
PPeetteerr GG.. SSmmiitthh 1800 Lincoln Plaza H. LOUIS NICHOLS (1916-2010)
Direct: (214) 665-3365 500 North Akard LAWRENCE JACKSON
Email: psmith@njdhs.com Dallas, Texas 75201 OF COUNSEL
(214) 965-9900
Fax (214) 965-0010
Email NJDHS@NJDHS.COM
April 19, 2011
Via Email: dneeley@cstx.gov
City of College Station
c/o David Neeley, City Manager
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas 77840
Via Email: kregister@bryantx.gov
City of Bryan
c/o Kean Register, Interim City Manager
300 South Texas Avenue
Bryan, Texas 77803
Re: Joint Representation of the Cities of College Station and Bryan
Dear Messrs. Neeley and Register:
This will serve to confirm that the City of College Station, Texas and the City of Bryan,
Texas have jointly employed the law firm of NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAGER & SMITH,
L.L.P. (“the Firm”) to represent the cities in connection with the Joint Research Valley
BioCorridor Development Project, and other legal matters assigned in writing by the respective
city to the Firm from time to time.
We understand that each city will designate one or more representatives to work with the
Firm on the assigned tasks. The primary attorneys assigned to provide the requested services
shall be Peter G. Smith, managing partner and Kevin B. Laughlin. Requests and communications
regarding this engagement should be directed to the undersigned who may be contacted at the
Firm’s general telephone line (214) 965-9900, direct dial telephone (214) 665-3365, cell phone
(214) 535-3818, or by email at psmith@njdhs.com. Kevin B. Laughlin may be contacted at the
Firm’s general telephone line (214) 965-9900, direct dial telephone (214) 665-3337, cell phone
(432) 770-3763, or by email at klaughlin@njdhs.com. Other attorneys of the Firm may be
assigned work from time to time.
NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAGER & SMITH, L.L.P. will provide the required legal
services at the rate of $160.00 per hour. This rate applies to all attorneys regardless of
experience. The Firm, in the same manner as in previous assignments, will forward to you, on
behalf of each City, a monthly itemized invoice for legal services which will include the date,
description of the activity or transaction, the name or initials of the person performing the
service, the time used for that service, the amount charged, client cost and a total of the fees and
cost due for the monthly period. The Firm charges for the cost of copies and for outgoing
facsimile transmissions, courier service, and for travel expenses. In addition to monthly invoice
indicating total services performed, each City will receive an invoice for its 50% share of the
fees and costs. If at any time either City has any questions regarding the charges shown on the
monthly invoice, the Firm will immediately investigate, and, if necessary, eliminate such charges
or provide a credit in the next billing.
53
April 19, 2011
Page 2
Thank you for this opportunity to be of service to the Cities, we look forward to working
with each City. If the terms are acceptable please execute in the signature block provided below
on behalf of the respective City and return to us by facsimile transmission or email. This
Agreement may be executed in counterparts. Each of the counterparts shall be deemed an
original instrument, but all of the counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument. We
will start the required services as soon we receive executed counterparts from each City. We will
forward a fully executed copy to each City. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact us.
Sincerely,
NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD
HAGER & SMITH, L.L.P.
By:
Peter G. Smith
PGS:tlo:48902
cc: Mayor Nancy Berry, City of College Station (via email: nberry@cstx.gov)
Mayor Jason Bienski, City of Bryan (via email: jbienski@bryantx.gov)
Agreed to and accepted:
C ITY OF C OLLEGE STATION
By:
David Neeley, City Manager
Agreed to and accepted:
C ITY OF BRYAN
By:
Kean Register, Interim City Manager
54
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2h
Water Meter Purchase Contract
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: David Coleman, Director of Water Services
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the approval of
the water meter purchase contract with Aqua-Metric Sales Company for the amount of
$63,024.00.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Financially sustainable city providing response to core
services and infrastructure.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
Summary: A large number of water meters are required for the new development called
the “Cottages of College Station” located along the new Holleman Drive extension. This
purchase contract will provide 60 water meters, size 1.5 inch, to be installed for the 480
unit development. The contract (#WM08-10) will purchase Sensus OMNI C2 water
meters from Aqua-Metric Sales Company through the Houston-Galveston Area Council
(HGAC) contract.
Aqua-Metric Sales Company is the HGAC contract dealer for Sensus water meter
assemblies and related products. Products and services offered through HGAC have been
subjected to either the competitive bid or competitive proposal format based on Texas
statutes under the Local Government Code Chapter 252.
Considering the extended service life we have been getting from this type of meter the
accuracy over the life of the meters and the purchase price, this purchase is an excellent
value for our water utility.
Please note, the water meters approved for purchase at the prior City Council meeting were
for our ongoing Meter Replacement Program, and both purchases are necessary.
Budget & Financial Summary: Funds are available and budgeted in the Water Fund.
Attachment:
HGAC Contract Pricing Worksheet
55
Contract Pricing Worksheets
Rev 02-05-07
NOTE: Purchase Orders are not valid unless
a copy of the completed worksheet and the
customer's order are faxed to HGACBuy at:
713-993-4548
This Workbook contains three versions of HGACBuy's Contract Pricing
Worksheet. One is for Standard Equipment / Services, one is for Catalog
or Price Sheet type purchases, and the third is for Motor Vehicles only.
See tabs at bottom to select appropriate Worksheet.
Please contact H-GAC staff about use of the worksheets if you have any questions.
Toll Free - 800.926.0234
56
Please contact H-GAC staff about use of the worksheets if you have any questions.
57
Contract
No.:WM08-10 Date
Prepared:4/11/2011
Buying
Agency:Contractor:
Contact
Person:
Prepared
By:
Phone:Phone:
Fax:Fax:
Email:Email:
Quan Unit Pr Total
0
60 1,050.40 63024
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
63024
Quan Unit Pr Total
0
0
0
0
0
0%
0
63024
This Worksheet is prepared by Contractor and given to End User. If a PO is issued, both documents
MUST be faxed to H-GAC @ 713-993-4548. Therefore please type or print legibly.
Aqua-Metric Sales Company
Lee Goodson
903-520-8950
CONTRACT PRICING WORKSHEET
For Catalog & Price Sheet Type Purchases
City of College Station, Texas
Lisa Davis
979-764-3558
ldavis@cstx.gov
Catalog / Price Sheet
Name:Sensus North American Price List
1.5" Sensus OMNI C2 Water Meters with Electrinic Registers/Oval Flanges
General Description
of Product:Sensus OMNI Compound Water Meters
210-967-6305 979-764-3899
Description
A. Catalog / Price Sheet Items being purchased - Itemize Below - Attach Additional Sheet If Necessary
lee.goodson@aqua-metric.com
HGAC PC 17K PL page 10
Check: Total cost of Unpublished Options (B) cannot exceed 25% of the total of
the Base Unit Price plus Published Options (A+B).
Total From Other Sheets, If Any:
Subtotal A:
For this transaction the percentage is:
Delivery Date: 2-3 Weeks A.R.O.D. Total Purchase Price (A+B+C):
B. Unpublished Options, Accessory or Service items - Itemize Below - Attach Additional Sheet If Necessary
(Note: Unpublished Items are any which were not submitted and priced in contractor's bid.)
Subtotal B:
Total From Other Sheets, If Any:
C. Trade-Ins / Special Discounts / Other Allowances / Freight / Installation / Miscellaneous Charges
Description
Subtotal C:
58
NEW COVERSHEET FORMAT EXAMPLE 1
April 28, 2011
Consent Agenda Item No. 2i
RadioIP upgrade in EnRoute
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Ben Roper, Information Technology Director
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding approval of a
supplement to the original contract with EnRoute Public Safety, purchasing services to
upgrade the RadioIP software for the Public Safety Systems for an amount not to exceed
$10,950.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Goal I.8 Evaluate public safety needs.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends approval.
Summary:
The new software version and upgrade services will allow College Station to utilize multiple
paths for critical data communications between Public Safety Systems in Dispatch and
Mobile devices in patrol vehicles. The current low data rate system is obsolete and being
evaluated for replacement. Additionally, this system will not support more modern
applications that require higher bandwidth than is available. This upgrade will support using
Cellular communications to augment and provide back up for existing communications.
Budget & Financial Summary: Funds for this project are from the 2010 Byrne Justice
Assistance Grant 2010-DJ-BX-0423.
Attachments:
Customer Order Form for upgrade services
59
Customer Order Form Multi-Element Existing Customer
TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
1. This Customer Order Form (COF), together with any software, hardware, professional services or software support services which are the subject of
this Order, shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the existing Agreement(s) between EnRoute Emergency Systems LLC (“EnRoute”), the
particulars of which are set out below. Except as otherwise provided herein, the terms and conditions of the said Agreement(s) are incorporated herein
by reference including definitions.
2. By signing this COF, Customer represents and warrants that it has obtained all necessary authorizations and approvals to execute this COF and
enter into this agreement with EnRoute.
3. Upon receipt of the signed COF EnRoute will schedule the services described above and order the Third Party Software and/or Hardware. EnRoute
will not be obligated to deliver any goods or services until the required down payment stated below has been received.
4. EnRoute will invoice Customer for the Software and/or Hardware and Customer shall pay such invoice within thirty (30) days of invoice date.
EnRoute will perform services as requested by Customer. Customer will be billed for Services as incurred (i.e. upon completion of each individual
deliverable each of which is represented by a line item above). Customer’s payment of each invoice is due within 30 days of invoice date.
5. Delivery for all products shipped is FOB Shipping Point.
6. The above prices will be held for ninety (90) days from the date of the Order Form.
7. If it is determined that additional Software, and/or additional services are required that are outside of the scope of this COF, such products, licenses
and/or services may be provided on a separate Customer Order Form at EnRoute’s then-current rate for those products and/or services
8. All items related to this Order must be utilized within one year of signing this Order. No refunds or credits are issued for service hours committed but
not utilized within such one-year period.
9. Support Fees for newly licensed products will begin upon Delivery of the Software and may be prorated to the end of the current Support Term.
10. No changes or modifications of any kind to this Order shall be accepted after execution unless signed in writing by both parties.
11. Prior to making any modifications for custom programming, the Customer and EnRoute must approve the specifications by signing any necessary
Functional Specification Document or such other form as to which the parties agree.
12. Any purchase order or similar document (other than a mutually executed and delivered Customer Order Form) that may be issued by the
undersigned Customer in connection with this Customer Order Form does not modify this Customer Order Form or the Agreement to which it pertains.
No such modification will be effective unless it is in writing, is signed by each party, and expressly provides that it amends this Customer Order Form (or
as applicable, the Agreement).
Particulars of Existing Agreement(s) between EnRoute Emergency Systems LLC, (where applicable, as successor in interest to the Geac Public Safety
division of Geac Enterprise Solutions, Inc.), and the Customer:
6) Agreement for System & Services dated 2/21/2003 being Agreement No 102-S040406A
4/18/2011
Effective date of this form: 4/18/2011
Customer:City of College Station Order #:
Ship To Contact:Kevin Joyner Rev #:
Address 310 KrenekTap Road Date:
City, State Zip College Station, TX 77842 USA Cust #:
E-mail:kjoyner@cstx.gov Req. by:
FAX #:(979) 764-3664 Customer PO #:
Phone #: (979) 764-3645
Bill To Contact:Kevin Joyner 1
Address 310 KrenekTap Road Dated
City, State Zip College Station, TX 77842 USA Number
E-mail:kjoyner@cstx.gov 2
FAX #:(979) 764-3664 Dated
Phone #: (979) 764-3645 Number
I. Component Systems Process Type:
Component System Quantity License Fee Annual Support
1 Next Generation Mobile VPN Gateway 1 $196.00 $280.00
2
Next Generation Mobile VPN Premium
Gateway Option 1 $392.00 $560.00
3 Next Generation Mobile VPN Client 77 $1,131.90 $2,156.00
4
Next Generation Mobile Premium VPN Client
Option 77 $756.14 $1,617.00
TOTALS $2,476.04 $4,613.00
* If specified in the User Restriction field:
N/A
Part # (if applicable)
('the Order Form Date)
102-1101051120
4/18/2011
102
M. Williams
4
N/A
Systems and Services
February 21, 2003
Existing Agreement Details
102-S040406A
N/A
4/18/2011 60
III. Support Services
Annual Escalation Percentage Cap: 6% of the then-current Consumer Price Index, whichever is greater.
Payment is due within 30 days of Order Form Date.Other Fees
All amounts are US Dollars unless otherwise specified.Currency:USD
Equipment Account ID:
Computer Platform: Sales Rep ID:10862
Operating System: Sales Rep :M. Williams
Location:310 KrenekTap Road
College Station, TX 77842 USA
Serial Number:
Model:
DBMS:
Delivery Address:City of College Station Invoice Address:
310 KrenekTap Road
College Station, TX 77842 USA
Kevin Joyner Kevin Joyner
9797643645 9797643645
kjoyner@cstx.gov kjoyner@cstx.gov
City of College Station
310 KrenekTap Road
College Station, TX 77842 USA
THE PARTIES have executed this Order Form through the signatures of their respective authorized representatives.
Contact Title:
Contact Phone:
102
Contact eMail:
Contact Name:
*** If the Initial Term is less than or more than 12 months, the Fee for Initial Term of Support represents a proportional amount of
the Support Fee based on the anticipated delivery date.
(if blank, the Delivery Address shall be used for Invoicing):
Delivery is FOB Shipping Point.
4/18/2011
EnRoute Emergency Systems LLC
Signature Signature
Typed or Printed Name Typed or Printed Name
Title Date Title Date
THE PARTIES have executed this Order Form through the signatures of their respective authorized representatives.
Customer:
4/18/2011 61
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
By: _________________________________
Mayor
Date: ________________
ATTEST:
City Secretary
Date: ________________
APPROVED:
City Manager
Date: ________________
City Attorney
Date: ________________
Chief Financial Officer
Date: ________________
62
TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
1. This Customer Order Form (COF), together with any software, hardware, professional services or software support services which are the subject of
this Order, shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the existing Agreement(s) between EnRoute Emergency Systems LLC (“EnRoute”), the
particulars of which are set out below. Except as otherwise provided herein, the terms and conditions of the said Agreement(s) are incorporated herein
by reference including definitions.
2. By signing this COF, Customer represents and warrants that it has obtained all necessary authorizations and approvals to execute this COF and
enter into this agreement with EnRoute.
3. Upon receipt of the signed COF EnRoute will schedule the services described above and order the Third Party Software and/or Hardware. EnRoute
will not be obligated to deliver any goods or services until the required down payment stated below has been received.
4. EnRoute will invoice Customer for the Software and/or Hardware and Customer shall pay such invoice within thirty (30) days of invoice date.
EnRoute will perform services as requested by Customer. Customer will be billed for Services as incurred (i.e. upon completion of each individual
deliverable each of which is represented by a line item above). Customer’s payment of each invoice is due within 30 days of invoice date.
5. Delivery for all products shipped is FOB Shipping Point.
6. The above prices will be held for ninety (90) days from the date of the Order Form.
7. If it is determined that additional Software, and/or additional services are required that are outside of the scope of this COF, such products, licenses
and/or services may be provided on a separate Customer Order Form at EnRoute’s then-current rate for those products and/or services
8. All items related to this Order must be utilized within one year of signing this Order. No refunds or credits are issued for service hours committed but
not utilized within such one-year period.
9. Support Fees for newly licensed products will begin upon Delivery of the Software and may be prorated to the end of the current Support Term.
10. No changes or modifications of any kind to this Order shall be accepted after execution unless signed in writing by both parties.
11. Prior to making any modifications for custom programming, the Customer and EnRoute must approve the specifications by signing any necessary
Functional Specification Document or such other form as to which the parties agree.
12. Any purchase order or similar document (other than a mutually executed and delivered Customer Order Form) that may be issued by the
undersigned Customer in connection with this Customer Order Form does not modify this Customer Order Form or the Agreement to which it pertains.
No such modification will be effective unless it is in writing, is signed by each party, and expressly provides that it amends this Customer Order Form (or
as applicable, the Agreement).
Particulars of Existing Agreement(s) between EnRoute Emergency Systems LLC, (where applicable, as successor in interest to the Geac Public Safety
division of Geac Enterprise Solutions, Inc.), and the Customer:
Services OnlyCustomer Order Form
4/18/2011
Effective date of this form: 4/18/2011
Customer:City of College Station Order #:
Ship To Contact:Kevin Joyner Rev #: 4
Address 310 KrenekTap Road Date:
City, State Zip College Station, TX 77842 USA Cust #:
E-mail:kjoyner@cstx.gov Req. by:
FAX #:(979) 764-3664 Customer PO #:
Phone #: (979) 764-3645
Bill To Contact:Kevin Joyner 1
Address 310 KrenekTap Road Dated
City, State Zip College Station, TX 77842 USA Number
E-mail:kjoyner@cstx.gov 2
FAX #:(979) 764-3664 Dated
Phone #: (979) 764-3645 Number
II. Professional Services
Part # (if applicable) Service Description Process Type Estimate Hours Fees
1 PSGSVC2 Product On-Site Installation MISC FEE 35 $6,125.00
$6,125.00
102-1101051120
N/A
Systems and Services
February 21, 2003
6) Agreement for System & Services dated 2/21/2003 being Agreement No 102-S040406A
4/18/2011
102
M. Williams
102-S040406A
N/A
Existing Agreement Details
Total Services Fee
N/A
('the Order Form Date)
4/18/2011 63
Payment is due within 30 days of Order Form Date.
All amounts are US Dollars unless otherwise specified.Currency: USD
Total Amount Due (before applicable taxes) $6,125.00
U/M Qty Total
Lot 1 $4,825
$4,825
Equipment Account ID:102
Computer Platform: Sales Rep ID:10862
Operating System: Sales Rep :
Location:310 KrenekTap Road
College Station, TX 77842 USA
Serial Number:
Model:
DBMS:
City of College Station Invoice Address:
310 KrenekTap Road
Address shall be used
for Invoicing):
College Station, TX 77842 USA
Kevin Joyner Contact Name:Kevin Joyner
Contact Title:
9797643645 Contact Phone:9797643645
kjoyner@cstx.gov Contact eMail:kjoyner@cstx.gov
Contact Name:
City of College Station
310 KrenekTap Road
College Station, TX 77842 USA
Delivery Address:
M. Williams
Maximum Travel/Shipping Expenses
Weekly Expenses - Meals, Hotel, Transportation, Parking and Air Fare
Travel/Shipping Expenses - Billed at actual as incurred
Contact Title:
Contact Phone:
Contact eMail:
Delivery is FOB Shipping Point
4/18/2011
EnRoute Emergency Systems LLC
Signature Signature
Typed or Printed Name Typed or Printed Name
Title Date Title Date
Delivery is FOB Shipping Point.
THE PARTIES have executed this Order Form through the signatures of their respective authorized representatives.
Customer
4/18/2011 64
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
By: _________________________________
Mayor
Date: ________________
ATTEST:
City Secretary
Date: ________________
APPROVED:
City Manager
Date: ________________
City Attorney
Date: ________________
Chief Financial Officer
Date: ________________
65
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 1
Public Hearing and Consideration of Budget Amendment # 2
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Jeff Kersten, Chief Financial Officer
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on
an ordinance Budget Amendment #2 amending ordinance number 3290 which will
amend the budget for the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year in the amount of $1,600,000.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends the City Council hold the public hearing
on Budget Amendment #2 and approve the budget amendment ordinance.
Summary: The proposed budget amendment is to increase the General Fund
appropriation for the Weingarten settlement in the amount of $1,600,000. The
charter of the City of College Station provides for the City Council to amend the
annual budget in the event there are revenues available to cover increased
expenditures and after holding a public hearing on such budget amendment. This
item will be funded out of the General Fund fund balance which can be used for one-
time expenditures.
The settlement agreement was approved unanimously by the City Council at
the March 24, 2011 City Council Meeting.
Budget & Financial Summary: The City has resources to cover the appropriation
in this budget amendment. $1,600,000 is for the Weingarten litigation settlement.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance
66
67
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 2
Longmire Drive On-street Parking Removal
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Troy Rother, P.E., Traffic Engineer
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion of an
ordinance amending Chapter 10 “Traffic Code”, to remove parking along the east side of
Longmire Drive between FM 2818 and Valley View Drive and on Valley View Drive west of
the Longmire intersection.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Goal I, Financially Sustainable City Providing Response
to Core Services and Infrastructure. Goal IV, Improving Multi Modal Transportation.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendment.
Summary: This ordinance will remove the existing on-street parking between FM 2818 and
Valley View Drive and allow the bike lane to be striped adjacent to the roadway curb, which
is the typical bike lane installation in the city. Additionally, the ordinance will remove some
parking on Valley View to delineate where vehicles can park on Valley View to replace the
parking being removed on Longmire.
During a September 2008 Council meeting, a compromise to balance the need for bike lanes
and on-street parking was approved. This plan changed the roadway cross section from
parking on both sides of the street with two-way traffic to parking on the east side of the
street only, bike lanes on both sides of the street, and two-way traffic. Since then concerns
about bicyclists’ safety and driver expectancy have been expressed even though the
roadway striping meets the standards of the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices.
The city’s Traffic Management Team reviewed the issue and recommends the removal of the
on-street parking on the east side of Longmire to eliminate the safety concerns and meet
driver expectancy. Similar interest was expressed during a recent Council Transportation
Committee meeting.
This item was presented at the January 27, 2011 City Council meeting. Council asked for
staff to look at parking alternatives and allow the property owner time to seek parking
arrangements with an adjacent business.
Staff has evaluated the parking areas and met with the property owner concerned with the
loss of parking on Longmire. The property owner asked if the parking spaces along Valley
View could be striped. Staff recommends that the parking area be identified by placing No
Parking signs which will accomplish the same result, but are less expensive to install and
maintain. To accommodate this request, the parking restrictions on Valley View have been
added to this item.
68
Due to the existing poor pavement condition of Longmire between FM 2818 and Valley View,
the Public Works Department has plans to rehab this section of the roadway. Once the
street is reconstructed, it will need to be restriped for traffic. If the ordinance is passed, the
roadway will be striped with bike lanes and two-way traffic. If the ordinance is not passed,
the existing striping will be reinstalled.
Notices informing the residents about tonight’s meeting and the proposed parking removal
were mailed during the week of January 17, 2011.
Budget & Financial Summary: The “NO PARKING” signs are planned operation and
maintenance expenses accounted for in the Public Works Traffic Operation budget.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance
2. Project Location Map
69
70
71
72
VALLEY VIEW DRALLEYLONGMIRE DRFM 2818 SERVICE RDANGELINA CIR
HARVEY MITCHELL PKWY SANDERSON ST
RAYBURN CT
Ê Proposed Longmire DriveParking Removal 0 200100Feet
New Bee Creek Bridge
Proposed Parking Restriction
Existing Parking Restriction
Available Parking
73
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 3
Impact Fees for Water/Wastewater
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Dave Coleman, Director of Water Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding
the possible implementation of “system capacity” impact fees for Water and Wastewater.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Financially sustainable city providing response to core
services and infrastructure.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council direct staff to either:
a) Terminate the process for impact fees and keep the five existing impact fee lines; or
b) Create an ordinance (to be considered on May 12th) that would implement the
system-wide impact fees at some dollar amount greater than zero, and eliminate the
five existing impact fee lines for developments that plat in the future.
Summary: On November 22, 2010 City Council directed staff to proceed with the required
analysis regarding potential impact fees for the Water and Wastewater utility systems. If
implemented, these impact fees would provide revenue to pay a portion of the cost to
increase the capacity of these utility systems, thereby reducing the financial burden placed
on the rate paying customers. Please note that, even if implemented at the maximum,
impact fees will only play a partial role in funding needed infrastructure improvements.
The steady growth of College Station is very likely to continue, which means a significant
investment will be required for the water and wastewater systems to meet the expected
demand increases over the next 20 years. The resulting capital projects can be funded from
a variety of sources, including:
· Rate revenue, with moderate rate increases
· Revenue bonds or certificates of obligation, typically 20-year instruments that are
repaid with rate revenue from utility customers
· Special Districts, such as TIF, TIRZ, PID, etc. for property tax sharing
· System-capacity impact fees
· Special area impact fees, specific to certain utility lines
· Oversize Participation to create excess capacity for the future
Please note: These alternative funding mechanisms can potentially provide supplemental
revenue to mitigate future rate increases. But if they are implemented, rate increases
would still be required to provide adequate revenue for the necessary capital projects.
Since November, staff and our consultant, HDR Engineers, have completed the study of the
underlying land use assumptions, capital improvements, future growth projections, and rate
credits to calculate the maximum impact fees. This information is compiled in an Impact
Fee Report that was approved by the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC).
The CIAC recommended to City Council that the Impact Fees be implemented at zero
dollars, and that the existing five impact fee lines remain in effect as they are. The CIAC
made this recommendation based largely on the premise that our economy is not strong
enough for impact fees, and that their implementation would harm the local market for new
74
housing. On March 10, 2011 Dr. Jim Gaines of the Texas A&M Real Estate Center spoke to
City Council, and provided a summary on the health of our local economy, and then hosted
a “question and answer” session.
The final decision (whether to implement the system-wide impact fees) is a Policy decision
of whether to continue our existing system, whereby the utility customers pay for all system
capacity increases through their rates, or alternatively, to offset the financial burden on the
customers by having new development pay impact fees when obtaining a building permit.
After legal review, we have concluded that we cannot implement the system-wide impact
fees at zero, and continue to charge the existing impact fee lines, because State law
prohibits assessing more than one impact fee. Staff recommends the Council choose one or
the other: Either the system-wide impact fees, or the existing impact fee lines. Based on
Council’s direction, staff will either terminate the impact fee study, or create an Ordinance
to implement system-wide impact fees for consideration at the May 12th Council meeting.
Budget & Financial Summary: Not applicable
Attachment: None
75
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 4
100 Graham Road Rezoning
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, CNU-A, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an
amendment to Chapter 12, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning
Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning 1.70 acres
located at 100 Graham Road near the intersection of Graham Road and F.M. 2154 from M-1
Light Industrial to C-3 Light Commercial.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Financially Sustainable City Providing Response to Core
Services and Infrastructure, Neighborhood Integrity, and Diverse Growing Economy.
Recommendation(s): The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their
April 7, 2011 meeting and voted 5-0 to recommend approval. Staff also recommended
approval of the request.
Summary: The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for
zoning map amendments:
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is designated
Suburban Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map.
The Suburban Commercial land use designation is “generally for concentrations of
commercial activities that cater primarily to nearby residents versus the larger
community or region. Generally, these areas tend to be small in size and are located
adjacent to major roads (arterials and collectors). Design of these structures should be
compatible in size, roof type and pitch, architecture, and lot coverage with the
surrounding single-family uses.” The proposed change in zoning classification from M-1
Light Industrial to C-3 Light Commercial is consistent with the Suburban Commercial
Future Land Use designation. Uses such as offices, personal service shops, and retail
sales, which are allowed by right by the C-3 Light Commercial zoning district, are
compatible with the uses intended for areas with a Suburban Commercial Future Land
Use designation.
The Comprehensive Plan states that small-scale office and neighborhood retail uses are
appropriate directly adjacent to the neighborhood provided that they are an integrated
component of the neighborhood with adequate buffering and transition for noise, light,
and parking intrusions. A change in zoning classification from light industrial to light
commercial will enable a better land use transition between industrial and residential
uses than is currently possible.
Additionally, the structure that currently exists on the property is similar in style, size
and roof pitch with the surrounding residential structures. If in the future if this site
were redeveloped, a C-3 Light Commercial zoning classification would require any
structure built on the property to meet the Non-Residential Architecture Standards of
Article 7 of the City of College Station Unified Development Ordinance. Under the current
76
M-1 Light Industrial zoning classification any new structures constructed on this site are
not required to meet the Non-Residential Architectural Standards.
2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property
and with the character of the neighborhood: The properties to the south and the
east of the subject property are currently zoned and develop as residential duplexes
while the properties to the north are currently zoned and developed as light industrial
uses. The proposed change in zoning classification from light industrial to light
commercial would allow this property to develop with uses that are more compatible
with the surrounding residential properties than those uses allowed by right under the
current zoning classification such as outdoor storage of equipment and materials,
research laboratories, warehousing and distribution centers, and retail wholesales and
services.
3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment: The
requested change from a M-1 Light Industrial to a C-3 Light Commercial zoning
classification represents uses that the Comprehensive Plan anticipates as being suitable
for this area. The types of uses allowed by a C-3 zoning classification are compatible
with the surrounding light industrial uses and residential uses which currently exist in
the vicinity of subject property.
4. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: Due
to the subject property’s close proximity to residential dwelling units, some uses, which
are allowed under the subject property’s current M-1 Light Industrial zoning district, are
not suitable for this location. The structure that currently exists on the subject property
is used as offices which is allowed by both the current zoning classification and the
proposed zoning classification.
5. Marketability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by
the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment:
The subject was zoned for industrial uses in 1993; however, since that time it has
remained undeveloped except for the existing office building that was built sometime in
the 1980’s. There are 14.72 acres of developed, M-1 Light Industrial zoned property in
the vicinity of the subject property. Of the 14.72 acres of property zoned for light
industrial uses, 9.22 acres are currently developed and 5.55 acres are undeveloped.
77
There are currently 19.24 acres of property zoned for C-3 Light Commercial uses in the
City of College Station; 18.56 acres of which are developed and 0.68 acres are
undeveloped.
6. Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities
generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: The subject tract is
adjacent to a 12-inch water main and separate 12-inch wastewater main which runs
along Graham Road. This property is located within the Graham Road Sanitary Sewer
Impact Fee Area ($316.07/LUE) and is located in the Lick Creek Drainage Basin.
However, the subject property is not located within a FEMA regulated Special Flood
Hazard Area. Further development of this site will be required to be in compliance with
the City’s Storm Water Design Guidelines. This site will continue to take access to
Graham Road, which is designated as a 2 Lane Major Collector – Suburban Context on
the City’s Thoroughfare Plan. The existing infrastructure serving this site would
adequately serve any new or future redevelopment of this site for uses allowed in C-3
Light Commercial zoning districts.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Background Information
2. Small Area Map (SAM) & Aerial
3. Ordinance
78
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date: April 7, 2011
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: April 28, 2011
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College
Station’s Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this
public hearing:
Edelweiss Gartens Neighborhood Association
Property owner notices mailed: 20
Contacts in support: None at the time of staff report.
Contacts in opposition: None at the time of staff report.
Inquiry contacts: Two residents had questions regarding the types of
uses allowed by right in C-3 Light Commercial zoning
districts.
ADJACENT LAND USES
Direction Comprehensive
Plan
Zoning Land Use
North
Suburban
Commercial across
Graham Road
(Major Collector)
M-1 Light
Industrial across
Graham Road /
M-2 Heavy
Industrial to the
Northeast
Light
Industrial/Manufacturing
Facility across Graham
Road / Vacant to the
Northeast
South General Suburban R-2 Duplex
Residential Duplexes
East General Suburban R-2 Duplex
Residential Duplexes
West Business Park
across F.M. 2154
(Major Arterial)
A-O Agricultural
Open Vacant
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation: 1992
Zoning: A-O Agricultural Open to M-1 Light Industrial (1993)
Final Plat: Unplatted
Site development: 5,400 square foot office building (built sometime in the
1980’s).
79
80
81
April 7, 2011 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 1
MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
April 7, 2011, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Scott Shafer, Mike Ashfield, Jodi Warner, Hugh
Stearns, and Bo Miles
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Doug Slack and Craig Hall
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Prochazka, Jason Schubert, Matt Robinson, Matthew
Hilgemeier, Joe Guerra, Carol Cotter, Molly Hitchcock, Lance Simms, Bob Cowell, Carla
Robinson, Carrie McHugh, Deborah Grace-Rosier, and Brittany Caldwell
1. Call meeting to order.
Chairman Shafer called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
Regular Agenda
5. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a request to rezone
1.70 acres located at 100 Graham Road at the intersection of Graham Road and F.M.
2154 from M-1 Light Industrial to C-3 Light Commercial. Case # 11-0050036 (MKH)
(Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for the April 28, 2011 City Council
Meeting--subject to change)
Staff Planner Hilgemeier presented the rezoning request and recommended approval.
Chairman Shafer opened the public hearing.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Chairman Shafer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Stearns motioned to recommend approval of the rezoning request.
Commissioner Miles seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
12. Adjourn.
Commissioner Warner motioned to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
82
83
84
85
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 5
Rezoning for 3180 Cain Road
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion regarding a
Rezoning for 3180 Cain Road of 19.575 acres from A-O Agricultural Open to C-1 General
Commercial, R-3 Townhouse and R-4 Multi-Family located at 3180 Cain Road and more
generally located west of the intersection of Old Wellborn Road and Cain Road.
Recommendation(s): The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their
November 18, 2010 meeting and voted 7-0 to recommend denial. Staff also recommended
denial of the request.
Summary: The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for
zoning map amendments:
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is designated as
Urban on the Future Land Use and Character Map of the Comprehensive Plan and is
located within Growth Area Five. Under the Urban designation in Growth Area Five,
intense land use activities including general commercial, office uses, townhomes, high-
density apartments, and vertical mixed-use are appropriate land uses. As proposed, the
applicant is requesting three zoning designations on the property, which includes 12
acres of R-3 Townhouse; 6.3 acres of R-4 Multi-Family; and 1.2 acres of C-1 General
Commercial. While the zoning designations allow uses that are consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, they also allow uses that are not. These uses include single-family
detached residences, which would be allowed in the R-3 Townhouse zoning district and
duplexes, which would be allowed in the R-4 Multi-Family zoning district.
2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property
and with the character of the neighborhood: Currently, the surrounding properties
are all zoned A-O Agricultural Open with uses consisting of single-family residences,
manufactured homes, commercial strip centers and a self-storage business. In addition,
there are several properties that are currently vacant. With the exception of the single-
family residences, none of the existing uses are allowed under the current zoning A-O
zoning designation. However, these uses existed prior to annexation and as such are
allowed to continue as is. Single-family residences and townhomes would be compatible
at this time, but the subject property as well as the surrounding properties are
designated as Urban on the Future Land Use and Character Map in the Comprehensive
Plan and as such are intended for a higher intensity of land use than what currently
exists.
86
3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment: The
requested zoning changes are generally representative of uses that the Comprehensive
Plan anticipates as being suitable for this area. However, the proposed zoning
designations of R-3 Townhouse and R-4 Multi-Family, allow uses that would not be
suitable for the area. This includes the ability to develop single-family detached
residences and duplexes, which would be at much lower land use intensity than what is
currently planned for the area. Infrastructure in the area is currently inadequate to serve
87
additional development and improvements constructed by the City at taxpayer’s cost,
will be needed even for the least intense uses as Cain Road is not currently built to City
standards. Additionally, a local street(s) would need to be provided for any development
consisting of single-family detached homes, townhomes or duplexes as these uses are
not permitted to take direct access to a collector street (Cain Road). Without
improvements to the current street system, the property is not suitable for the type and
intensity of development proposed by the applicant or planned by the City.
4. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: The
property is currently zoned A-O, Agricultural Open, which allows for agricultural, low-
intensity residential and open space uses. These uses may not be suitable for this
property due to the existing commercial businesses and duplexes existing on or adjacent
to the subject property. Additionally, the Future Land Use and Character Map of the
Comprehensive Plan designates the area as Urban, which is intended for the most
intense land use activities. As such, A-O land use activities will eventually become less
and less suitable as the surrounding properties develop.
5. Marketability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by
the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment:
The marketability of the property is limited under the current A-O, Agricultural Open
zoning designation, which limits potential development to agricultural, low-intensity
residential or open space uses. Through the rezoning, the applicant is seeking to
enhance the marketability of the property.
6. Availability of water, wastewater, storm water, and transportation facilities
generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: The subject tract is
currently being served water service through a private water main. There is an 18-inch
water main along Old Wellborn Rd, which is adjacent to this tract. Development of the
subject tract would have to meet the City’s water system and fire flow requirements.
The subject tract is located adjacent to a 12-inch sanitary sewer main, located along the
property’s northern property boundary, though downstream sewer capacity may not be
available to service this development. The subject tract is located in the Bee Creek
Tributary “B” drainage basin. The subject tract is not located in a FEMA Regulated
Special Flood Hazard Area; however, drainage problems have been reported near the
intersection of Cain Rd. and Old Wellborn Rd. Development of the subject tract will be
required to meet the minimum requirements of the City’s storm water design guidelines.
The subject tract is located adjacent to Holleman Drive South (future 4 Lane Major
Collector), Wellborn Rd. (future 6 Lane Major Arterial), Cain Rd. (future 2 Lane Minor
Collector), and the future extension of General Pkwy (future 2 Lane Minor Collector).
Although Cain Rd. is on the City thoroughfare plan, Cain Rd. is not currently built to city
standards and would need to be upgraded by the City at taxpayer’s cost to serve the
proposed development. At this point, sanitary sewer service is near capacity in the area
and the existing transportation facilities are inadequate to serve development on the
subject property.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Background Information
2. Aerial & Small Area Map (SAM)
3. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes – December 9, 2010
4. Ordinance
88
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date: November 18, 2010
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: April 28, 2011
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s
Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
None
Property owner notices mailed: 18
Contacts in support: None at time of staff report
Contacts in opposition: None at time of staff report
Inquiry contacts: 2
ADJACENT LAND USES
Direction Comprehensive Zoning Land Use
North Urban, Growth Area
5
A-O, Agricultural
Open
Vacant, not
developed
South Urban, Growth Area
5
A-O, Agricultural
Open
Cain Road, single-
family residences,
manufactured homes,
vacant property
East Urban, Growth Area
5
A-O, Agricultural
Open
Commercial strip
center, Old Wellborn
Road
West Urban, Growth Area
5, 4-Lane Major
Collector
A-O, Agricultural
Open
Thoroughfare -
Holleman Drive South
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation: 2002
Zoning: A-O Agricultural Open upon annexation (2002)
Final Plat: N/A
Site development: Duplexes are developed along a portion of Cain Road. The remainder of
the site is largely vacant.
89
90
91
November 18, 2010 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
November 18, 2010, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Scott Shafer, Mike Ashfield, Craig Hall, Jodi
Warner, Bo Miles, Hugh Stearns and Doug Slack
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Maloney and Jess Fields
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Prochazka, Matt Robinson, Joe Guerra, Josh Norton, Carol
Cotter, Alan Gibbs, Lance Simms, Bob Cowell, Mary Ann Powell, Kerry Mullins, and Brittany
Caldwell
1. Call meeting to order.
Chairman Shafer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Hear Citizens.
None
Regular Agenda
3. Public hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion regarding a Rezoning for
3180 Cain Road of 19.575 acres from A-O Agricultural Open to C-1 General
Commercial, R-3 Townhouse and R-4 Multi-Family located at 3180 Cain Road and more
generally located west of the intersection of Old Wellborn Road and Cain Road. Case
#10-00500139 (MR)
Staff Planner Robinson presented the Rezoning and recommended denial.
Chairman Shafer opened the public hearing.
Greg Jasper, property owner in the area, stated that he was in support of developing the
property to a higher density.
Joe Schultz, engineer, said that he does not know what infrastructure is going to be
extended that will be utilized and that Cain Road was just recently designated as a private
street after being a public road all the way back to the 1970’s.
92
November 18, 2010 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
Hartzell Elkins, 2508 River Forest Drive, College Station, Texas; C M Rutledge, 3033
Cain Road, College Station, Texas; John Kemp, 3100 Holleman Drive South, College
Station, Texas; Kenneth Tripp, 1393 Seamist Lane, College Station, Texas; Cheryl Jones,
3001 Cain Road, College Station, Texas. The citizens were concerned about flooding
and drainage issues in the area. Some of the citizens also stated that Cain Road was a
public road.
Paul Schultz, applicant, stated that Cain Road has been treated as a public road in the past
and townhomes is the only type of development that is practical on the property.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding drainage in the area.
City Engineer Gibbs stated that he was not aware of Cain Road being a public road.
Commissioner Stearns said that mitigation needed to be done because of the flooding and
drainage issues.
Commissioner Slack expressed concern about the uncertainty of whether Cain Road was
public or private and the scale of the development.
Commissioner Stearns motioned to recommend denial of the Rezoning.
Commissioner Slack seconded the motion.
Commissioner Miles said that the City has an obligation to take care of drainage issues in
the area and he also expressed concern about not knowing for certain whether Cain Road
was public or private.
The motion passed (7-0).
4. Adjourn.
Commissioner Warner motioned to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (7-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
Approved:
____________________________________
Scott Shafer, Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
Attest:
_____________________________________
Brittany Caldwell, Admin. Support Specialist
Planning and Development Services
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 6
Scott & White Rezoning
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, CNU-A, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an
amendment to Chapter 12, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning
Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning 37.12
acres located at 3210 Rock Prairie Road, from PDD Planned Development District to PDD
Planned Development District to modify standards for the development of a hospital and
clinic.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Financially Sustainable City Providing Response to Core
Services and Infrastructure, Neighborhood Integrity, and Diverse Growing Economy.
Recommendation(s): The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their
April 21, 2011 meeting and the recommendation will be presented at the Council meeting.
Staff recommended approval of the request.
Summary: The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for
zoning map amendments:
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
· Portions of the tract are designated as Suburban Commercial, which is generally
for concentrations of commercial activities that cater primarily to nearby residents
versus the larger community or region. According to the Comprehensive Plan,
design of structures in these areas should be compatible in size, roof type and pitch,
architecture, and lot coverage with single-family residential uses. The proposal is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
· A portion of the tract is designated as General Commercial. The General
Commercial designation is for concentrations of commercial activities that cater to
both nearby residents and to the larger community or region. It is preferred that
development in these areas be concentrated in nodes instead of developed in strips.
The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
· The subject property is also located within the Spring Creek District (Medical
Corridor) – a special planning area that at some point in the future will be studied
in further detail. The focus of the Spring Creek District Plan should be linking current
and future medical facilities into a cohesive district.
2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property
and with the character of the neighborhood: The existing PDD includes a hospital
campus at the heart of the property with periphery retail and office uses. As such, the
proposed zoning is generally compatible with the commercially zoned property located to
the west. The property to the north, across Rock Prairie Road, is largely zoned A-O
Agricultural Open and is undeveloped. At the entrance to the Woodcreek Subdivision,
the Riviera Day Spa is zoned and developed as light commercial. The northeast corner
of Rock Prairie Road and State Highway 6 is developed as the Plazas at Rock Prairie
101
shopping center. The proposed PDD designation is compatible with the commercial
development in the area.
3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment: The
property is currently zoned PDD Planned Development District allowing for the
development of a hospital and clinic. The proposed PDD includes modifications to the
Non-Residential Architectural Standards contained in Section 7.9 of the Unified
Development Ordinance.
4. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: The
property is currently zoned PDD Planned Development District allowing for the
development of a hospital and clinic. The use of the property will not change with the
proposed PDD zoning.
5. Marketability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by
the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment:
The existing PDD zoning allows for the development of a hospital and clinic. The
proposed PDD will not change the permitted uses on the property.
6. Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities
generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: The proposed use will not
change. Utilities and transportation facilities are adequate for the proposed hospital and
clinic use.
Base Zoning and Meritorious Modifications
The applicant proposes to retain C-1 General Commercial as the base, underlying zoning
district for standards not identified in the PDD. At the time of site plan and plat, the project
will need to meet all applicable site, architectural and platting standards required by the
Unified Development Ordinance except where meritorious modifications are granted with the
PDD zoning. The applicant has requested the following additional meritorious modifications
to the existing PDD zoning:
1. Section 7.9.2 “Building Mass & Design” and Section 7.9.E.1 “Façade
Articulation” of the Unified Development Ordinance
The applicant believes that the proposed hospital structure complies with the intent of
the ordinances. Proposed building elevations have been provided with this report.
2. Section 7.9.F.2 “Additional Standards for 150,000 s.f. or Greater” of the Unified
Development Ordinance
This ordinance section requires that each façade utilize a minimum of 50% masonry
materials. The applicant has identified that the north façade includes 48.65% masonry.
All other facades exceed the 50% requirement and as a whole the building exceeds the
requirement.
3. Section 7.9.E.4.d “Pedestrian / Bike Circulation & facilities” of the Unified
Development Ordinance
The UDO requires a 10-foot sidewalk along the full length of any façade facing a right-
of-way. The applicant has requested to vary from this requirement in several instances.
The west façade of the hospital has no public access points and is grade separated along
the majority of its face. Also, the west facade of the utility building has no public access
point and has cooling tower intake grills along much of its face.
102
4. Section 7.9.B.1 “Required Screening” of the Unified Development Ordinance
The applicant has proposed a 10-foot tall screening wall for the bulk oxygen tank, but
believes that screening the full height of the tank will be more visually intrusive than
screening only the lower portion. The exposed portion of the tank will be painted a
complimentary color and will contain not company logo.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Background Information
2. Small Area Map (SAM) & Aerial
3. Ordinance
103
BACKGROUND
The subject property was zoned PDD Planned Development District in conjunction with the
surrounding tracts for a hospital and clinic development. Scott & White is now in the design
phase and have identified several modifications needed to the City’s Non-Residential
Architectural Standards. The proposed PDD zoning retains the existing land uses, concept plan
and meritorious modifications previously approved, with additional modifications outlined later in
the report.
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date: April 21, 2011
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: April 28, 2011
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s
Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
Wilshire HOA
Sandstone HOA
Foxfire HOA
Amberlake HOA
Chadwick HOA
Stonebridge HOA
Stonebridge Court HOA
Property owner notices mailed: 15
Contacts in support: None as of date of staff report
Contacts in opposition: None as of date of staff report
Inquiry contacts: None as of date of staff report
ADJACENT LAND USES
Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use
North Suburban
Commercial and
Restricted Suburban
across Rock Prairie
Road (Major Arterial)
A-O Agricultural-
Open, C-3 Light
Commercial, C-1
General Commercial
across Rock Prairie
Road (Major Arterial)
Vacant, Riviera Day
Spa, Plazas at Rock
Prairie shopping
center across Rock
Prairie Road (Major
Arterial)
South Suburban
Commercial, General
Commercial and
Natural Areas –
Reserved
PDD Planned
Development District,
A-O Agricultural Open
Rural, Vacant
East General Suburban in
Growth Area III and
PDD Planned
Development District,
Rural, Vacant
104
General Commercial A-O Agricultural-
Open, A-P
Administrative
Professional
West Suburban
Commercial, General
Commercial and
Freeway
PDD Planned
Development District,
C-1 General
Commercial
Vacant and State
Highway 6
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation: 1977 and 1983
Zoning: Annexed as A-O Agricultural-Open. A-O to C-2 Commercial
Industrial in 1986; C-2 to R-5 Apartment/Medium Density in 1994;
and R-5 renamed to R-4 Multi-Family in 2003. Portions of the
larger Scott & White property along the State Highway 6 Frontage
Road and along Rock Prairie Road near its intersection with State
Highway 6 were zoned C-1 General Commercial in 2009.
Preliminary Plat: Scott & White Healthcare Subdivision (2011)
Site development: Largely vacant, with an on-site oil well
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 7
Rezoning for 1400, 1402, 1404, 1406, 1408, 1410,
1500, 1502, & 1504 Airline Drive
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an
amendment to Chapter 12, “Unified Development Ordinance”, Section 4.2, “Official Zoning
Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning 2.2257
acres located at 1400, 1402, 1404, 1406, 1408, 1410, 1500, 1502, & 1504 Airline Drive
from C-1 General Commercial and R-6 High Density Multi-Family to R-6 High Density Multi-
Family.
Recommendation(s): The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their
April 7, 2011 meeting and voted 5-0 to recommend approval. Staff also recommended
approval of the request.
Summary: The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for
zoning map amendments:
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is designated
Urban on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map. The Urban land
use designation is “generally for areas that should have a very intense level of
development activities. These areas will tend to consist of townhomes, duplexes, and
high-density apartments.” This area was included in the Central College Station
Neighborhood Plan that was adopted in June 2010. One of the strategies contained
within the Neighborhood Plan is to initiate rezoning of select areas where the current
zoning is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is one of
the rezoning areas, as identified in strategy CC3.2, which would rezone the C-1 General
Commercial area to R-6 High Density Multi-Family so that if redevelopment would occur
it would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed request is
consistent with Comprehensive Plan and this strategy identified in the Central College
Station Neighborhood Plan.
2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property
and with the character of the neighborhood: The proposed zoning is compatible
with the adjacent multi-family and duplex uses located on the same block. In addition,
this request will help preserve the character of the neighborhood by transitioning the
large scale commercial uses along Texas Avenue and Harvey Mitchell Parkway to the
single-family uses on the interior of the Southwood Valley neighborhood.
3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment: The subject
property was developed as multi-family apartments with the current zoning in 1977. At
that time, multi-family could develop in C-1 General Commercial with approval of a
Conditional Use Permit, which was obtained. With the adoption of the Unified
Development Ordinance in 2003, multi-family was not permitted in C-1 General
143
Commercial and the use became non-conforming. The proposed rezoning would allow
the use to become conforming again.
4. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: The
subject property is located on Airline Drive and is near a large commercial area. With
this location there is potential to develop non-residential uses, however, the most of the
property has a shallow depth of roughly 130 feet in depth, making non-residential uses
more difficult to develop. The subject property is developed as a multi-family use and a
small portion of it is already zoned R-6 High Density Multi-Family.
5. Marketability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by
the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment:
With most of the development being a non-conforming use and two zoning districts
located on the property, the applicant states that it is not eligible for certain types of
loan funding which can negatively impact the marketability of the property.
6. Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities
generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: Adequate facilities are
available for the existing multi-family use. A 12-inch water main exists along Airline
Drive and a 6-inch sanitary sewer main extends along the rear of the property. The
subject property is adjacent to Airline Drive which is not identified as a thoroughfare on
the Thoroughfare Plan but is constructed as a minor collector.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Background Information
2. Aerial & Small Area Map (SAM)
3. Draft Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes – April 7, 2011
4. Ordinance
144
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date: April 7, 2011
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: April 28, 2011
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s
Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
Southwood Valley Neighborhood Association
Property owner notices mailed: 29
Contacts in support: None at the time of staff report.
Contacts in opposition: None at the time of staff report.
Inquiry contacts: 1
ADJACENT LAND USES
Direction Comprehensive Zoning Land Use
North General Commercial,
across Airline Drive
C-1 General
Commercial
Post Office and Bank,
across Airline Drive
South Urban R-6 High Density
Multi-Family
Duplexes
East Urban R-6 High Density
Multi-Family
Multi-Family Units
West Urban R-6 High Density
Multi-Family
Multi-Family Units
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation: 1974
Zoning: C-1 General Commercial and R-6 High Density Multi-Family
(unknown); a Conditional Use Permit for multi-family units (1977)
Final Plat: 1976
Site development: Multi-family units developed in 1977.
145
146
147
April 7, 2011 Draft P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 1
DRAFT MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
April 7, 2011, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Scott Shafer, Mike Ashfield, Jodi Warner, Hugh
Stearns, and Bo Miles
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Doug Slack and Craig Hall
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Prochazka, Jason Schubert, Matt Robinson, Matthew
Hilgemeier, Joe Guerra, Carol Cotter, Molly Hitchcock, Lance Simms, Bob Cowell, Carla
Robinson, Carrie McHugh, Deborah Grace-Rosier, and Brittany Caldwell
1. Call meeting to order.
Chairman Shafer called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
Regular Agenda
8. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a request to rezone
2.2257 acres located at 1400, 1402, 1404, 1406, 1408, 1410, 1500, 1502, and 1504
Airline Drive from C-1 General Commercial and R-6 High Density Multi-Family to R-6
High Density Multi-Family. Case # 11-00500043 (JS) (Note: Final action on this item
is scheduled for the April 28, 2011 City Council Meeting--subject to change)
Senior Planner Schubert presented the rezoning request and recommended approval.
Chairman Shafer opened the public hearing.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Chairman Shafer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Ashfield motioned to recommend approval of the rezoning request.
Commissioner Stearns seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
12. Adjourn.
Commissioner Warner motioned to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
148
149
150
151
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 8
Rock Prairie Marketplace Rezoning
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, CNU-A, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an
amendment to Chapter 12, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning
Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by rezoning Lot 1,
Block 1 of the Rock Prairie Marketplace Subdivision, being 9.014 acres located at 2000 Rock
Prairie Road, from C-1 General Commercial to PDD Planned Development District.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Financially Sustainable City Providing Response to Core
Services and Infrastructure, Neighborhood Integrity, and Diverse Growing Economy.
Recommendation(s): The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their
April 21, 2011 meeting and the recommendation will be presented at the Council meeting.
Staff recommended approval of the request.
Summary: The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for
zoning map amendments:
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the
property as General Commercial. The General Commercial designation is for
concentrations of commercial activities that cater to both nearby residents and to the
larger community or region. The uses included in the proposal are those permitted with
the current C-1 General Commercial zoning and are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property
and with the character of the neighborhood: The proposed PDD includes land uses
permitted by the current C-1 General Commercial zoning on the property. As such, the
proposed zoning is generally compatible with the commercial portions of the Scott &
White PDD to the south and east. The property to the north, across Rock Prairie Road is
zoned C-1 General Commercial and is developed as the Plazas at Rock Prairie shopping
center. The proposed PDD is compatible with the commercial development in the area.
3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment: The
requested PDD includes C-1 General Commercial uses that the Comprehensive Plan
anticipates as being suitable for this area over the 20-year Plan horizon. The general
suitability of the land for development, including a discussion of the availability of water,
wastewater and transportation infrastructure is included in Review Criteria #6. No FEMA
floodplain exists on the property.
4. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: The
property is zoned C-1 General Commercial. General Commercial is a district that is
designed to provide goods and services to the general public and visitors. The uses
permitted in this district are generally dependant on good access and visibility. The
152
property has frontage on Rock Prairie Road and State Highway 6. The property is
generally suitable for C-1 uses.
5. Marketability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by
the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment:
The existing C-1 zoning allows the property to be marketed for general commercial
development. A market analysis of the subject property has not been provided to the
City; however, the C-1 district permits commercial retail, restaurant, service and office
uses, which are consistent with other uses found along the east side of State Highway 6.
6. Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities
generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: There are existing 18-inch
water lines along State Highway 6 south of the property and along Rock Prairie Road.
The 18-inch waterline along the State Highway 6 Frontage Road will need to be
extended to connect to the 18-inch waterline on Rock Prairie Road with the development
of the property, in accordance with the Water Master Plan.
There is an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line northeast of the property along Rock
Prairie Road that is available to serve the site. A sanitary sewer line will need to be
extended offsite to connect to this existing sewer line with the development of the
property.
The property is surrounded by State Highway 6 and Rock Prairie Road. State Highway 6
is classified on the City’s Thoroughfare Plan as Freeway/Expressway and Rock Prairie
Road is classified as a 4-Lane Major Arterial in this area, although it is currently
constructed to a rural collector standard. Scott & White Drive, a major collector
roadway, is planned south of the property.
REVIEW OF CONCEPT PLAN
The Concept Plan provides for general commercial development on the subject property.
Purpose & Intent Statement
The applicant has stated the following purpose of the PDD zoning “to enhance the possibility
of bringing a valuable retail and commercial development to the City of College Station,
Texas.”
Land Use
The PDD proposal includes all land uses permitted in the C-1 General Commercial zoning
district.
Access
Driveway locations are limited to those shown on the Concept Plan. The driveway shown to
the State Highway 6 South Frontage Road is subject to TxDOT review and approval.
Building Height
The applicant has proposed building heights in the range of 15 to 40 feet.
Base Zoning and Meritorious Modifications
The applicant proposes to utilize C-1 General Commercial as the base, underlying zoning
district for standards not identified in the PDD. At the time of site plan and plat, the project
will need to meet all applicable site, architectural and platting standards required by the
Unified Development Ordinance except where meritorious modifications are granted with the
PDD zoning. The applicant has requested the following meritorious modifications:
153
1. Section 7.2.I “Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Required” of the Unified
Development Ordinance
The applicant has proposed an off-street parking requirement of 1 parking space per 250
square feet of space for multi-tenant structures with no limitation on intense uses, and
no additional parking required for intense uses. Restaurant parking is proposed at 1
parking space per 100 square feet of area, regardless of whether the use has a drive-
thru.
2. Section 7.9.D.2 “Parking Screening” of the Unified Development Ordinance
The applicant requested that berms not be required for parking screening and has
proposed to screen parking areas with vegetation.
3. Section 3.5.E.2 “Site Plan Review Criteria” of the Unified Development
Ordinance –related to the provision of sidewalks
The applicant has requested that no sidewalk be required along State Highway 6
Frontage Road. No sidewalk is included with the Scott & White development for
sidewalks associated with this property to tie into.
4. Section 7.3.C.3 “Spacing of Driveway Access” and 7.3.C.4 “Freeway Frontage
Road Access and Location Requirements” of the Unified Development
Ordinance
The applicant has proposed two driveways to Scott & White drive and one to Rock Prairie
Road. Additionally, the applicant has proposed a driveway from the State Highway 6
Frontage Road, subject only to compliance with TxDOT requirements.
5. Section 7.4 “Signs” of the Unified Development Ordinance
The applicant has proposed two freestanding signs for the shopping center in the general
locations shown on the Concept Plan; one sign is proposed at the hard corner with a
maximum height of 20 feet tall and a maximum area not to exceed 200 square feet, and
a second freestanding sign at the southern end of the property, with a maximum height
of 30 feet tall and a maximum area not to exceed 300 square feet. Additionally, the
applicant has proposed five additional low profile signs along State Highway 6.
6. Section 8.2.E.3 “Street Projections” and 8.2.G “Blocks” of the Unified
Development Ordinance
The applicant has requested that with any future subdivision of the tract, the plat be
exempt from maximum block length requirements and that no Public Way be required to
be provided, subject to the provision of internal cross access among the lots/pads on the
property.
7. Section 7.12 “Traffic Impact Analysis” of the Unified Development Ordinance
The applicant has requested that a Traffic Impact Analysis not be required.
The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for PDD
Concept Plans:
1. The proposal will constitute an environment of sustained stability and will be in
harmony with the character of the surrounding area: The land uses permitted will
not change and are similar to those permitted on adjacent tracts and in the larger area.
The Concept Plan provides for Driveways to Rock Prairie Road and Scott & White Drive.
Driveways to the Frontage Road are subject to approval by TxDOT.
2. The proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan, and any subsequently adopted Plans, and will be
154
consistent with the intent and purpose of this Section: The Comprehensive Plan
describes future development of this tract as General Commercial. The Concept Plan
reflects the Community Character and Land Use designation.
3. The proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites
and will not adversely affect adjacent development: The abutting properties are
largely vacant, but were recently zoned PDD Planned Development District with the
Scott & White proposal. Adjacent property located to the south along State Highway 6
Frontage Road allows for general commercial uses. Adjacent PDD property to the east
includes uses similar (though slightly restricted) to General Commercial zoning and
includes increased aesthetic requirements. The land uses permitted on the subject
property will not change and are similar to those permitted on adjacent tracts and in the
larger area.
4. Every dwelling unit need not front on a public street but shall have access to a
public street directly or via a court, walkway, public area, or area owned by a
homeowners association: No dwelling units are proposed.
5. The development includes provision of adequate public improvements,
including, but not limited to, parks, schools, and other public facilities: None
proposed.
6. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare,
or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity: Besides the
requested meritorious modifications, the proposed development will meet all City
requirements. One of the meritorious modifications requested is to allow development of
the property without a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). A TIA was prepared for the PDD
zoning on the adjacent Scott & White property. Based on information contained in that
TIA, Staff is aware that significant transportation deficiencies will exist if this property
and the surrounding area is developed prior to upgrades to Rock Prairie Road and the
State Highway 6 overpass. Traffic mitigation will be needed in this area and the City
should continue progress toward this end.
7. The development will not adversely affect the safety and convenience of
vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian circulation in the vicinity, including traffic
reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use and other uses
reasonably anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses in
the area: The site will have access to the future Scott & White Drive and Rock Prairie
Road. If meeting State requirements and granted by TxDOT, access to the site may also
come from State Highway 6. Again, one of the meritorious modifications requested is to
allow development of the property without a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). Staff is
aware that significant transportation deficiencies will exist if this property and the
surrounding area is developed prior to upgrades to Rock Prairie Road and the State
Highway 6 overpass. Traffic mitigation will be needed in this area and the City should
continue progress toward this end.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Background Information
2. Small Area Map (SAM) & Aerial
3. Ordinance
155
BACKGROUND
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date: April 21, 2011
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: April 28, 2011
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s
Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
Wilshire HOA
Sandstone HOA
Foxfire HOA
Amberlake HOA
Chadwick HOA
Stonebridge HOA
Stonebridge Court HOA
Property owner notices mailed: 15
Contacts in support: None as of date of staff report
Contacts in opposition: None as of date of staff report
Inquiry contacts: None as of date of staff report
ADJACENT LAND USES
Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use
North Suburban
Commercial across
Rock Prairie Road
(Major Arterial)
C-1 General
Commercial across
Rock Prairie Road
(Major Arterial)
Plazas at Rock Prairie
shopping center
across Rock Prairie
Road (Major Arterial)
South General Commercial PDD Planned
Development District
Vacant
East Suburban
Commercial
PDD Planned
Development District
Vacant
West Freeway N/A State Highway 6
South
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation: 1977
Zoning: A-O Agricultural Open to C-1 General Commercial (1979 & 1982)
Final Plat: Rock Prairie Marketplace (2008)
Site development: The southern-most end of the property was previously developed
with a plumbing service office and associated parking. The site is
currently vacant.
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 5EXHIBIT "C"163
164
165
166
167
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 9
UDO Amendment for Corridor Overlay Signage Requirements
To: David Neely, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, CNU-A, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an
ordinance amendment to Chapter 12 “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 5.8.A(2)
“Corridor Overlay District, Signs” specifically related to sign requirements.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Goal III. Diverse Growing Economy – Promote business-
friendly attitude
Recommendation(s): At their meeting on April 7, 2011, the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the amendment. Staff recommended
approval of the Ordinance amendment.
Summary: Section 5.8.A “Corridor Overlay District” of the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) currently outlines the standards for development within the City’s Corridor Overlay.
Originally adopted in 1991, these standards were implemented as part of the City’s
University Drive Corridor Study. The sign requirements developed at the time were to
ensure harmonious signage that promoted an attractive University Drive as a primary
gateway into the community. Since the development of these standards, the City has
enacted a more comprehensive sign ordinance (2003) and non-residential architectural
standards making the Corridor Overlay District sign requirements less necessary to maintain
the visual appeal of the corridor.
This amendment will remove sign font and color limitations for signs in the overlay, except
for colors expressly prohibited by the City of College Station Color Palette. Currently, the
standard allows only two fonts and three colors be used on a sign.
The amendment will continue to maintain the height requirement that restricts the
maximum height of a sign in the overlay to the height of the adjacent building to keep with
the intent of the original ordinance of maintaining a sense of openness and continuity along
major gateway corridors and entry points into the City.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Draft Planning & Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
2. Ordinance
168
April 7, 2011 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
April 7, 2011, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Scott Shafer, Mike Ashfield, Jodi Warner, Hugh
Stearns, and Bo Miles
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Doug Slack and Craig Hall
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Prochazka, Jason Schubert, Matt Robinson, Matthew
Hilgemeier, Joe Guerra, Carol Cotter, Molly Hitchcock, Lance Simms, Bob Cowell, Carla
Robinson, Carrie McHugh, Deborah Grace-Rosier, and Brittany Caldwell
1. Call meeting to order.
Chairman Shafer called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
Regular Agenda
9. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to
the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 5.8.A.(2) “Corridor Overlay Districts,
Signs.” Case # 11-00500027 (MKH) (Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for
the April 28, 2011 City Council Meeting--subject to change)
Staff Planner Hilgemeier presented the amendment to the Unified Development
Ordinance regarding Corridor Overlay District sign requirements.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the amendment.
Chairman Shafer opened the public hearing.
Robert Rose, 505 University Drive, College Station, Texas, stated that it is good that the
City is trying to make the process easier.
Chairman Shafer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Stearns motioned to recommend approval of the amendment.
Commissioner Ashfield seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
12. Adjourn.
169
April 7, 2011 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
Commissioner Warner motioned to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
170
Article 5. District Purpose Statements and Supplemental Standards
Section 5.7 Design District Dimensional Standards
5-26
Unified Development Ordinance 03/07/11 City of College Station, Texas
Notes:
(A) Lot line construction on interior lots is allowed where access to the rear of the building is provided
on the site or by dedicated right-of-way or easement.
(B) Minimum/maximum setback from the back of any curb, including lots with single frontage, lots with
double frontage, and corner lots with multiple frontages.
(C) If the width of any public easement or right-of-way is in excess of the maximum setback, the
maximum setback will be measured from the edge of the public easement or right-of-way.
(D) Maximum setback from back of curb for University Drive is 25 feet, Wellborn is 35 feet and 100 feet
for South College.
(E) When café seating is between the café’s building and a right-of-way, the building may be setback a
maximum of 35 feet.
(F) This area calculation shall not include any lot area encumbered by required easements, setbacks,
sidewalks, detention, or area dedicated to civic features. The area of a porch or arcade fronting a
public street is included in the calculation of lot coverage.
(G) The 2-story requirement shall not apply to structures existing on or before April 2, 2006.
(H) Minimum front setback may be reduced to fifteen feet (15’) when approved rear access is provided
or when side yard or rear yard parking is provided.
5.7 Overlay Districts
In the event that an area is rezoned to apply overlay district provisions, this district shall apply to
all multi-family, commercial and industrial property, and where applicable, to single -family, duplex
or townhouse development. The underlying district establishes the permitted uses and shall
remain in full force, and the requirements of the overlay district are to be applied in addition to the
underlying use and site restrictions.
A. Corridor Overlay (OV) District
This district is established to enhance the image of gate ways and key entry points, major
corridors, and other areas of concern, as determined by the City Council, by maintaining a
sense of openness and continuity. The following supplemental standards shall apply to this
district:
1. Setbacks
All buildings will be set back 40 feet from the right-of-way. Where parking is located in
the front of the building, there shall be a front setback of 20 feet from the right -of-way
to the parking area and all drive aisles.
2. Signs
a. Signs shall include no more than three colors and two lettering (font) styles. At
least one of the colors must match the predominant colors of the building. For the
purposes of this section, black or white shall not be considered as colors unless
requested to be so by the applicant.Signs shall utilize only colors not expressly
prohibited by the City of College Station Unified Development Ordinance.
b. Freestanding signs shall be limited to the restrictions of Section 7.4 Signs, but
shall not exceed the height of the building.
3. Building Colors
Building colors shall be neutral and harmonious with the existing man-made or natural
environment, and only compatible accent colors shall be used. All colors shall be
approved by the Administrator. The applicant must provide elevation drawings and
color samples.
4. Special Restrictions for Retail Fuel Sales
In cases where the underlying zoning district permits gasoline service stations and a
station is proposed, the following restrictions shall apply:
a. Activities Restricted
1) No major emergency auto repair; and
171
172
173
174
April 28, 2011
Regular Agenda Item No. 10
UDO Amendment to the Non-Residential Architecture Standards
for Non-Residential Accessory Structures
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an
ordinance amendment to Chapter 12 “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 7.9.B.2
“Building Mass and Design,” of the College Station Code of Ordinances, specifically related
to architecture standards for non-residential accessory structures.
Recommendation(s): The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item at their
April 7, 2011 meeting and voted 5-0 to recommend approval. Staff also recommended
approval of the request.
Summary: At the January 11, 2011 Council meeting, Staff was given direction to pursue
various amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that was identified by a
subcommittee of the Mayor’s Forum on Development. This item is being brought forward in
connection with this effort.
UDO Section 7.9.B “Standards for All Non-Residential Structures” currently provides the
base standards for non-residential buildings subject to the City’s Non-Residential
Architecture Standards which were originally adopted in 2004. The application of
architectural relief design elements on smaller, accessory buildings often does not have the
effect of promoting good design, and can be burdensome when compared to the benefit.
The existing ordinance provides a list of qualifying architectural design elements and
requires that two different elements be used for every 45-foot section of a façade facing a
public right-of-way and two different elements for every 60-foot section of all other façades.
This amendment proposes to remove the requirement for architectural design elements for
freestanding structures if they are accessory to a primary use, if each façade is twenty-five
feet (25’) or less in width and the façades incorporates the same materials and colors of the
primary structure.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Draft Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes – April 7, 2011
2. Red-lined version of UDO Section 7.9.B.2 “Building Mass and Design”
3. Ordinance
175
April 7, 2011 Draft P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
DRAFT MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
April 7, 2011, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Scott Shafer, Mike Ashfield, Jodi Warner, Hugh
Stearns, and Bo Miles
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Doug Slack and Craig Hall
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Prochazka, Jason Schubert, Matt Robinson, Matthew
Hilgemeier, Joe Guerra, Carol Cotter, Molly Hitchcock, Lance Simms, Bob Cowell, Carla
Robinson, Carrie McHugh, Deborah Grace-Rosier, and Brittany Caldwell
1. Call meeting to order.
Chairman Shafer called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
Regular Agenda
10. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to
the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.9.B "Standards for All Non-Residential
Structures" related to architecture standards for non-residential accessory structures.
Case # 11-00500049 (JS) (Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for the April
28, 2011 City Council Meeting--subject to change)
Senior Planner Jason Schubert presented the amendment to the Unified Development
Ordinance regarding architecture standards for non-residential accessory structures.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the amendment.
Chairman Shafer opened the public hearing.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Chairman Shafer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Ashfield requested that the wording in the proposed amendment be
changed to read “where each façade is equal to or less” rather than "where all facades are
equal to or less".
176
April 7, 2011 Draft P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
Commissioner Stearns motioned to recommend approval of the amendment with
the condition that the changes to the wording be made that Commissioner Ashfield
requested. Commissioner Miles seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
12. Adjourn.
Commissioner Warner motioned to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0).
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
177
Article 7 General Development Standards
7.9 Non-Residential Architectural Standards
B. Standards for All Non-Residential Structures
2. Building Mass and Design
In order to provide visual interest, the first two (2) stories of any façade facing a public
right-of-way shall use architectural relief every forty-five horizontal feet (45’) by
incorporating a minimum of two (2) different design elements within each forty-five
foot (45’) section from the options below. All other façades shall incorporate a minimum
of two (2) different design elements within each sixty-foot (60’) section as described
above. Wall sections less than forty-five feet (45’) or sixty feet (60’) respectively, shall
also be required to provide the two (2) different design elements., except that
freestanding structures that are accessory to a primary use, where each façade is equal
to or less than twenty-five horizontal feet (25’) in width, and where each façade
incorporates the same building materials and colors as the primary structure, are not
required to provide architectural relief elements.
a. Canopies, permanent decorative awnings, or windows accompanied by overhangs;
b. Wall plane projections or recessions with a minimum of four foot (4’) depth;
c. Pilasters or columns;
d. Recessed entries, stoops, porches, or arcades;
e. Balconies that extend from the building; or
f. Boxed or bay windows;
g. Decorative stormwater management initiatives physically integrated with the
building, as approved by the Administrator. An example is shown below.
Picture used with permission from the City of Portland, Environmental Services (2008)
178
As represented above, on buildings three (3) stories or less, the horizontal line of a flat
roof (or parapet) along any façade facing a public right-of-way shall vary by a minimum
of two feet (2’) feet up or down so that no more than sixty-six percent (66%) of the
roofline is on the same elevation.
Roof or Parapet
Max. 66 % of length
Min. 2'
179
180
181
182