Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/19/2020 - Agenda Packet - Planning & Zoning CommissionCollege Station, TX Meeting AgendaPlanning and Zoning Commission Regular 1101 Texas Ave, College Station, TX 77840 The City Council may or may not attend the Planning & Zoning Commission Regular Meeting. March 19, 2020 6:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers College Station, TX Page 1   1.Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, Consider Absence Request.       2.Hear Visitors.    At this time, the Chairperson will open the floor to visitors wishing to address the Commission on  issues not already scheduled on tonight's agenda. The visitor presentations will be limited to three  minutes in order to accommodate everyone who wishes to address the Commission and to allow  adequate time for completion of the agenda items. The Commission will receive the information, ask  city staff to look into the matter, or will place the matter on a future agenda for discussion. (A  recording is made of the meeting; please give your name and address for the record.)    3.Consent Agenda    All matters listed under the Consent Agenda, are considered routine by the Commission and will be  enacted by one motion. These items include preliminary plans and final plats, where staff has found  compliance with all minimum subdivision regulations. All items approved by Consent are approved  with any and all staff recommendations. Since there will not be separate discussion of these items,  citizens wishing to address the Commission regarding one or more items on the Consent Agenda  may address the Commission at this time as well. If any Commissioner desires to discuss an item on  the Consent Agenda it may be moved to the Regular Agenda for further consideration.  3.1.Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. Attachments:1.March 5 2020 3.2.Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Final Plat for Indian Lakes  Subdivision, Phase XXXV on approximately 15 acres, generally located approximately 300 feet  from the southwest corner of Anasazi Bluff Drive and Sacred Arrow Drive, in the College Station  Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. Case #FP2017-000036  Sponsors:Laura Gray   Attachments:1.Staff Report 2.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map 3.Final Plat 3.3.Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Final Plat for Mission Ranch Phase  302 on approximately 15.8 acres generally located at 3770 Rock Prairie Road West. Case  #FP2019-000019  Sponsors:Rachel Lazo   Attachments:1.Staff Report 2.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map 3.Final Plat Page 1 of 39 Planning and Zoning Commission  Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Page 2 March 19, 2020   4.Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent  Agenda by Commission action.       5.Informational     5.1.Discussion of new development applications submitted to the City.       New Development Link: www.cstx.gov/newdev 5.2.Presentation and discussion regarding an update on economic development efforts. Sponsors:Aubrey Nettles 5.3.Presentation and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming Meetings: Thursday, March 26, 2020 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 5:00  P.M. & Regular 6:00 P.M. (Liaison - Osborne) Thursday, April 2, 2020 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ 6:00 P.M. Thursday, April 9, 2020 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 5:00  P.M. & Regular 6:00 P.M. (Liaison - Mirza) Thursday, April 16, 2020 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers 6:00 P.M. 5.4.Presentation and discussion regarding an update on items heard.  An Ordinance Amendment amending Appendix A, "Unified Development Ordinance,"  Section 6.5, "Accessory Uses," and Section 11.2, "Defined Terms," relating to  impervious cover. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on February 20,  2020, and voted (4-3) to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on  March 9, 2020, and voted (4-2) to approve the request.  An Ordinance Amendment amending Appendix A, "Unified Development Ordinance,"  Section 3.3, "Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning)," Section 7.2.D, "Required Yards  (Setbacks)," and Section 8.3.H.2, "Platting and Replatting within Older Residential  Subdivisions" regarding the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay (NCO). The Planning  and Zoning Commission heard this item on March 5, 2020, and voted (6-1) to  recommend approval with a condition that one or two members of the petition committee  have to be residents of the subdivision. The City Council heard this item on March 9,  2020, and voted (6-0) to approve the request without the recommended condition. A Rezoning for approximately 15 acres generally located at Creek Meadow Boulevard  and Victoria Avenue, from PDD Planned Development District to PDD Planned  Development District. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on February  20, 2020, and voted (7-0) to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on  March 9, 2020, and voted (6-0) to approve the request. 5.5.Discussion and review regarding the following meetings: Design Review Board, BioCorridor  Board, Comprehensive Plan Evaluation Committee Page 2 of 39 Planning and Zoning Commission  Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Page 3 March 19, 2020   6.Regular Agenda     6.1.Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Final Plat for  Edelweiss Business Center Block 1, Lot 9R which includes a replat of Edelweiss Business  Center Block 1, Lot 9, on approximately 2.5 acres located at 12925 FM 2154. Case  #FPCO2020-000003  Sponsors:Rachel Lazo   Attachments:1.Staff Report 2.Vicinity Aerial and Small Area Maps 3.Final Plat 6.2.Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending  the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Thoroughfare Plan in the College Station  Extraterritorial Jurisdiction by modifying the alignment of a future minor arterial to the northeast  between Koppe Bridge Road and Clay Pit Road and by removing a future minor collector  between the Meadow Creek Subdivision and Minter Springs Road. Case #CPA2020-000001  (Note: Final action on this item will be considered at the April 9, 2020 City Council Meeting -  Subject to change.)  Sponsors:Jason Schubert   Attachments:1.Staff Report 2.Vicinity Map 3.Thoroughfare Plan Amendment Exhibit 4.Background Information 6.3.Public Hearing, presentation, discussion and possible action regarding an Impact Fee Credit Policy.  (Note: Final action on this item will be considered at the April 9, 2020 City Council Meeting - Subject to  change).  Sponsors:Carol Cotter  Attachments:1.Staff Memo 2.Draft Credit Policy   7.Adjourn       8.Discussion and possible action on future agenda items.    A Planning & Zoning Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A  statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any  deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent  meeting.  The Planning and Zoning Commission may adjourn into Executive Session to consider any item listed  on the agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion.  Page 3 of 39 Planning and Zoning Commission  Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Page 4 March 19, 2020 I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue,  College Station, Texas, on March 13, 2020 at 5:00 p.m.      City Secretary   This  building  is  wheelchair  accessible.  Persons  with  disabilities  who  plan  to  attend  this meeting    and   who   may   need   accommodations,   auxiliary   aids,   or   services   such   as interpreters,   readers,  or  large  print  are  asked  to  contact  the  City  Secretary’s  Office  at  (979) 764-3541,  TDD  at  1-800-735-2989,  or  email  adaassistance@cstx.gov  at  least  two  business days  prior  to  the  meeting  so  that  appropriate  arrangements  can  be  made.  If  the  City  does not  receive  notification  at  least  two  business  days  prior  to  the  meeting,  the  City  will  make  a reasonable  attempt to provide the necessary accommodations. Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun."Pursuant  to  Section  30.07,  Penal  Code  (Trespass  by  License  Holder  with  an  Openly Carried     Handgun)     A     Person     Licensed     under     Subchapter     H,     Chapter     411,  Government   Code   (Handgun   Licensing   Law),   may   not   enter   this   Property   with   a Handgun that is Carried Openly."  Codigo Penal § 30.07. Traspasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia.“Conforme  a  la  Seccion  30.07 del  codigo  penal  (traspasar  portando  armas  de  mano al    aire   libre   con   licencia),   personas   con   licencia   bajo   del   Sub-Capitulo   H,   Capitulo 411,  Codigo  de  Gobierno  (Ley  de  licencias  de  arma  de  mano),  no  deben  entrar  a  esta propiedad portando arma de mano al aire libre.” Page 4 of 39 March 5, 2020 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 7 MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 5, 2020 6:00 p.m. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dennis Christiansen, Jeremy Osborne, Bill Mather, Elizabeth Cunha, Joe Guerra, Paul Gunnels, Bobby Mirza CITY STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Prochazka, Molly Hitchcock, Carol Cotter, Erika Bridges, Anthony Armstrong, Alma Guerra, Jason Schubert, Jade Broadnax, Alyssa Halle-Schramm, Rachel Lazo, Jesse DiMeolo, Treston Rodriguez, Leslie Whitten, Donald Harmon, Debbie Stickles, Caroline Ask, Venessa Garza, William Anderson, and Kristen Hejny 1. Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, Consider Absence Request. Chairman Christiansen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2.Hear Visitors No visitors spoke. 3.Consent Agenda 3.1 Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes. February 20, 2020 3.2 Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Final Plat for Midtown Reserve Phase 103 on approximately 1.16 acres generally located at the southwest corner of Town Lake Drive and McQueeny Drive. Case #FP2020-000005 Commissioner Osborne motioned to approve Consent Agenda with item #3.1 as amended. Commissioner Guerra seconded the motion, motion passed (7-0). Regular Agenda 4. Consideration, discussion and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission Action. No items were removed from the Consent Agenda. 5.Informational 5.1 Discussion of new development applications submitted to the City. New Development Link: www.cstx.gov/newdev Page 5 of 39 March 5, 2020 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 7 There was no discussion. 5.2 Discussion of Minor and Amending Plats approved by Staff. Final Plat ~ Minor Plat ~ Carter Lake Subdivision; Block 2, Lot 8R ~ Case #FP2019-000032 Final Plat ~ Minor Plat ~ Emerald Ridge Estates Phase II Block 1, Lot 1 ~ Case #FP2019-000033 There was no discussion. 5.3 Presentation and discussion regarding the 2019 P&Z Plan of Work. Long Range Planning Administrator Halle-Schramm presented updates on the Plan of Work. The Commission moved to agenda item #5.5. 5.4 Presentation and discussion regarding Engineering updates including the B/CS Unified Design Guidelines and College Station’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit. Assistant City Engineer Bridges opened the presentation explaining to the Commission that the MS4 Permit is updated every five years. Graduate Engineer I Stickles and Environmental Compliance & Recycling Manager Ask presented updates on the B/CS Unified Design Guidelines and MS4 permit to the Commission. Environmental Compliance and Recycling Manager Ask spoke on the current Storm Water Management Program. Graduate Engineer I Stickles presented the timeline of the program status with the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ). Commissioner Mather asked for the time allowance in which the TCEQ is to respond to the City in regards to a technical review. Graduate Engineer I Stickles stated that they do not have a required timeline in which to respond. Commissioner Guerra asked for a scenario in which TCEQ would not renew the permit. Graduate Engineer I Stickles stated that staff is not aware of such a situation, but TCEQ would work with the applicant to renew the permit. Chairman Christiansen asked if all cities are required to participate in the program. Graduate Engineer I Stickles stated that based upon census population sizes, different cities meet different program criteria. Chairman Christiansen asked if there was a minimum city size that would waive the requirement for program participation. Page 6 of 39 March 5, 2020 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 7 Environmental Compliance and Recycling Manager Ask stated that staff is not aware of any criteria that would give the city ability to be waived from the MS4 program. Commissioner Mather asked for the breakdown of staff commitment to the MS4 program. Graduate Engineer I Stickles stated that Planning & Development Services is the coordinator for the program, but information and research are required from and distributed through several departments within the City, such as the Water, Public Works, and Parks & Recreation departments. Commissioner Guerra asked with collection of data as it pertains to development, is developer using a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3). Environmental Compliance and Recycling Manager Ask stated that as for construction there are two minimum control measures contractors are required to follow; construction site stormwater runoff control and post-construction stormwater management in new development and redevelopment. There was general discussion amongst the Commission. Item #5.5 was heard prior to item #5.4. 5.5 Presentation and discussion regarding an update from the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) on the upcoming widening of SH 6 between SH 21 and SH 40. Doug Marino, TxDOT, presented updates on the SH 6 Central Expansion Project to the Commission. Commissioner Mather asked if the Diverging Diamond Intersection (DDI) that proven to move traffic as expected. Mr. Marino stated that the DDI has fewer phases in traffic signals. Mr. Marino explained that this means less red light time and more green light time, which leads to traffic moving through the intersection quicker. Commissioner Cunha asked for the age of the infrastructure along South Texas Avenue. Mr. Marino stated that this infrastructure was built in 1950’s or 1960’s. Commissioner Osborne asked if the DDI was shown to be more efficient. Mr. Marino stated that the DDI allows fewer opportunities for conflict, and more efficiency allows for more green light time. Commissioner Guerra asked in regards to main lanes, how much more capacity could be expected. Mr. Marino estimates that about 90,000 vehicles a day drive through these areas. Mr. Marino further stated that in some spots, extra main lanes will accommodate an increase in traffic. Commissioner Guerra asked in regards to greater clearance for freight traffic, will main lanes be lower because of widened bridges. Page 7 of 39 March 5, 2020 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 7 Mr. Marino confirmed that main lanes will be lowered, bridges may be replaced or repaired, and it is possible that bridges may be replaced/raised completely. Commissioner Guerra asked if the frontage roads will contain curb and gutter. Mr. Marino confirmed that frontage roads will contain curb and gutter. Chairman Christiansen asked in regards to freight clearance and having to lower pavement, will the roads still maintain two lanes of traffic in each direction. Mr. Marino confirmed that two lanes of traffic in each direction will still exist. Mr. Marino further clarified the addition of new travel lanes on the inside to maintain traffic, and then the outside roadways will be lowered to match inside lanes. 5.6 Presentation and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming Meetings: Monday, March 9, 2020 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 5:00 P.M. & Regular 6:00 P.M. (Liaison – Mather) Thursday, March 19, 2020 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Special Workshop 4:00 P.M. & Regular 6:00 P.M. Thursday, March 26, 2020 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 5:00 P.M. & Regular 6:00 P.M. (Liaison – Osborne) Thursday, April 2, 2020 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ 6:00 P.M. There was no discussion. 5.7 Discussion and review regarding the following meetings: Design Review Board, BioCorridor Board, Comprehensive Plan Evaluation Committee. There was general discussion. 6.Regular Agenda 6.1 Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 3.3 “Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning),” Section 4.1 “Establishment of Districts,” Section 5.11 “Single-Family Overlay Districts.” Section 7.2.D “Required Yards (Setbacks),” and Section 8.3.H.2 “Platting and Replatting within Older Residential Subdivisions” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, regarding the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay (NCO). Case #ORDA2019-000014. (Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for the March 9, 2020 City Council Meeting – Subject to change). Staff Planner Broadnax presented the Ordinance Amendment to the Commission, recommending approval. Chairman Christiansen asked in regards to the ordinance background, how extensive was the feedback, and what kind of feedback was received by staff. Page 8 of 39 March 5, 2020 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 7 Staff Planner Broadnax stated that the bulk of the feedback came from the seminar supper. Ms. Broadnax stated that the feedback was substantial to format changes making it easier to read, and clarifying existing terms. Commissioner Mather asked about the required yard setback as part of toolbox, redline work. Mr. Mather inquired if the city’s Legal Department had reviewed the redlines. Staff Planner Broadnax stated that this information was original to the NCO, and the Legal Department had reviewed the information. Commissioner Osborne asked in regards to the maximum lot coverage if it will apply to that option in the tool kit. Staff Planner Broadnax confirmed. Commissioner Osborne asked in regards to demolition permits added to the purpose section, if this to clarify or expand applicability in an overlay district. Staff Planner Broadnax stated that this was to clarify. Commissioner Osborne asked in regards to the petition committee, if it can be comprised of individuals that do not currently reside within the subject subdivision. Staff Planner Broadnax confirmed that the committee can be comprised of non-residents. Ms. Broadnax further explained that this was added to allow additional flexibility. Director of Planning & Development Services Prochazka stated that this language was added to allow more flexibility based on direction from citizens, City Council and the Commission. Commissioner Osborne suggested adding a requirement that a certain number of people reside in the subdivision. Commissioner Guerra expressed concern with the word “consensus”. Mr. Guerra requested a definition of consensus, asked if the verification process can be done on the fly, if staff can be present at neighborhood meetings, and changes within the verification process and signature process. Director of Planning & Development Services Prochazka stated that petition numbers will be reported to the Commission and City Council. Chairman Christiansen opened the public hearing. Fred Dupriest, College Station, CSAN, spoke in support of the NCO. Mr. Dupriest cited concerns with the required third meeting, requesting that the meeting be dropped. Mr. Dupriest also cited some concerns for the petitioning and revoting processes. Chairman Christiansen asked other than removing the third meeting, does the ordinance and booklet make the process easier to understand. Mr. Dupriest stated that the booklet and ordinance will help avoid a lot of conflict. Page 9 of 39 March 5, 2020 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 7 Commissioner Mather asked for thoughts in regards to not requiring the process driven from a subdivision member. Mr. Dupriest stated that a volunteer from another subdivision may be a good thing. Mr. Dupriest stated that if subdivision residents do not want someone to work with, they will not go with it. Chairman Christiansen closed the public hearing. Commissioner Osborne motioned to recommend approval of the Ordinance Amendment with the condition that states that 1 or 2 members from the subdivision must be required. Commissioner Mather seconded the motion. There was general discussion. Commissioner Mather expressed concerns with specifics that do not require a subdivision homeowner. Commissioner Gunnels expressed that he sees no value in having outside influence in the process. Mr. Gunnels stated that the process needs invested occupants. There was general discussion amongst the Commission. The motion passed (6-1) with Commissioner Cunha voting in opposition. 6.2 Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by changing the zoning district boundaries from R Rural to PDD Planned Development District on approximately 7 acres of land generally located at 14565 and 14575 FM 2154. Case #REZ2019-000018 (Note: Final action on this item will be considered at the March 26, 2020 City Council meeting – subject to change.) Senior Planner Lazo presented the Rezoning to the Commission, recommending approval. Commissioner Guerra asked for staff or the applicant to describe how the drainage issues are being rectified. Applicant, Deven Doyen, Schultz Engineering, stated that they will follow the City’s ordinances, restrictions and design guidelines in place. Mr. Doyen also confirmed that the applicant and staff are aware of current drainage issues and plan to address the issues with the site plan submittal. Commissioner Guerra asked if the development would include a detention pond. Mr. Doyen confirmed that the development will include detention pond. Commissioner Guerra spoke in support of the development uses as they pertain to trip generation. Mr. Guerra expressed concerns with driveway spacing, and stated that a right turn deceleration lane may be required by TxDOT. Additionally, Mr. Guerra recommended a signal left turn lane into the property. Page 10 of 39 March 5, 2020 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 7 Commissioner Gunnels asked if the detention pond will serve only the subject development, or also the adjacent development. Mr. Doyen stated that the detention pond will serve this development only. Developer, Robert Horton, Fort Worth, was available to elaborate on the detention pond. Commissioner Guerra requested the developer consider putting a gateway sign within the property. Senior Planner Lazo clarified that within the implementation of the Community Character portion of the Wellborn Community Plan, that capital funds and grant money will bring unified signage. Chairman Christiansen opened the public hearing. Mike McCleary, College Station, inquired about the size of the proposed detention pond. Mr. Doyen stated that the pond has not been designed at the time, but will take in to account downstream conditions. Chairman Christiansen closed the public hearing. Commissioner Guerra motioned to recommend approval of the Rezoning. Commissioner Gunnels seconded the motion. The motion passed (7-0). Discussion and possible action on future agenda items – A Planning & Zoning Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. Commissioner Guerra inquired about a previous request for information in regards to redevelopment in Sulphur Springs. Director of Planning & Development Prochazka confirmed that this information will be presented at the Commissions March 19, 2020 Special Workshop Meeting. 7. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Approved: Attest: ______________________________________________________________Dennis Christiansen, Chairman Kristen Hejny, Admin Support SpecialistPlanning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Services Page 11 of 39 Planning & Zoning Commission March 19, 2020 Scale 8 lots and HOA Common Area on 15.07 acres Location Generally located approximately 300 feet from the southwest corner of Anasazi Bluff Drive and Sacred Arrow Drive, in the College Station Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. Property Owner Smiling Mallard Development, LLC Applicant Smiling Mallard Development, LLC Project Manager Laura Gray, AICP, CFM, Senior Planner lgray@cstx.gov Project Overview This final plat will add 8 estate lots ranging in size from approximately 1 acre to 2.3 acres to the Indian Lakes Subdivision. The final plat also includes 1.69 acres of right-of-way dedication, .468 acres of HOA Common Area, and Conservation Easement. Preliminary Plan Approved September 7, 2017 Public Infrastructure 974 linear feet of streets and waterlines Parkland Dedication Not required as this area is vested to the Indian Lakes Subdivision Master Plan. Traffic Impact Analysis Not required Compliant with Comprehensive Plan (including Master Plans) and Unified Development Ordinance Yes Compliant with Subdivision Regulations Yes Staff Recommendation Approval Supporting Materials 1.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map 2.Final Plat Final Plat for Indian Lakes Phase XXXV FP2017-000036 Page 12 of 39 Page 13 of 39 Page 14 of 39 Page 15 of 39 INDIAN LAKESSUBDIVISION“”‐‐‐‐“”’’’’Page 16 of 39 Planning & Zoning Commission March 19, 2020 Scale 19 lots on 15.8 acres Location 3770 Rock Prairie Road West Property Owner BCS Mission Ranch, LP Applicant Schultz Engineering, LLC Project Manager Rachel Lazo, Senior Planner rlazo@cstx.gov Project Overview This plat will establish lots within the Mission Ranch Subdivision. This phase of the development will consist of 19 residential lots, and 3 common areas. This is the sixth phase to be platted, with 17 phases remaining, 3 of which are currently under construction. Preliminary Plan The northern portion of the subdivision is part of the Great Oaks Subdivision and is vested to 2007 regulations; the southern half of this development is subject to current subdivision regulations. A Preliminary Plan was approved in 2014 and 2015 granting waivers to block length, sidewalk, single-family parking standards for platting and cluster development requirements. A revised Preliminary Plan was approved in 2017, which approved a waiver request for additional block lengths, included the addition of a tract zoned for multi-family and excluded property sold to the school district. Public Infrastructure Total linear feet proposed: 1,075 Streets 234 Sanitary Sewer Lines 1,182 Water Lines 1,231 Storm Sewer Lines Parkland Dedication A portion of this property is vested to a Master Plan that began in the ETJ. Therefore parkland dedication fee-in-lieu for 18 single-family lots, totaling $22,698, will be due prior to filing of the plat. Traffic Impact Analysis N/A Compliant with Comprehensive Plan (including Master Plans) and Unified Development Ordinance Yes Compliant with Subdivision Regulations Yes Staff Recommendation Approval Supporting Materials 1.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map 2.Final Plat Final Plat for Mission Ranch Phase 302 FP2019-000019 Page 17 of 39 Page 18 of 39 Page 19 of 39 Page 20 of 39 COOPER COURTCOMAL RIDGE DRIVECoope r Cou r t Duval River Court4BLOCK 17 5 67 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 BLOCK 17 HOA COMMONAREA 12HOA COMMON AREA 13 Cooper Court HOA COMMONAREA 13AAND PRIVATEDRAINAGEEASEMENT BLOCK 17 1 BLOCK 17 2 3 23 BLOCK 17 COMMON AREA 4 H.O.A.Cm.A. 2FF = 282.0'FF = 282.0' FF = 282.0' FF = 282.0' FF = 282.0' FF = 285.0' FF = 286.5'FF = 288.0'FF = 290.0'FF = 291.0'FF = 292.0'FF = 293.0'FF = 293.0'FF = 293.0' 0.375 AC. 0.451 AC. 1.050 AC.1.430 AC. 0.408 AC. 0.404 AC. 0.553 AC. 3.005 AC. 1.669 AC. 0.743 AC. 1.027 AC. 0.333 AC.0.279 AC.0.280 AC.0.278 AC.0.287 AC.0.301 AC.0.315 AC.0.328 AC. TBPE NO. 12327911 SOUTHWEST PKWY E. College Station, Texas 77840  (979) 764-3900 ENGINEER: FINAL PLAT MISSION RANCH SUBDIVISION PHASE 302 15.800 ACRES JAMES ERWIN SURVEY, A-119 COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS 19 LOTS BLOCK 17, LOTS 4-22 COMMON AREAS 12, 13 & 13A SURVEYOR: Brad Kerr, RPLS No. 4502 Kerr Surveying, LLC 409 N. Texas Ave.Bryan, TX 77803 (979) 268-3195 SCALE 1'' = 60'JULY, 2019 OWNER/DEVELOPER: BCS MISSION RANCH, LP 9955 Barker Cypress Rd., Suite 250 Cypress, TX 77433 (979) 260-7000 LEGEND LEGEND F EA TH E R RUNHOLLEMAN DR IVE S .DEACON DRIVE W.GREAT OAK DR.ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W. VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE MISSION RANCH DR. METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF ALL THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND LYING AND BEING SITUATED IN THE JAMESERWIN LEAGUE, ABSTRACT NO. 119, COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID TRACT BEING A PORTION OF THEREMAINDER OF A CALLED 270.800 ACRE TRACT AS DESCRIBED BY A DEED TO BCS MISSION RANCH, LP RECORDED INVOLUME 13842, PAGE 179 OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID TRACT BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A ½ INCH IRON ROD WITH PLASTIC CAP MARKED “MCCLURE” FOUND ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 23, BLOCK17, MISSION RANCH SUBDIVISION, PHASE 301, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 14856, PAGE 162 OF THEOFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS, MARKING A NORTHWEST CORNER OF COMMON AREA 2, MISSION,RANCH SUBDIVISION, PHASE 101, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 14856, PAGE 163 OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLICRECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. COORDINATES AND BEARING SYSTEM SHOWN HEREIN ARE NAD83 (TEXAS STATEPLANE CENTRAL ZONE GRID NORTH) BASED ON THE PUBLISHED COORDINATES OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION CONTROLMONUMENT CS94-117 (Y:10191793.14, X:3559913.46) AND AS ESTABLISHED BY GPS OBSERVATION. DISTANCES SHOWN HEREINARE GRID DISTANCES. TO DETERMINE SURFACE DISTANCES MULTIPLY BY A COMBINED SCALE FACTOR OF 1.00009959277366(CALCULATED USING GEOID12B); THENCE: ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID REMAINDER OF 270.800 ACRE TRACT AND SAID COMMON AREA 2 FOR THEFOLLOWING CALLS: S 13° 40' 39" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 385.57 FEET; S 08° 40' 08" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.01 FEET; S 09° 48' 31" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 104.79 FEET; S 28° 03' 44" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 138.49 FEET; S 47° 03' 13" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 93.98 FEET; THENCE: THROUGH SAID REMAINDER OF 270.800 ACRE TRACT FOR THE FOLLOWING CALLS: S 45° 18' 33" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 161.40 FEET; S 75° 47' 06" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 59.58 FEET; S 22° 21' 10" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.45 FEET; S 60° 58' 43" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 46.22 FEET; N 81° 21' 11" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.18 FEET; N 41° 04' 26" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 78.98 FEET; N 70° 30' 54" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.75 FEET; S 47° 56' 53" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 101.46 FEET; S 66° 02' 18" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 124.81 FEET; S 52° 36' 52" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 143.35 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST LINE OF GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1,ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 4150, PAGE 295 OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOSCOUNTY, TEXAS; THENCE: ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID REMAINDER OF 270.800 ACRE TRACT AND GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION, PHASE1, FOR THE FOLLOWING CALLS: N 57° 48' 51" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 32.64 FEET; N 25° 58' 33" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 47.10 FEET; N 49° 49' 51" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.93 FEET; N 35° 01' 35" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 70.55 FEET; N 44° 34' 19" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 91.37 FEET; N 03° 09' 31" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 72.75 FEET; N 44° 08' 14" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.35 FEET; S 82° 55' 38" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 46.07 FEET; S 64° 56' 53" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.47 FEET; S 70° 52' 44" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 54.66 FEET; S 16° 42' 56" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 34.50 FEET; S 79° 58' 05" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 72.33 FEET; S 39° 32' 39" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 20.31 FEET; S 15° 52' 02" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 28.62 FEET; S 57° 12' 31" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 22.06 FEET; N 79° 55' 44" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 74.11 FEET; S 53° 07' 35" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 38.96 FEET; N 48° 30' 55" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.36 FEET; N 17° 56' 38" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.66 FEET; N 49° 51' 20" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 89.37 FEET; N 76° 40' 20" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 78.87 FEET; N 41° 44' 27" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 473.92 FEET; N 45° 48' 50" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 145.42 FEET; N 28° 46' 48" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 108.58 FEET; S 87° 33' 45" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 119.89 FEET; N 24° 00' 20" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 42.45 FEET; N 73° 27' 00" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 97.67 FEET; N 41° 30' 09" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 135.33 FEET; N 08° 40' 42" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.07 FEET TO A COMMON CORNER OF SAID GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1, ANDMISSION RANCH SUBDIVISION, PHASE 301 (PLAT 14856/162); THENCE:ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID REMAINDER OF 207.800 ACRE TRACT AND MISSION RANCH SUBDIVISION,PHASE 301, FOR THE FOLLOWING CALLS: N 87° 04' 50" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 130.55 FEET; S 62° 36' 46" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 296.20 FEET TO A ½ INCH IRON ROD WITH PLASTIC CAP MARKED “MCCLURE” FOUND; N 09° 29' 06" E ALONG THE EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF COOPER COURT (50' R.O.W.) FOR A DISTANCE OF 149.98 FEET; S 80° 30' 54" E ACROSS COOPER COURT FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.99 FEET; N 09° 29' 06" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF COOPER COURT FOR A DISTANCE OF 44.36 FEET; S 80° 30' 54" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 162.19 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING CONTAINING 15.800 ACRES OF LAND ASSURVEYED ON THE GROUND.F:\_________19-716 Mission Ranch Subdivision - Phase 302\FINAL PLAT\Mission Ranch Ph 302.dwg, FINAL PLATPage 21 of 39 Planning & Zoning Commission March 19, 2020 Scale 1 lot on approximately 2.5 acres Location 12925 FM 2154 Property Owner Suresh Kumar Applicant Schultz Engineering, LLC Project Manager Rachel Lazo, Senior Planner rlazo@cstx.gov Project Overview The property is zoned GC General Commercial and SC Suburban Commercial and is a part of the larger Edelweiss Business Center development. This replat proposes to combine one 1.5 acre lot with a 0.95 acre tract. Preliminary Plan N/A Public Infrastructure N/A Parkland Dedication N/A Traffic Impact Analysis N/A Compliant with Comprehensive Plan (including Master Plans) and Unified Development Ordinance Yes Compliant with Subdivision Regulations Yes Staff Recommendation Approval Supporting Materials 1.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map 2.Final Plat Final Plat for Edelweiss Business Center Block 1, Lot 9R Including a Replat of Edelweiss Business Center Block 1 Lot 9 FPCO2020-000003 Page 22 of 39 Page 23 of 39 Page 24 of 39 Page 25 of 39 LOT 9R2.479 AC. BLOCK 1 WELLBORN ROAD ( FM 2154) REMAINDER OF LOT 91.532 AC. BLOCK 1 0.947 AC.15394/285 WELLBORN ROAD ( FM 2154) TBPE NO. 12327911 SOUTHWEST PKWY E. College Station, Texas 77840  (979) 764-3900 ENGINEER: FINAL PLAT EDELWEISS BUSINESS CENTER BLOCK 1, LOT 9R 2.479 ACRES BEING A REPLAT OFEDELWEISS BUSINESS CENTER BLOCK 1, LOT 9 5431/50 INCLUDING 0.947 ACRE UNPLATTED TRACT ROBERT STEVENSON SURVEY, A-54 COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS SURVEYOR: Brad Kerr, RPLS No. 4502 Kerr Surveying, LLC 409 N. Texas Ave.Bryan, TX 77803 (979) 268-3195 TBPELS FIRM # 10018500 SCALE 1'' =40'FEBRUARY, 2020 OWNER/DEVELOPER: SURESH KUMAR 2445 STONE CASTLE CIRCLE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 (979) 219-2341 LEGEND LEGEND ORIGINAL PLAT 5431/50 REPLAT VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE W E L L B O R N R O A D N. GRAHAM ROADROCK PRAIRIE ROADED E L W E I S S A V E N U E Page 26 of 39 March 19, 2020 Regular Agenda Comprehensive Plan Amendment Thoroughfare Plan Amendments – Thousand Oaks Ranch To:Planning & Zoning Commission From:Jason Schubert, AICP, Transportation Planning Coordinator Agenda Caption: Public hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Thoroughfare Plan in the College Station extra- territorial jurisdiction by modifying the alignment of a future minor arterial to the northeast between Koppe Bridge Road and Clay Pit Road and by removing a future minor collector between the Meadow Creek Subdivision and Minter Springs Road. Case # CPA2020-000001 (Note: Final action of this item will be considered at the April 9, 2020 City Council Meeting - Subject to change.) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to amend the Thoroughfare Plan. Summary: This proposed amendment revises the Thoroughfare Plan in the College Station extra- territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) in two ways. The first amendment proposes to modify the alignment of a future minor arterial between Koppe Bridge Road and Clay Pit Road to the northeast. The second amendment proposes to remove a future minor collector between the Meadow Creek Subdivision and Minter Springs Road. These amendments have been initiated by City staff as refinements to the Thoroughfare Plan and are in collaboration with the County Engineer in the Brazos County Road and Bridge Department. The first amendment is necessary as the proposed alignment varies more than 1,000 feet from the existing alignment, which is the maximum the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) allows staff the discretion to consider administratively. It seeks to reduce the amount of significant floodplain crossings, utilize more right-of-way of existing roadways, and limit the overall impact to existing developed properties. The second amendment removes a future minor collector to be more in keeping with the broader spacing of thoroughfares in the more rural context of the College Station ETJ. A public information meeting was held at Greens Prairie Elementary on March 4, 2020. There were 47 property owners and residents that attended to learn more of the proposed amendments and provide feedback. REVIEW CRITERIA 1. Changed or changing conditions in the subject area: The subject area is rural in character in the College Station in ETJ and has been developing slowly over decades with acreage lots. The proposed amendments seek to refine the Thoroughfare Plan to be more keeping with the overall rural character and reduce the impact of the future transportation network on the built and natural environment in this area of Brazos County. A future arterial corridor was placed on the Thoroughfare Plan along the western portion of Brazos County with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 2009. It was originally classified as a future major arterial and was anticipated to serve as part of a future loop in west Brazos County around College Station. The Bryan/College Station Metropolitan Planning Organization (BCS MPO) adopted a 2050 BCS MPO Thoroughfare Concept in 2017. With that adoption, the Page 27 of 39 thoroughfare was reclassified to a minor arterial as a freeway loop was envisioned to extend further west across the Brazos River into Burleson County. College Station updated the City Thoroughfare Plan in November 2017 to reflect changes based on the 2050 BCS MPO Thoroughfare Concept. As part of due diligence for the potential development of an acreage lot subdivision currently called Thousand Oaks Ranch, new data was provided by the developer with more detailed contours and estimated floodplain boundaries in this area. This information resulted in the proposed refinement of the future minor arterial alignment to reduce the amount of floodplain crossings and increase the viability of the future thoroughfare being connected through in the long-term. The alignment is proposed to be moved more than 1,000 feet so exceeds the authority provided by the UDO to consider the change administratively. The proposed alignment was created in collaboration with the County Engineer for Brazos County and with the potential development that needs to determine its location to create a subdivision layout of streets and lots. The future minor collector between the Meadow Creek Subdivision and Minter Springs Road was placed on the Thoroughfare Plan with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 2009. After the completion of the Meadow Creek Subdivision, conditions in this area have generally remained the same. 2. Compatibility with the existing uses, development patterns, and character of the immediate area concerned, the general area, and the City as a whole: New thoroughfares are generally constructed as new developments subdivide tracts of land and extend a thoroughfare in the conceptual alignment depicted on the Thoroughfare Plan. Thoroughfare alignments are refined and finalized as the engineering study is performed associated with a new subdivisions. Regardless of the classification on the Thoroughfare Plan, thoroughfares that are built outside the City limits are constructed as rural collectors. These are two-lane rural roadways that have 30-feet wide pavement and bar ditches for drainage on each side. The future minor arterial is proposed to be relocated to the northeast to diminish the extent of significant floodplain crossings. The Thousand Oaks and Quarter Horse Ranch Addition Subdivisions also create a continuous line of subdivided property in which the future minor arterial would need to eventually pass through in order to create the longer thoroughfare corridor that is planned. In moving the existing conceptual alignment, it will no longer be placed on, or adjacent to, some properties while now being placed on, or adjacent to, other properties. The developed lots along the proposed alignment are generally larger, up to 20 acres, than the existing alignment of developed lots including those around 5 acres in size. The proposed alignment also utilizes some existing right-of-way of Minter Springs Road and Windy Ryon Road which helps reduce the amount of private property needed for the roadway as it is extended over time. While now impacting properties differently, it is considered that the overall impact on private property will be to a lessened. The future minor collector is proposed to be removed as the anticipated future rural character of this area does not necessitate the amount of thoroughfares that are planned. A rule of thumb in transportation planning practice is that collectors are placed at ¼-mile intervals. This future minor collector is roughly spaced on ¼-mile intervals to the adjacent thoroughfares though the Page 28 of 39 traffic demand will be much lower in rural context outside the City limits than typical urban and suburban scale developments within the City limits. The future minor collector intersects other thoroughfares in a “T”intersection so is not anticipated to have significant traffic volumes in its context. In addition, a portion crosses subdivided property that is less likely to further subdivided to extend the thoroughfare in the future. 3. Impact on environmentally sensitive and natural areas: This subject area is in the western portion of Brazos County within two miles of the Brazos River. One intent of the Thoroughfare Plan amendments is to reduce the length and significance of floodplain and drainage crossings which generally become larger in closer proximity to the Brazos River. While future construction of the thoroughfares and the surrounding area impact the natural environment, the proposed amendments are anticipated to impact environmentally sensitive and natural areas to a lesser extent. 4. Impacts on infrastructure including water, wastewater, drainage, and the transportation network: The main purpose of realigning the future minor arterial is to refine the alignment such that it is more feasible to be constructed in the long-term. Two floodplain crossings along the existing alignment of the future minor arterial are offsite of the proposed development and range around 700-800 feet each. These crossings will necessitate expensive bridge and culvert infrastructure likely to be constructed as a future County project with tax payer funds. The proposed alignment crosses the floodplains further upstream which is less than crossing to less than half in length and places one of them as part of the development. New thoroughfares are generally constructed with developments as they occur. As it is located outside the College Station City limits, public roadways that are constructed become owned and maintained by Brazos County. 5. Consistency with the goals and strategies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan: The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan. The goal for the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is “College Station strives for improved mobility through a safe, efficient, and well-connected multi-modal transportation system designed to be sensitive to the surrounding land uses.” The proposed amendment refines the alignment of the future minor arterial to be located where future extension is more feasible and though impacts some properties more lessens the overall impact to surrounding land uses. Removal of the future minor collector will still allow a transportation network sufficient to accommodate the long-term traffic demands for this portion of Brazos County. SUPPORTING MATERIALS 1. Vicinity Map 2.Thoroughfare Plan Amendment Exhibit 3. Background Information Page 29 of 39 Page 30 of 39 Page 31 of 39 BACKGROUND INFORMATION NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Commission Hearing Date: March 19, 2020 Advertised Council Hearing Date: April 9, 2020 The following neighborhood organizations received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing: Meadow Creek Subdivision HOA Public Meeting: A public information meeting for property owners and area residents was held on March 4, 2020 at Greens Prairie Elementary. There were 47 property owners and residents that attended the meeting to learn more about the proposed amendments and provide feedback. Property owner notices mailed: 46 Attendees at public meeting: 47 Other contacts:12 ADJACENT LAND USES Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use North Rural N/A Rural, acreage single- family South Rural N/A Rural, acreage single- family East Rural N/A Rural, acreage single- family West Rural N/A Rural, acreage single- family DEVELOPMENT HISTORY Annexation: N/A (ETJ) Zoning:N/A (ETJ) Final Plat:N/A Site development: N/A Page 32 of 39 1101 Texas Avenue South, P.O. Box 9960College Station, Texas 77842Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 19, 2020 TO:Planning and Zoning Commission / Impact Fee Advisory Committee FROM:Carol Cotter, P.E., City Engineer SUBJECT:Impact Fee Credit Policy Item: Public hearing, presentation, discussion and possible action regarding an Impact Fee Credit Policy. Summary: The City of College Station adopted System-Wide Impact Fees for water, wastewater, and roadways in November 2016. The need for a method of awarding credit to developments that construct infrastructure on the Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan was identified. An Impact Fee Credit Policy has been developed to establish standards for determining projects for which credit is eligible, the process requirements for obtaining credit, and the methods for applying credit to development projects for which credits against impact fees may be awarded. The draft policy was distributed for review in summer of 2019. Comments were received and incorporated as appropriate. A summary of the revised Impact Fee Credit Policy was presented to a Joint Workshop of City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 28, 2019. This draft policy is presented for your recommendation to City Council. Attachment: Draft Impact Fee Credit Policy Page 33 of 39 1 a8cf67e7de.docx DRAFTCity of College Station Policies and Procedures for Obtaining and Applying Credits Against Roadway, Water and Wastewater Impact Fees Credit Agreements A property owner or authorized agent of owner for plat approval (“Applicant”), whose property is subject to the imposition of impact fees pursuant to College Station Code of Ordinances Chapter 107 for new development, may be eligible for credits (“Credits”) to offset impact fees otherwise due from the property. For purposes of this policy, Credits will be considered when an Applicant incurs costs toward the construction of or contributions toward a capital improvement project listed on the corresponding impact fee capital improvements plan (“Eligible Capital Improvement”). Credits shall be awarded on a like kind basis (i.e., credits earned for one type of capital improvement may not be used to offset impact fees for another type of capital improvement). Costs eligible for Credits (“Eligible Costs”) may include typical engineering and surveying, construction, right-of way dedication, insurance and surety. Credits are applicable when verified Eligible Costs combined with assessed impact fees exceed what is roughly proportional to the development as set out in a written credit agreement (“Credit Agreement”) which shall be on a form provided by the City. Alternative forms of agreement may be considered upon petition by the Applicant to City Council. Credit Agreements will be considered for approval by City Council. Process and Requirements An Applicant must apply for Credit against impact fees before impact fee collection. Applicants are encouraged to submit a request for credit eligibility at the time of preliminary plan application; whereupon a preliminary determination of Eligible Capital Improvements may be made. The Applicant may file a request for credit eligibility with the City Engineer when submitting an application for preliminary plan approval, or if a preliminary plan is not required, at the time of submitting an application for final plat or, if no final plat is required, at the time of submitting an application for site plan approval or building permit. The preliminary determination will identify the Eligible Capital Improvements. Specific credit amounts and credit allocation will be finalized with the subsequent request for Credit, typically at the final plat stage. 1. Preliminary Plan. Upon request for credit eligibility, the City Engineer will notify the Applicant whether the capital improvements to be dedicated, constructed, or contributed toward are Eligible Capital Improvements, and are eligible for Credit at the time of the request. a. Information Required. Applicant shall provide a request for a credit eligibility determination to the City that contains the following information: 1) Letter requesting eligibility determination; 2)Identification of the Eligible Capital Improvements to be dedicated, constructed, or contributed toward, forming the basis for the request; Page 34 of 39 2 a8cf67e7de.docx 3) Preliminary Plan submitted with application for approval; and4) Additional information as may be requested by the City as necessary in order to make a determination. b. Finalizing the Credits. Although a preliminary determination may identify Eligible Capital Improvements, a request for Credit must be submitted as provided below, and a resultant Credit Agreement executed on or before final plat recordation. 2. Final Plat.The Applicant shall submit a request for Credits with the City Engineer at the time of final plat application. The City Engineer will provide the Applicant, in writing, a decision on Eligible Capital Improvements and the maximum value of Credits which may be applied to offset impact fees assessed with the final plat as part of a draft Credit Agreement. The Credit Agreement shall be considered for approval by the City Council, and shall be executed prior to recordation of the final plat. The Credits included in the Credit Agreement cannot be applied to the impact fees due until the time of building permit application for a new development subject to the final plat. a. Information Required. The Applicant shall provide the following information in order to determine the maximum value of Credits and process a Credit Agreement: 1) Written request for Credits;2)Identification of the Eligible Capital Improvements to be dedicated, constructed, or contributed toward forming the basis for the request;3) Final Plat submitted with application for approval; 4)For roadway Credits, a College Station Roadway Impact Fee Worksheet shall be completed demonstrating the Eligible Capital Improvements provided combined with the roadway impact fees to be assessed are in excess of what is considered roughly proportionate; 5) For water or wastewater Credits, an approved utility report demonstrating capacity of the proposed improvements that are beyond the requirement of the development; 6) Approved construction plans for the proposed Eligible Capital Improvements;7) Approved construction estimate and/or proof of actual Eligible Costs, as applicable, by Applicant for the Eligible Capital Improvements;8) Value of right-of-way dedication for the proposed Eligible Capital Improvements on the appraisal district’s latest records. In lieu of the appraisal district’s valuation, an Applicant may, with the City’s approval, provide funds to the City to perform a market appraisal for the right-of-way to be dedicated; and 9) Additional information as may be requested by the City as necessary in order to make a determination. b. Finalizing the Credits. The Credit Agreement will establish a not to exceed maximum value of Credits or provide for an allowance in change in Credit amount based upon actual Eligible Costs, and conditions the Applicant must satisfy to begin receiving credit. Credits shall not be applied until the Eligible Capital Improvements have been constructed, dedicated and accepted, or financial guaranteed in a form acceptable to the City and upon verification of Eligible Costs. c. Execution of Credit Agreement. The City Engineer will make a recommendation for City Council consideration. The Credit Agreement must be executed before final plat recordation. Page 35 of 39 3 a8cf67e7de.docx 3. Site Plan or Building Permit. For projects that do not require platting, the Applicant shall submit a request for Credits with the City Engineer at the time of application for site plan and/or building permit. The City Engineer will provide the Applicant, in writing, a decision on Eligible Capital Improvements and the maximum value of Credits which may be applied to offset impact fees due as part of a draft Credit Agreement. The Credit Agreement shall be considered for approval by the City Council, and shall be executed prior to approval of the site plan or building permit. The Credits included in the Credit Agreement cannot be applied to the impact fees due until the time of building permit application. a. Information Required. The Applicant shall provide the following information in order to determine the maximum value of Credits and process a Credit Agreement: 1) Written request for Credits; 2)Identification of the Eligible Capital Improvements to be dedicated, constructed, or contributed toward forming the basis for the request; 3) Site Plan or Building Permit submitted with application for approval; 4)For roadway Credits, a College Station Roadway Impact Fee Worksheet shall be completed demonstrating the Eligible Capital Improvements provided combined with the roadway impact fees to be assessed are in excess of what is considered roughly proportionate;5) For water or wastewater Credits, an approved utility report demonstrating capacity of the proposed improvements that are beyond the requirement of the development; 6) Approved construction plans for the proposed Eligible Capital Improvements; 7) Approved construction estimate and/or proof of actual Eligible Costs, as applicable, by Applicant for the Eligible Capital Improvements; 8) Value of right-of-way dedication for the proposed capital improvements on the appraisal district’s latest records. In lieu of the appraisal district’s valuation, an Applicant may, with the City’s approval, provide funds to the City to perform a market appraisal for the right-of-way to be dedicated; and9) Additional information as may be requested by the City as necessary in order to make a determination. b. Finalizing the Credits. The Credit Agreement will establish a not to exceed maximum value of Credits or provide for an allowance in change in Credit amount based upon actual Eligible Costs, and conditions the Applicant must satisfy to begin receiving credit. Credits shall not be applied until the impact fee-related improvements have been constructed, dedicated and accepted, or financial guaranteed in a form acceptable to the City and upon verification of Eligible Costs. c. Execution of Credit Agreement. The City Engineer will make recommendation for City Council consideration. The Credit Agreement must be executed before site plan or building permit approval. Relationship to Proportionality Appeal An appeal, undertaken by an Applicant seeking to contest a dedication or construction requirement imposed under the City’s Unified Development Ordinance pursuant to Section 3.2-J on grounds of rough Page 36 of 39 4 a8cf67e7de.docx proportionality, normally should be determined prior to execution of any impact fee Credit Agreement. The City Engineer in submitting a response to a proportionality appeal shall take into account the eligibility of the facilities which are the subject of the appeal for impact fee Credits and shall preliminarily estimate the amount of such Credits due the Applicant. Such preliminary determination shall not ultimately affect the amount of Credits included in an impact fee Credit Agreement which is based on verified costs. Changes in Impact Fee 1. Roadway, water and/or wastewater impact fees shall be assessed against new developments subject to the approval of final plat, replat, or development plat in accordance with applicable law. 2. The impact fees to be charged against a new development, subject to Credits and collection rate, are those in effect at the time a building permit is issued,3. Following assessment of impact fees, no additional impact fees or increases shall be assessed unless the number of service units increases. Method of Applying Credits A request for Credits does not automatically entitle the Applicant to such Credits without entering into and successfully performing under a Credit Agreement. The Credit Agreement may be issued prior to construction and may be conditioned upon certain Eligible Capital Improvements being constructed, dedicated and accepted by the City. Credits shall not be applied until the Eligible Capital Improvements have been constructed, dedicated and accepted, or financial guaranteed in a form acceptable to the City and upon verification of costs. 1. Retention of Credit Agreement. A fully approved and executed Credit Agreement should be kept by the City with the file for the associated final plat as applicable. 2. Credit Pool. The total verified costs of Eligible Capital Improvements contributed by the Applicant for a subdivision shall constitute the initial Credit Pool associated with a recorded final plat. 3. Application of Credits Against Impact Fees Due. City shall apply Credits against the impact fees due until the Credit Pool has been exhausted. The method for distribution of Credit among service units shall be set forth in the Credit Agreement from one of the following options: a. First-come first served. Credit applied for the first building permit subject to the recorded final plat, and thereafter, against impact fees due for each building permit subsequently issued; b.Prorated. Credits may be prorated equally among all projected service units relating to the new development. Any increase in service units from what was projected and which result in an increase in the amount of impact fee assessed shall result in an adjustment to such prorated distribution of credit. Prorated distribution of credit will be set forth in the Credit Agreement and adjustments to same must also be in writing by issuance of a new Agreement or Amendment to Agreement; or c. Allocation Plan. If set forth in a Credit Agreement, allocation of credits for new development may be applied, setting forth the timing and collection of impact fees and credits. 4. Expiration of Credits. Unused Credits associated with a property expire ten (10) years after the date of the Credit Agreement unless such Credits are formally extended in accordance with the Agreement. 5. Transfer of Credits Prohibited. Credits associated with a property cannot be transferred to different land, unless the land is subject to a multi-phase Credit Agreement that provides for such transfer. Page 37 of 39 5 a8cf67e7de.docx 6. Types of Credits. Credits may not be transferred between different types of impact fees, i.e., roadway Credits apply only to roadway impact fees and may not be applied to water or wastewater impact fees, and so on. 7. No Retroactive Application. No Credits shall be applied against impact fees which have already been previously collected. Redevelopment Capacity for existing uses may also be eligible for credit. Only uses within period from date of impact fee adoption may be considered. City staff may approve these minor Credits related to redevelopment without a Credit Agreement approved by City Council as set out below: 1.Existing Trip Generation. Vehicle-Miles associated with existing land uses may be applied as a Credit towards the amount of roadway impact fee due. 2.Existing water capacity. Existing water meters associated with a property may be applied as a Credit towards the amount of water impact fee due. 3.Existing wastewater capacity. Existing water meters associated with a property may be applied as a Credit towards the amount of wastewater impact fee due. Multi-Phase Subdivisions 1. Multi-phase Subdivisions. Where an Applicant proposes a preliminary plan for a multi-phase subdivision that includes Eligible Capital Improvements in one or multiple phases, the Applicant may request the City Engineer identify the Eligible Capital Improvements associated with the proposed preliminary plan that are eligible for Credits against impact fees otherwise due. The Applicant may apply for a Credit Agreement in accordance with this policy at the time of application for the final plat for the first phase of the approved preliminary plan for which the Applicant contributes Eligible Capital Improvements. 2. Multi-phase Subdivision Addendum. When an Applicant proposes a subsequent final plat for a multi-phase subdivision, the Applicant may apply for an addendum to the original Credit Agreement. If agreed to by the City, the verified Eligible Costs of the Eligible Capital Improvement(s) may be applied to reduce impact fees due for lots or uses subject to an earlier or later phase of the subdivision. As additional phases of the subdivision are finally platted, the amended Credit Agreement for the subdivision may be further amended by additional addenda containing like provisions. 3. Multiple Approved Final Plats. Where the original Credit Agreement applies to more than one approved final plat for a multi-phase subdivision, the verified Eligible Costs of all Eligible Capital Improvements dedicated, constructed and accepted by the City may be credited against impact fees due for any lots or uses within such phases. 4. Credit Improvements by Phase. As Eligible Capital Improvements are dedicated, constructed and accepted by the City for each additional phase of a multi-phase subdivision, the verified Eligible Costs of such Improvements shall be added to the Credit Pool once an addendum to the original Credit Agreement for the subdivision is executed. 5. Credits Applied to Subsequent Phases. Excess Credits obtained through contributions of Eligible Capital Improvements for prior recorded phases of a multi-phase subdivision may be used to reduce impact fees due for new developments in subsequently approved phases of the subdivision. Page 38 of 39 6 a8cf67e7de.docx Replats 1. If land subject to a final recorded plat is replatted, a new determination will be made at the time the replat is recorded in accordance with Chapter 107. Unused Credits created by a Credit Agreement may be used to reduce the impact fees for new development subject to the replat. 2. If additional Eligible Capital Improvements are contributed by an Applicant as a condition of approval of the replat, the verified costs of such improvements may result in new additional Credits to be added either as an addendum to an existing Credit Agreement or reflected in a new Credit Agreement. Cost Participation by the City Nothing herein prevents the Applicant and City from entering into a participation agreement for one or more Eligible Capital Improvements. In such event, the amount of the City’s participation shall be subtracted from the verified costs of Eligible Capital Improvements when determining eligibility for Credits. Page 39 of 39