Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/2020 - Regular Minutes - Comprehensive Plan Evaluation Committee MINUTES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVALUATION COMMITTEE Monday, June 15, 2020, 6:00 PM Virtual meeting via Zoom COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Bochner, Brad Brimley, Michael Buckley, Clint Cooper, Elizabeth Cunha, Joe Guerra, Lisa Halperin, Linda Harvell, Dennis Maloney, John Nichols, Jeremy Osborne and Julie Schultz COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Shana Elliott CITY STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Manager and Interim Director of Planning and Development Services Jennifer Prochazka, Assistant Director Molly Hitchcock, Transportation Planning Coordinator Jason Schubert, Long Range Planning Administrator Alyssa Halle-Schramm, Staff Planner Jade Broadnax, Staff Planner Treston Rodriguez, Staff Planner Jesse DiMeolo and Staff Assistant Robin Macias 1. Call the meeting to order. The meeting was called to order at 6:03 p.m. 2. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. The committee had no corrections to the minutes. 3. Overview presentation of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report working draft. Planning Next Consultant Michael Curtis gave a presentation regarding the evaluation and appraisal report draft. There was general discussion amongst the committee regarding the draft report. 4. Presentation and discussion of the Big Picture Recommendations. Planning Next Consultants Michael Curtis and Jamie Greene gave a presentation regarding the Big Picture Recommendations. There was general discussion amongst the committee regarding the big picture recommendations: Consider renaming the chapters to reflect aspirations • In general, the committee liked using Mobility or Integrated Mobility as a title for the existing Transportation chapter • There was a general agreement to keep the names simple with no fancy tag lines so people know exactly what they are looking for • Use titles people can understand • Keep titles as they are with the exception of changing transportation to mobility • Potentially keep the new examples for chapters 3, 4, 6 and 8 in example one Refine the vision statement and goals Vision • Committee members feel it may be important to keep “valuing and protecting our cultural and historical community resources” in the vision statement • The committee liked having a shorter/brief vision statement with support embedded in the goals • A mission statement should be something anyone can say. A simple sentence that everything else falls under. Goals • Make sure the goals have words with meaning or are not trying to modify things the goal cannot modify • Chapter 3 – Neighborhood Integrity – could be a little clearer. A single neighborhood may not provide a wide range of housing options but the city as a whole does provide a wide range of housing options. • Reconsider wording regarding a “complete neighborhood”. This may not be clear • Chapter 2 – rural areas vs green spaces. These are two different descriptions. We may not want to replace rural areas with green spaces. Refine the Concept Map We will be incorporating pieces of the concept map into the future land use categories. The concept map would be more of a planning map going forward. Everything will be on the future land use map and the concept map would be more about future land use areas. • The committee agreed with this change • There were no questions or concerns regarding the concept map. Refine the Future Land Use Map Since the last draft photos have been added, a clarification was made to the definition of mixed residential, and Employment Center was changed to Business Center per the recommendation of the Economic Development department. • Suburban Residential – There was some concern about combining restricted suburban and general suburban because these two categories have different densities and utility capacities. o We need to make sure we don’t confuse zoning with the Land Use Categories. o Long Range Planning Administrator Halle-Schramm stated that the City would still evaluate the utility capacity at the zoning level. There could be multiple zoning categories that fit under one land use category. o Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert clarified that for utility purposes there is not a large difference in capacity from the densities of restricted suburban and general suburban o Concerned that current neighborhoods who have bigger lots do not want to be classified as general suburban where lots can be easily subdivided o Assistant City Manager Prochazka explained that from a resident standpoint they may be confusing land use and zoning. Most single family neighborhoods are zoned general suburban. • A committee member asked if we want to have zoning land uses set at the comp plan stage or wait until it gets to rezoning? o Long Range Planning Administrator Halle-Schramm explained that we currently have a one-to one relationship with the zoning districts. As part of this process we are trying to move away from the one-to-one relationship to have there be more flexibility in the categories to evaluate at the zoning level • Neighborhood Center – This idea seems more flexible and allows more interaction with commercial and vertical mixed use. Supportive of this category. • General Commercial – We currently do not have office and mixed use opportunities in general commercial. Likes the distinction between these categories. Example Map Changes • Long Range Planning Administrator Halle-Schramm explained that we are really looking for input to determine if these are tangible examples that will demonstrate these change in categories? o The committee felt these are good examples to take to the public to give them a better understanding of the changes. • Are Natural Areas another name for flood plain? There is a concern in areas where the housing backs up to the flood plain. We need to build in resilience to the plan in regards to flood plain. o Long Range Planning Administrator Halle-Schramm explained that the natural areas designation can cover more area than just flood plain. It covers flood plain and sensitive areas. We are proposing to better match these areas to current FEMA maps. There will be time spent on this in 2021 to determine if the areas need to be larger or smaller based on flooding issues. • Where there are already neighborhoods we need to make sure there is buffering between them and new development. • Concerns about minimizing the Wellborn Area district plan. o Long Range Planning Administrator Halle-Schramm stated that we will have reference to a special district area and the land use category will refer to the special district. Prioritize areas for additional detailed planning There was no discussion regarding this item. Refine the Thoroughfare Plan There was no discussion regarding this item. Refine the Annexation Priorities and Phasing Plan • With regards to freight traffic route along state highway 30 there may be talk about what we would like to do about the City Limits • Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert explained that the loop on the thoroughfare plan is currently not designated as an interstate. The state legislature has restricted the city’s ability to annex so it will be more challenging to secure this land in the future. Revise the Plan’s recommendation structure and format There was no discussion regarding this item. Add a chapter about partnerships and collaboration There was no discussion regarding this item. 5. Presentation and discussion of updated scenario information including performance measures. Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert gave a presentation of the updated scenarios. He stated that we have updated the utility information for all six areas. He also stated that we have also added more descriptions under the quality of place category. We have moved the Post Oak Mall Area to scenario one instead of the University Drive area as CPEC recommended. The land use categories in each scenario have not changed since the last draft scenarios. More descriptions of each of the scoring metrics have been added. There was general discussion regarding the scenarios: • Have market studies been done for the amount of development or redevelopment? Staff explained there have not been any market studies done but these scenarios are only intended to be a representative example. We are not saying exactly which properties will redevelop. • Did we receive transportation costs? Staff explained we did not get transportation costs. • Urge the City to not put commercial property on George Bush across from A&M campus to preserve the neighborhood integrity. Staff explained the intent of the exercise to get public input whether it be something they would like to see or something they would not like to see and to test the current comprehensive plan. • Is there a metric or something we could list that speaks to the compatibility to the adjacent neighborhoods? Planning Next said it may be possible to come up with something that speaks to the adjacency impacts. • Letting the public know the kind of knowledge about what is possible without sending the message that this is what the City is trying to do. Does the public have other scenarios or suggestions they would like to see? It would be good to see a space on the website where people could put in their own input or information. 6. Presentation and discussion of the proposed public input process. Planning Next consultants Jamie Greene and Michael Curtis gave a presentation regarding the website for virtual public engagement. They stated there would be a Spanish translation option and the website would be optimized for cell phone usage. There will be a series of videos explaining the Comprehensive Plan evaluation and instructions on how to complete the workshop activities. Staff has taken feedback from previous CPEC meetings in regards to communication about the scenarios and will be recording information explaining this process. There is an opportunity to download a paper form to complete. There is a feedback form where the citizen can talk more about each scenario. There was discussion amongst the committee regarding the website: • There was concern from the committee regarding calling for questions. Staff explained that the phone number will be the Planning and Development front office and would be directed to the correct staff member. There will also be a Spanish interpreter on call to help with any translating. • Will there be a save and return option? Planning Next stated that you will be able to complete one section and then come back and complete another section. • Will there be photos showing what is currently on the ground or street view? There is concern that the public will not have a clear understanding of the map. Planning Next stated they will look at other options to possibly include street views within the exercise. • Committee likes the feedback page for each scenario. This gives the public an opportunity to share their thoughts they may not have said in a face to face meeting. It also gives them to opportunity to share other visions for the areas. • Is there going to be anything on the website regarding deed restrictions in each area? Will the public have an opportunity to state whether or not they would like the City to remove the deed restrictions? Staff needs to be clear on what the deed restrictions are in each area if there are any. There are concerns about the legal issues in the older neighborhoods in regards to deed restrictions. Staff clarified that the City does not enforce deed restrictions and we are not proposing any specific changes rather than test the land use changes in the areas. • There was concern about making it clear to the citizens that the City does not own the properties being discussed so they have ability to put specific things in each location should the whole community say they want something specific. 7. Presentation and discussion outlining next steps in the Evaluation process. Long Range Planning Administrator Halle-Schramm gave an update regarding the next committee meeting dates as well as the potential in person public event. She also gave an overview of the outline for the next meeting which will be back to back meeting days in July. Commissioner Cunha stated that it may be a good opportunity to do some community outreach when Adamson Lagoon opens on July 6th. 8. Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m.