Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/30/2003 - Joint Agenda - Parks Boardar F Zo issio ecre.ttion viso • oar ctober 3(I, 2 I f13 Teene ter 1 2 c r irie 's.o , s olle _' a tatio exas college Station Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future Agenda Joint Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission & Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 5:30 p.m. The EXIT Teen Center 1520 Rock Prairie Road College Station, Texas 1. Call to order. 2. Pardon — possible action concerning requests for absences of members from meeti g. 3. Hear visitors. 4. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning Conservation Easements (Carolyn Vogle, Texas Parks and Wildlife). 5. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning the current status of Greenways (Judy Downs, Greenways Coordinator). 6. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning the update of the Greenways Master Plan (Judy Downs, Greenways Coordinator). 7. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning Pedestrian Access policies and criteria (Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner). 8. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning bikeways. 9. Discussion and possible action co cerning Park Land Dedication Ordinance revisions. 10. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning the Unified Development Ordinance. 11. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A Planning and Zoning Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. 12. Adjourn. The building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive services must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. College Station Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future MINUTES Joint Meeting Planning and Zoning Como fission Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 5:30 p.m. The EXIT Teen Center 1520 Rock Prairie Road College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Shafer, Commissioners White, Davis and Reynolds. COMMISSI )Ik ERS ABSENT; Commissioners Hall, Trapani and Williams. PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY °= O►ARD MEMBEi' S 'RESENT: Chairman Nichols, Board Members Schroeder, Warner, Allison, Livingston, Farnsworth and Erwin. PACKS RECREATION ADVISORY BOA '1 a 6 EMy==IRS ASENT: Glen Davis. PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF PRESENT: Parks and Recreation Director Beachy and Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Ploeger. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, Transportation Planner Fogle, Senior Planner Battle, Staff Planners Fletcher and Prochazka, Development Manager Ruiz, Development Services Director Templin, Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson and Staff Assistant Hazlett. OTHER CITY STAFF PRESENT: Greenways Program Manager Downs, Diane Strom, Public Works Intern (Greenways), and Assistant City Attorney Nemcik. CITY COUNCIL ME BE 'S PRESENT: Anne Hazen. V,SIT° S: Mark Barker, Jennifer Lorenz (Executive Director, Legacy Land Trust), Carolyn Vogle (Texas Parks and Wildlife), Charles Ellison (PC), and members of the Brazos Greenways Council Jennifer Nations and Sherry Ellison. 1. Cali to order. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Chairman John Nichols and Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Scott Shafer called the meeting to order at 5:54 p.m. 2. Pardon possible action concerning g requests for absences of members from meeting. Advisory Board member Farnsworth motioned to approve the absences of Advisory Board members. Advisory Board member Warner seconded the motion, which carried 7-0. Commissioner Davis motioned to approve the Commission absences. Commissioner Reynolds seconded the motion, which carried 4-0. Hear Visitors,. Introductions were made around the room. P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 1 of 7 Chairman Shafer opened the Hear Visitors portion of the meeting. Because no one spoke, he closed the public hearing. 4~ Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning Conservation Carolyn Vogle,arepresentative of the Department of Texas Parks and Wildlife, explained that a conservation easement is land that is deed restricted, has tax consequences and is restricted of all 0rsome future development. She added that it is property Owned by a db/ or county government Or a charitable organization through negotiations of a purchasing organization with a landowner, Once the agreement of purchase is reached 8 hold is placed on the design of the land and agreements on the land for the future are then determined. Thereafter, each subsequent landowner is bound to the agreement. M5. V0g|e pointed out the three types of tax benefits for land that is designated as a conservation easement: (1) Property Tax Benefit, (2) Wild ||fe/Aghcu|tuc]! Income Tax Benefit, and (3) Inheritance Benefit. In closing, MS. Vog|e stated that the responsibility of the land trust company is to monitor and enforce the land easement agreement, making annual visits UOthe site t0 ensure that the land remains as preserved. Jennifer Lorenz, Executive Director, Legacy Land Trust, Stated that the 8 year old organization has 10Cnn5en/atVn easement, 7 of which are mitigation projects, and are spread Out Over a number of counties around Houston. She distributed a brochure of the Montgomery County Preserve that is one Of the first COunh/ }and easements in the country. The land trust company also assists the county with the park development by putting in and maintaining trails. In addition, butterfly counts, bird counts and other similar ecological interests will be part of the New Texas Parks and Wildlife Trail that is partly owned by The Woodlands. The VVOOd|and5 also made four land swaps for wetland mitigation for property that the county wanted to preserve. MS. Lorenz reported that The Village of Wimberly is the first municipality that has a conservation easement. She reiterated that conservation easement is land that can never bedeveloped but provides trails and access tothe area 24 hours a day, 7days a week. M5. L0nenaegave a diagram ofpurchase development rights and explained that the property can change hands but that the easement remains on the land. Additional information regarding supplemental environmental projects, which a|XOwS you to do strategic conservation, was discussed. There is no rnin|nnurn size for conservation easements and you may add property to the size of the easement through amendments. Further discussion ensued regarding other ways conservation easements have been used. Mark Barker, Legacy Land Trust, stated that the City of Brazos Bend is working with landowners regarding a park that houses an observatory. The City of Houston is building adjacent t0the park. Light pollution from the observatory is an issue they are trying to address by working with the landowners to build a buffer through a conservation easement. M5. Lorenz added that Texas Parks and Wildlife offers great grants and bonus points for doing an easement. She told of the City of Cleveland's canoeing and launch site that has been provided through aconservation easement. P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 2 of Commissioner Davis asked how an easement is established, whether by the landowner orthe land trust company and who retains the title? Also, is there a tax benefit to the owner and how do we facilitate this for fair market value or tax Ms. Lorenz advised obtaining the services of an appraiser that is familiar with conservation easements. Chairman Nichols asked how much value a landowner would get out of8 fl0odp|a|n area that isn't developable. City Planner Kee interjected that under the Cib/s current drainage ordinance; a landowner can peC|airn f|0odp|ain if it is properly engineered. Parks and Recreation Director BeaChy asked if there was anything that would speak to lessen the liability of the owner, i.8., and trails. Ms. Lorenze stated that having a conservation easement on private land vvQu|d increase the liability. Therefore, the trust company tries to have the landowner give ownership over to a municipality or county. However, we do work with landowners to open the area for bird|ng and butterfly observation, native plant society, etc. Most landowners will not open up their property for trails, and it may be possible to have them give some property for connected easements that are donated to the municipality and receive 8 tax deduction for doing so. Mr. Be8chy pointed out that the City has approximately ll acres in Veteran's Park designated as a conservation easement as well as the Arboretum, off Southwest Parkway which iSalso a conservation easement Chairman Nichols suggested that since there is a demand in Texas for conservation easements, resources Sh0u|U be explored and our efforts should be concentrated on the areas Ofpriority. Chairman Shafer concurred. MS. Lorenz stated that the Brazos Valley Council of Governments is exploring the possibility Ofhelp in funding acquisition processing with TxOCA'. It was pointed out that by using Trusts, the land would be Saved from becoming fragmented. Ms. Lorenz encouraged City Staff to look C|oS8}y at their 2003 aria| photos and determine the important areas in and around Brazos County, Grimes County and Robertson County. It would be beneficial to speak simultaneously with 4-5 landowners about conservation easements. On behalf of the City Of College Station, Council Member Anne Hazen, presented Carolyn Vog|e, Mark Barker and Jennifer Lorenz a gift of appreciation for their informative presentation. 5. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning the current status of Greenways. SreenwayS Program Manager Judy Downs made the presentation. She opened her n2rnerks by referring to the maps in the back of her report, which, she distributed to those oresent. She presented an update ofthe Greenvvays Program that include, d properties that have either been acquired or dedicated to date as vvel| as the P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 3 of 7 program budget. She followed with an explanation of the proposed GreenwayS Conservation Master Plan Update which she, Scott Shafer, Nanette Manhart and lane Kee had begun. Ms. Downs covered each section of the program update. She reported that a meeting is scheduled for November 10, 2003tg receive public input regarding the Update. She also recommended changing the title from The (3reenways Plan to the Conservation Plan. Ms. OOvxnS briefly explained the inception of the GreenwayS Plan as a flood control program, adding that sometimes streams have been disturbed and the habitat value is not known. Connectivity issues have been addressed through other plans but still, other issues remain, It is important that land is acquired as it becomes available. C)pemgbonS and maintenance has not been addressed and is an issue with both the Public Works and the Parks and Recreation Departments. If the City takes theArrny'S Conservation areas, maintenance will be needed. This project is proposed for mitigation. Ms. DQvvnS also pointed out the status of the implementation program and the accomplishments thus far. There was some discussion about determining if bond money can be used for the E7]. Assistant City Attorney Nernc|kStated that it would depend on how the bond - share !swritten. Further discussion ensued regarding rezoning cases and properties that are proposed atthe time 0fthe rezoning for gmeenvvayspace but are actually never dedicated. y4S. Downs suggested that areas specified as gmeeMwayshouUd remain as A-OAgricu|tura| Open zoning districts. When the final plat iSsubmitted tothe C0[nrniSSi0n, the public and/Or privategreenwaV should be depicted on the plat atthat time. TO accomplish this, Ms. Kee stated that the City Council would need to approve the change in the platting language, which is being considered at the City Council meeting on November 13, 2003. Ms. Downs reported that the City has received 16 acres of greeUvv8yand 40 acres for parks in gneenways. Chairman Nichols interjected that several times plans have been reviewed and the developer didn't have usable land for the Parks Board. Further, the fact that land was accepted doesn't mean the land needed was obtained. He questioned the Parks Board's options in regards to accepting fees in lieu of !and dedication and if the developer has the option to choose to pay the fee rather than dedicate land. MS. Kee stated that the Parks Board, and not the developer, decides to accept money in lieu of land dedication. Mr. Beachy added that parks may have some greenvvay but that not all greenvvayS are parks. Ms. Downs pointed out that some connectivity is being created in some areas but many people do not want their greenway areas open tOthe public. Parks 8o8nj Member Warner added that in some instances where the Parks Board voted to accept land thinking that connectivity would result, proved to be an assumption, asthe connectivity did not come t0 fruition, Ms. Downs encouraged the Parks Board Co consider the whole and not one particular piece of property when mapping out connectivity. Chairman Shafer asked if the floodwater impact was known. MS. Onvvns stated that the City is negotiating with some developers regarding storm water needs. She added that velocity control must be conducted. She pointed out that more water is being held in gn2enway5than before development begins. This will kill [1hetn8es and could take as much as 50-100 years for the habitat to correct itself. Mr. Beachy added that there are no requirements explaining how a greenway should look. 6. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning the update of the Greenways Master Plan (Judy Downs, Greenways Coordinator). This item was discussed in combination with Agenda Item No. 5, preceding. 7. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning Pedestrian Access policies and criteria (Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner). Transportation Planner Fogle presented a policy guideline for pedestrian access ways. He explained that the Commission can require a pedestrian access way, but that this policy will give them a better guideline on where the access ways should be placed and how often they should be provided. He requested further direction from the boards to continue and complete his research. Mr. Fogle gave three examples of pedestrian access way locations: • Between the bulbs of two cul-de-sacs ▪ At mid -block locations between long blocks • At mid -block locations or dead end streets that abut a public land use or a public street Commissioner White asked if the emergency access way between Woodland Hills Subdivision and the new subdivision being developed to the east would be an example of a pedestrian access way. Mr. Fogle responded that this is an example, but it is oversized since it must also accommodate fire trucks and other emergency vehicles. Mr. Beachy interjected that this is a real problem. He pointed out that Woodcreek Park only has one access and that the new phase that will back the subdivision has no additional access. He added that through a study conducted a few years ago, significant access issues were brought to light. He requested the Commission's assistance in addressing these issues. Mr. Fogle further explained design consideration issues in the proposed Pedestrian Access Way Policy Guideline. Points of discussion included the maximum length, width, landscaping, adjacent fencing requirements, compatible adjacent land uses and requirements based on future or existing adjacent land uses. Other considerations were voiced, Le., (1) Should the City require an access way when existing development is going on next to each other or should we plan and require the area to be fenced off until the property is developed out? (2) How do we regulate it? (3) Do the requirements become part of the Subdivision Regulations, Code and Policy Statement? (4) Do we want to provide some sort of incentive? Commissioner White stated that he thought this concept was a great idea and would enhance the sale of lots. Mr. Beachy pointed out that a recent study of Pebble Creek residents revealed that 70% of the residents purchased their lots because of the golf course. While most of them do not use the golf course, they purchased their lot for the visual image. Chairman Nichols spoke positively of the Pedestrian Access Way Policy Guideline, saying that it seemed to be something that is manageable. Chairman Shafer concurred and feels that this is the way to address these particular issues: P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 5 of 7 Commissioner Davis expressed concern whether or not bicycles would be able to traverse the pedestrian access ways. Chairman Shafer reiterated the benefit from this type of connectivity. He believes it will lead to a richer and better community and provide a better quality of life. 8. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning bikeways. Commissioner Davis deferred comments, stating that he was satisfied with the presentation that was made during the presentation of the preceding agenda item No. 7 No further comments were made. 9. Discussion and possible action concerning Park Land Dedication Ordinance revisions. Parks and Recreation Director Beachy stated that his staff has begun the process and will be working on provisions over the next several months, particularly regarding Item 101).4 that deals with the developer's option in the building of the parks. The current ordinance creates a conflict that precludes using that option at this time and it is important to have it working correctly in order to make the option usable for the developer. • iscussion, considerati Developm-nt Ordinance. n, and possible action c ncerning the Unifie Development Services Director Templin asked the Parks Board members if there were any issues or actions that needed to be revisited and discussed. He suggested that several meetings may be necessary in order to address and define these issues for inclusion in the updated version of the UDO. The Board noted several items that were issues of concern: • Open space - Water and sewer line sizes • Thickness of pavement - Parkland dedication funds - residential vs commercial. Mr. Beachy reported that Article 8 has been drafted and will be coming before the Commission in the near future. Mr. Templin interjected that the current UDO can be modified to carry through to Article 8. A brief discussion regarding open space ensued. Mr. Templin added that the City is attempting to negotiate density transfers and encourage developer not to develop in the floodplains. Ms Downs reminded the Parks Board and the Commission to encourage clustering in order to provide more open space and which is permitted through the UDO. Chairman Nichols asked who owns and maintains properties obtained through clustering and that he would like to see an example of that and see how it fits in with parks. 11.. Discussion and possible action on future a 'enda items — A Planning and * Z ning ember or Parks an Recreation dvisory 4,oard Member may P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 6 of 7 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 Davis asked for further information regarding the use of bond money for the ETJ. Chairman Shafer suggested forming a subcommittee to research this prospect. He directed Staff to place this item on a future agenda for further discussion. Chairman Nichols thanked the members of the Commission for the opportunity to meet with them. Mr. Beachy echoed his sentiments also to the Commission, and to the staff of Development Services, Ms, Downs, Councilwoman Hazen and all the members of the Parks Board. Commissioner Shafer reiterated the compliments for the work Ms. Downs has done, commenting on the great strides in the greenways project that have been accomplished. 12. Adjourn. Commissioner White motioned to adjourn the meeting. His motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis and carried by a vote of 4-0. FOR: Shafer, White, Davis and Reynolds. AGAINST: None. ABSENT: Trapani, Williams and Hall. Parks Board member Warner motioned to adjourn the meeting. Parks Board alternate member Erwin seconded the motion, which carried 7-0. FOR: Nichols, Schroeder, Warner, Allison, Livingston, Farnsworth and Erwin. AGAINST: None, ABSENT: Davis. The meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m. Approved, Scott Shafer Chairman, Planning and Zo ing Commission roved, John Nichols Chairman, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Attest: Susan Hazlett, StaffAssistant Development Services P&Z Mnutes Joint Workshop Page 7 of 7 / t i''r -.^, 11 ,s I \Y,ti �I" I k !J i rit\ ti`�.� 1 I 11 /� I y IT 6 _.I "W. ' / I , Joyce Astor, Boll ms_ f 112A I '•• d £AS — wa 2, oaaum u.Y (.1 A 18 26 I.,. // .,, QrO/IB AMsrD Ot 6/ _ err a,. rt s-ax, al,' 1 "'9G(9 Awm 8mxt Kg ?dJ," JRB-^^�J, dOA�D C� Y' !'.....-r^ 4V4.c. ._ 1, WL K mKi "IED s,wR�ac w 'w-� _ If- H — I iI) STREET t'- pit i f , ' ' I vry` { _-r(f1�. tY i J J �.. J Jf NANA .✓, ;:� ), /,/ � r Oi22U Lu ciN, Ol LAS ..-, a s )/ ✓jce A Lsb by - — ' , , , �,_�__A__� ^ , a,,lu, (iWta'Q 2d 11•.®.❖.•• dAm a—o p ARF s®��I J ' .�.�•:❖••♦: .0 as- •�. SDI - }I ,'"DE/tNilT1ai l 3.73 AGUES 7 I �I n 1 -- ( j '_ •.• FEET �..:•�.SCALE ac • ' WOMAN Y .40 i 4+� ` SPAC U'kL�T.17r ARZ<A 430 AL7tL$r... �,�...`- conillrRcrsL -••• 7 37 ACRES ••.' ....•••�••®•••�`� - -• ¢ - e 'TICE EN'�l0 i, •.....{y'' B/vXA9 Su(MI T[e'C. .hC. ...«s' A Tw 6 tE LTENLIe 4 A �"a" I �'''. / } ) Ac/B Tracts w„oN_ + lYyRg9yY6,ua^ DETENTION �. j �AlYYAA00�i !I I f ' CR ) 6H1�J641 • , i , ....i. ZONED ". _ ^O^ �. 1 d ` = _ VICINITY MAP CONCEPTUAL PLAN LEGEND �� ..ma mes mmlm WPM PROPOSED LAND USE „� „„ e d� „� Via.® raA nEscxlrnnN HARVEY VILLAS OF H ,q �� ACRES ^°®"p IF °O�'�ed°�"® m�°p :�" PAEN - ° SCALE: 1'>z 120' SEPTEYBER. 2003 —__� ® OPEN SPACE r PARK >_ze AcxPs r.,uvr �• OWNER/DEVELOPER 113.21 ACRES ENGINEER: GREENBELT r LANDSCAPE AREAS I.25 ACRES J.W. SGOTT LEAGUE TE CON apa. �' TX �w SURVEY. A 49 PEN SPACEr Iz rx ACRES oEiew'r ION t5 SURVEYOR: COLLEGE TIOCameral Contractors STATION, P.C.. P0°� 1O!AL zs.00 AC., RRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS 1 ]A eom p�w.ey w WO q o.M M.e,. rumCo.. LwMa. Toy. Tn. . A Waw�YM s1W1 (CM) No-n,l .� . air- 7 I ,, (P,.11 ,» 1.122 20.602% 1221 22* or 910001 W.. A F0001.010 AID, #2122 6002 2. ME 722 C1/11G1 N At Pi...A VOE. 116, PO. 207 2028E1 eflat 14, 25.12.212 Be .1.. IP Um. 66., Mem era er amet. e ma.ara. 666 6611. ru.s.ss. 116 616166.66 116 .666( 0.1116 Ot WW1 61.1011 Ostaa 66. 6406 . . eam. 6 komay carey Mal 6 alat 66466 1161 661 Ot 6 66 6 toe, al BMA O 661 Naaa. 166 11.6. 66 Dama OleMeaa. Dot itemok, .16661611 *Sae 120.122. OMR COMPS OM. 0 ROAM I, .66 A .06116. 111. Oa. me 00.= al a 16 Arre Tooad 6 Me 'ma. as OMIT . eLME 96116'12. 6- 1.16 PM, 6 66 0616 .031, 609551 Taam ead saasa 66 Pt 5*82*42.24808584 atols. to Ma ota tor 6 gte. tatese aN elea. wobs 6troop, ammeado ewe .6 ea. tharas M. Oar . ampias 5.2.00 6661 6666. ahh. R. 6.6 0 A= Of 66 C01116 PO MBA Ca. me 6 6.6m, adloa. et 06 6, ma. 16,066 660. A 1166111.1.2. 66. to Paa le pm. ta. Is awl. to 16 4•161, Ira* ead 60665542to ma MI Pa atotat. Re a. Po 6 oamemo. 616601.066 666 elas ta. red M. 61 ....me Om at2422. ate 6 066 d teelo 10. 22 1161.1 2* 0622•2122- . FLAMM MO 1122.22 6662 AMOS 010412.01 221120 CAMP .166,10 Naar maaN maw° s Ns4l2.1.'02ras2' Ns.' Naar, arNalr° s erastelo-NINN ca ace 2ro.02° N fryer ria-anN 25 81116 .1611686. I/ NrIeNeriaNzar ce Law 'WY 061, 6 Sae 16166.11, • aar at., snow a arINNNINear aa mar vale araree savavala-alas, i:'8220' 81.6X 111.611966. sr 1.6111.11101-1607. PO at tat .41..06' 16,1611116 S ravrars-aer vase Nun. vote a Nraa'arrNtase a/N aNar aaraN, Naar, a 51$Nrar11'27.S111 au It or. raap male a a-Frau-a-mu: 666 al Ma 6660 me Bastag 6.66 a taas saaa, arab** orta sta ataraa r.rs osty 21*0445 06.. ea 6 066. e 666412.66 6666 DM al Cal. 0166 ..2( 0,2162222 21002 1220,21. lhe 2.12 al Oa. 12.6, Tem 1.0222 01•114 itat WO NYC* *um Ba 060226cermis tA2 ette.aan 60.66 a, 6 06, 666 666. Bomm 0 TAT 0 42008. 66 6 Oa, 34242282 1 BMW .111111M0161.11 .. : .., 1 i 11601146 S166111 WE 1 NMI 14801 .66C NOM seses trat 1 , az PZ61261. i ME MP i t 66661 ,6601. 1 mammas rasa 1 1 soreas taran r t 6.11A6 i Isom atreas --o--- as I2116 1(226211 06060 .CP. LooP I .6 166 * 1 6669 0° 6SPOR( i 667161 laa r aromas r masa Lac i mamma arrow tam =want I I mph= 6611061661 - '66, 1 . ., . -....... . PDT 2 Eel. 2 6 60 qt'grtThe .$o PEP , POI a CaN rra .1,! AerraN 0147 11 Lcit A Pg/ s 1 ,2 .201 .0122 '22; .2;2 0002 '.1272. 2,0 69 .46, VoVj 9 1 1.00, 21 d la 61 .1 02 at;:e 82,8,20J' F"Mr R;0066,1 1441 ; '.20,7:-L E, 4 , , OD ft - .1.40 -11 eau %SU ,„„„ 11 '''' ' '''''' '7' ' \ - - _ ' ' 0.-..,- ---,,,,.. ,- ....:-....- bi ,-.0 ....0 g , Id .6' ! --- I) to Wane ---- 77, 6, 1 am 6 men . _91 1.6P 11 LOP . SCALE NUM I. WS OS 066 EN Dal 0660.03 661-0P-61, WE Or MARC ORM 66 A 1101610 .fsal a, maw. M.M1T PRUP 61.6 10 NO 61161 01 06,120 P. 161.61. O. BP 616 Of 041/606T 111.6616 6. WWII. PO MP 0/606 10.00 Of 01060 I mos sea 1.8 1161 . 14006661 6660 10 OPOOD 00161CN 004 W e RP 86701 TC69 eaD 60010666. ARM camases aissas, aosaa maa. INN ▪ 6001,1066 161461RS 111= 61.1t letrt 4. LOPE 111-1110 NC MOM PAR 6tql W. U6 CCU. MX. assmarsc pals 111/16SCALE:: -= 40 SEPTEMBER 30, 2003 va.060,se :6166161 malit CPT 0 oet mom 66, p,66 76, gps,6 666., PREPARED BT: 1/2. 6 ed 000.9. iltRao oNaPaNnwo * WON.. 4101 MOS AV. + P.O. BOX elle Drawn,. • 16979/191.6-8212 ',lat._ PG, 207 I I COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS AGE_)A I Pedestria Ace ss licies nd Criteria PE E hTIA. ACC AY FOLl U l `: Ll E ' AF Pedestrian Access Ways (PAWS) are rights -of -way or easements that provide connectivity for non -vehicular transportation modes between public streets (and other public uses) where this access would otherwise be precluded due to barriers from private development. Policy Guideline: The City of College Station will encourage the use of non -vehicular transportation modes by increasing pedestrian access between residential and adjacent land uses through the use of I'AWs. Examples of PAW locations: • between the bulbs of two cul-de-sacs • At mid -block locations between long Hocks • At mid -block locations or dead end streets that abut a public land use (e.g., schools, park, library, neighborhood retail center, etc.) or a public street Example PAW Requirement Criteria: O A I'AW shall be provided on all dead end streets that are longer than 200 feet (unless abutting land use is incompatible). Dead End Street PAW: In this case, the PAW provides access to the primary thoroughfare behind the subdivision The PAW could also connect the ends of two dead end streets. • A f'AW shall be provided at mid -block locations when the block length exceeds 800 feet (unless abutting land use is incompatible). Mid eilock PAW: In this case, the PAW provides access through a neighborhood across a long block. • I'AWs shall be provided through a residential Hock at intervals of not more than 400 feet when the Hock backs up to a public use (e.g., school, park, or library). Public Area PAW: In this case, the I'AW provides access through a neighborhood to a city park. Design Considerations: Maximum PAW length between cul-de-sac bulbs. - The maximum PAW length between cul-de-sacs shall be 100 feet. ® Desirable PAW widths (easement and pavement). - The PAW easement shall be 20 feet wide with a 6-foot sidewalk. The sidewalk shall either be located in the center of the easement, or may meander through the access way. • Landscaping requirements within PAW. - Canopy trees shall be planted at intervals of 30 feet through the access way. Shrubs are prohibited within access ways. • Adjacent fencing requirements. - Open type fences (as shown below) will be required adjacent to I'AWs. These fences will be constructed by the developer and dedicated to the City of College Station with other public infrastructure such as streets and utility lines. 1111111111111 1111111111111 1291 tiilli�ti 11111111111111 la-0" o.c. 71AX. OPTPONAL 2'x4"a12 6/VJG WCLDCD WIRC ra.CC 112 SLOP 7Ra+✓CL 3f1c771 6RaJND LC✓CL l'PONT ELEVATION TWO PAIL- PENCE to"0 coNCIe e POOr7Ne CRCGOMMCNOCD) Open Fence: Open fences will allow a view of the PAW from adjacent homes, increasing security of the PAW. 4" 6"a6" Rawer: SAWN GCD, W P05i 2"0" Ra✓rt1 SMYN GCDAR RNL (301-7" r0 Po`) Compatible adjacent land uses. - PAWS shall be required as described by the above criteria when the adjacent land use is residential, park, floodplain/stream, institutional. PAWS connecting residential areas to retail land uses may be required by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Requirement based on future or existing adjacent land use. - PAWS shall be required based on the planned future land use of the adjacent property. In many cases, PAWS will be constructed that lead to undeveloped land, but the opportunity for these pedestrian connections will be preserved for the future. Until the PAW connects to the adjacent developed parcel, the PAW fencing shall be continuous across the opening. College Station Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future MINUTES Joint Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 5:30 p.m® The EXIT Teen Center 1520 Rock Prairie Road College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Reynolds, COMMISSIONERS ASSENT: Chairman Shafer, Commissioners White, Davis and Commissioners Hall, Tra PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS',l Board Members Schroeder, Warner, Allison, Livingston, Farr PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS ASNT: PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF PRESEN Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Ploe DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAF Fogle, Senior Planner xatle, Sta Ruiz, Developmn Assistant Hazlett:' Williams. Chairman Nichols, Erwin. en Davis. nd Recr°ation D;rector Beachy and SE City Pla.r ner Kee,„---TransportationPlanner inners Fletcher and' Prochazka, Development Manager Templin, G'-aduate CivL Engineer Thompson and Staff OTHER CITY STAFF PRESEN, Greenways Program Manager Downs, Diane Strom, Public WorkstIr ern (Greenways), and Assistant City Attorney Nemcik. CITY COUNCI EM ERS PRESENT: Anne Hazen. VISITORS: Mark arkerennifer Lorenz (Executive Director, Legacy Land Trust), Carolyn Vogle (Texas Parks Sand i Vildlife), Charles Ellison (PC), and members of the Brazos Greenways Council Jennifer Nations and Sherry Ellison. 1. CaII to order. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Chairman John Nichols and Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Scott Shafer called the meeting to order at 5:54 p.m. 2. Pardon possible action concerning requests for absences of members from meeting. Advisory Board member Farnsworth motioned to approve the absences of Advisory Board members. Advisory Board member Warner seconded the motion, which carried 7-0. Commissioner Davis motioned to approve the Commission absences. Commissioner Reynolds seconded the motion, which carried 4-0. 3. Hear visitors. Introductions were made around the room. P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 1 of 7 Chairman Shafer opened the Hear Visitors portion of the meeting. Because no one spoke, heclosed the public hearing. 4. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning Conservation Easements. Carolyn Vog|e, a representative of the Department of Texas Parks and Wildlife, explained that a conservation easement is land that is dead restricted, has tax consequences and is restricted of all or some future deveioprnent. She added that it is property owned by a city or county government or a charitable organization through negotiations of a purchasing organization with e landowner. Once the agreement of purchase is reached a hold is placed on the design of the land and agreements on the land for the future are then determined. Thereafter, each subsequent landowner is bound to the agreement. Ms. Vogle pointed out the three types of tax benefits for land that is designated as a conservation easement: (1) Property Tax Benefit, (2) Wildlife/Agricultural Inco , f, n , 0 T aix Benefit, and (3) Inheritance Benefit, In closing, Ms. Vogle stated re§poins--fbility of the land trust company is to monitor and enforce the land�,.-"41sement',,, agreement, making annual visits to the site to ensure that the land remain5,,,,-4aso,,'p "d Jennifer Lorenz, Executive Director, Legacy Land r th-- he 8 year old organization has 10 conservation easement, 7a,,p tigati-on, projects, and are spread out over a number of countie-q., hout U She,- -'--tributed a brochure of the Montgomery County Pre�6rve th&t,'�-i :,the unty land easements in the country. The land,,trust-,,P-,,:compa,r,,,i,,Y�i-,4l�o assi�t§-., the county with the park development by putting in addition, butterfly counts, bird counts and other-simi�ar (�C7'0 ogical intems ,,Prt ofthe New Texas Parks and Wildlife Whed by Woodlands also made """kind mitigation f6r,,-,--,-,-properW h he county wanted to that has', 6,;conservation reite d that a conservation easement is land that ta[n never be devej,''Oed b'd-t', -, rovides trails and access to the area 24 hours Ms. Lorenze'i'a'Ve a diagra - f purchase development rights and explained that the property can change h a t that the easement remains on the land. Additional information re 1'emental environmental projects, which allows you to do strategic cons s discussed. There is no minimum size for conservation easements and you may add property to the size of the easement through amendments. Further discussion ensued regarding other ways conservation easements have been used. Mark Barker, Legacy Land Trust, stated that the City ofBrazos Bend is working with landowners regarding a park that houses an observatory. The City of Houston is building adjacent to the park. Light pollution from the observatory is an issue they are trying to address by working with the landowners to build a buffer through a conservation easement. Ms. Lorenz added that Texas Parks and Wildlife offers great grants and bonus points for doing an easement. She told of the City of Cleveland's canoeing and launch site that has been provided through aconservation easement. P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 2 of 7 Commissioner Davis asked how an easement is established, whether by the landowner or the land trust company and who retains the title? Also, is there a tax benefit to the owner and how do we facilitate this for a fair market value or tax break? Ms. Lorenz advised obtaining the services of an appraiser that is familiar with conservation easements. Chairman Nichols asked how much value a landowner would get out of a floodplain area that isn't developable. City Planner Kee interjected that under the City's current drainage ordinance; a landowner can reclaim floodplain if it is properly engineered. Parks and Recreation Director Beachy asked if there was anything that would speak to lessen the liability of the owner, i.e., and trails. Ms Lorenze; stated that having a conservation easement on private land would increase 'he Itoh�lity. Therefore, the trust company tries to have the landowner give ownership over to a municipality or county. However, we do work with landowners to open they area for birding and butterfly observation, native plant society, etc. MostS[ancaowners twill not open up their property for trails, and it may be possible to have them give s me property for connected easements that are donated to the« municipality an receive a tax deduction for doing so. Mr. Beachy pointed out that the City has approximately 11 acres in Veteran's Park designated as a conservation easement s wed as the Arboretum, off Southwest Parkway which is also a conservation easeme^�` Chairman ]chois suggested that since there is a detnanin Texas for conservation easements, resources should be`explored and our efforts should be concentrated on the areas of priority. Chairman Shafer concurred. Ms. Lorenz stated that the possibility of {ieip; !n fundin It was pointed fragmented. azos Valley Council of Governments is exploring the acquisition processing with TxDOT. y using Trusts, the land would be saved from becoming Ms. Lorenz encouraged City Staff to look closely at their 2003 aria! photos and determine the important areas in and around Brazos County, Grimes County and Robertson County. It would be beneficial to speak simultaneously with 4-5 landowners about conservation easements. On behalf of the City of College Station, Council Member Anne Hazen, presented Carolyn Vogle, Mark Barker and Jennifer Lorenz a gift of appreciation for their informative presentation. 5. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning the current status of Greenways. Greenways Program Manager Judy Downs made the presentation. She opened her remarks by referring to the maps in the back of her report, which she distributed to those present. She presented an update of the Greenways Program that included properties that have either been acquired or dedicated to date as well as the P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 3 of 7 program budget. She followed with an explanation of the proposed Greenvvays Conservation Master Plan Update which she, Scott Shafer, Nanette Manhart and Jane Kee had begun. Ms. Downs covered each section of the program update. She reported that a meeting is scheduled for November 10, 2003 to receive public input regarding the Update. She also recommended changing the title from The Graanvvays Plan to the Conservation Plan. Ms. Downs briefly explained the inception of the Greenvvays Plan as flood control program, adding that sometimes streams have been disturbed and the habitat value is not known. Connectivity issues have been addressed through other plans but still, other issues remain. It is important that land is acquired as it becomes available. Operations and maintenance has not been addressed and is an issue with both the Public Works and the Parka and Recreation, Departments. If the City takes theArrny's Conservation areas, maintenance b This project is proposed for mitigation. Ms. Downs also poithe,, status of the implementation program and the accomplishments thu There was some discussion about determining if bon used for the ET]. Assistant City Attorney Nonncih stated that it wolul,, end w the Uondshare is written. - Further discussion ensued regarding rezoni'Rg---,'-,"c-a's'e"-2s,�-a,ihd properties that-iap6i'i-pro posed at the time of the rezoning for greenway space but a'to"actually,"bever de�d-kbted. Ms. Downs suggested that areas specifieo--,,as g,re_enway`,,thd6l­d rem'61'6.as A-0 Agricultural "lat CoM,__,_mission, the public Open zoning districts. When the fin' and/or private gr_eeqway,,,should',1 epicted oF)y,,-,th'e plaf'�`O`t-`,-tlhat time. To accomplish prove the change in the platting Ian Uage, whichf.�,-i ,,Js bein d E*b-_at,,the City Council meeting on consi Chairman Niefibis interjected -FtV times plans have been reviewed and the VEI 3',,,,have usable�`]­ nd for the Parks Board. Further, the fact that land was accepted (id sn't mean th" ,1and needed was obtained. He questioned the Parks Board's options'�,,-J'h`, regarcls,,"�'_6-Paccepting fees in lieu of land dedication and if the developer has th6_1�,�6ptippt "choose to pay the fee rather than dedicate land. Ms. Kee stated that tfie`,;_P6'rk9` Board and not the developer, decides to accept money in 'h added that parks may have some greenway but lieu of land dedicatio'. Mr. Beac y that not all greenways are parks. Ms. Downs pointed out that some connectivity is OpentOthepub|iC. Parka Board Member Warner added that in some instances where the Parks Board voted to accept land thinking that connectivity would result, proved to be an assumption, asthe connectivity did not come tofruition, Ms. Downs encouraged the Parks Board to consider the whole and not one particular piece of property when mapping out connectivity. Chairman Shafer asked if the floodwater impact was known. Ms. Downs stated that the City is negotiating with some developers regarding storm water needs. She added that velocity control must be conducted. She pointed out that more water is being held in gnaenvvaysthan before development begins. This will N|| the trees and could take as much as 50-100 years for the habitat to correct itself. P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 4 of 7 Mr. Beachy added that there are no requirements explaining how a greenvvay should 6. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning the update of the GreenwaymMaster Plan (Judy Downs, GmaemnwaysCoordinatmr). This item was discussed incombination with Agenda Item No. S, preceding. 7. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning Pedestrian Access policies and criteria (Ken FogU«,l[ranmpor8ation Planner). Transportation P|annerFog|e presented a policy guideline for pedestrian access ways. He explained that the Commission can require a pedestrianay, but that this policy will give them a better guideline on vvha should be placed and how often they should be provided. He reque-s-stb'd- fUtt irection from the boards to continue and complete his research. Mr. Fog|e gave three examples ofpedestrian access 19 At mid -block locations between Between the bulbs of two cul-de-sacs blocks ElAt mid -block locations or dead end stre bu bUc |or public ������ - street � Commissioner White asked if the,, emergency att"Ots, way b, tween Woodland Hills ,p',d to east would be an example of a p Aan acce"§s'%ay. Mr. Fdg4e res�p�dri�ded that this is an example, in r�t'ucks and other emergency pointed out that VVoodcreek Park onl'�-I`has one access an" e rid that.,,fli new phase that will back the subdivision has rough a study conducted e few years ago, signiica;.Access issues brought to light. He requested the Commission's assistance ilhi Mr. Fogle furfh­, 4,i-fied design consideration issues in the proposed Pedestrian Access Way Po_,Ificy_, ui ei Points of discussion included the maximum length, width, landscaping,, adjacent fencing requirements, compatible adjacent land uses and requirements based on future or existing adjacent land uses. Other considerations were voiced, i.e., (1) Should the City require an access way when existing development is going on next to each other or should we plan and require the area to be fenced off until the property is developed out? (2) How do we regulate it? (3) Do the requirements become part of the Subdivision Regulations, Code and Policy Statement? (4) Do we want to provide some sort of incentive? Commissioner White stated that he thought this CODC8pt was a great idea and vvOu|d enhance the sale of lots. Mr. Baachy pointed out that a recent study of Pebble Creek residents revealed that 7O%nfthe residents purchased their lots because nfthe golf course. While most of them do not use the golf course, they purchased their lot for the visual image. Chairman Nichols spoke positively of the Pedestrian Access Way Policy Guideline, saying that it seemed to be something that is manageable. Chairman Shafer concurred and feels that this is the way to address these particular issues. P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 5 of Commissioner Davis expressed concern whether or not bicycles would be able to traverse the pedestrian access ways. Chairman Shafer reiterated the benefit from this type of connectivity. He believes it will lead to a richer and better community and provide a better quality of life. S. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning bikeways. Commissioner Davis deferred comments, stating that he was satisfied with the presentation that was made during the presentation of the preceding agenda item No further comments were made. � 9. Discussion and possible action concerning Park revisions. 1ca ion Ordinance Parks and Recreation Director Beachy stated that his stdff"-h process and will be working on provisions over the next several Item 10b.4 that deals with the developer's option in 'UL I he parks. The current ordinance creates a conflict that preclu-des-``V---,sJng th-;at',bption cit4his',time and it is important to have it working correctly - , --d"" tW ueve/uye/. 10~ Discussion, consideration, sg'lbo g the Unified Development (�F, ~ _~-~-. ��members�pvp|nnnoe� e���ivices ritet��r n�mnu|in ask o���rhe.R�� Board if there ��� be discussed. He suggested that in order~toaddress and define these issues in The Board ncifJ��,,,several items,,` , that weri issues of concern: * Thickness of PON'Yem,,pn, * Parkland s- residential vs commercial. Mr. Beachy reported that Article 8 has been drafted and will be corning before the Commission in the near future. Mr. Tennp|in interjected that the current UDO can be modified tocarry through to Article 8. A brief discussion regarding open space ensued. Mr. Ternp|in added that the City is attempting to negotiate density transfers and encourage developer not to develop in the f|oodp|ains. Ms Downs reminded the Parks Board and the Commission toencourage clustering in order to provide more open space and which is permitted through the UDO. Chairman Nichols asked who owns and maintains properties obtained through clustering and that he would like to see an example of that and see how it fits in with parks. 11. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A Planning and Zoning Member or Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Member may P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 6of7 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 Davis asked for further information regarding the use of bond money for the ETJ. Chairman Shafer suggested forming a subcommittee to research this prospect. He directed Staff to place this item on a future agenda for further discussion. Chairman Nichols thanked the members of the Commission for the opportunity to meet with them. Mr. Beachy echoed his sentiments also to the Commission, and to the staff of Development Services, Ms. Downs, Councilwoman Hazen and all the members of the Parks Board. - Commissioner Shafer reiterated the complimentsir the worms. Downs has done, commenting on accomplished. 12. Adjourn. the great strides in the greenwa,YS-ii'Pr'oject that have been Parks Board mennbe d.Warne*- motionedo.,-,i,-,4djourn the meeting. Parks Board alternate member ErViin`:qecoli4.ed the motiOfir'which carried 7-0. FOR: Nichols, Sdnroe er;Warner, Allison, Livingston, Farnsworth and Erwin. AGAINST: None. ABSENT: ' Davis. The meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m. Approved, Scott Shafer Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission Approved, John Nichols Chairman, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Attest: Susan Hazlett, Staff Assistant Development Services P&Z Minutes Joint Workshop Page 7 of 7