Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/28/2005 - Regular Minutes - Design Review Board CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning & Development Services Minutes Design Review Board Friday, October 28, 2005 Administrative Conference Room City Council Office 1101 Texas Avenue 11:00 AM Board Members Present: Chairman Scott Shafer, Alan King, Hunter Goodwin, Ward Wells, Nancy Sawtelle, and Rick Heaney Board Members Absent: None Staff Present: Staff Planner Molly Hitchcock and Staff Assistants Mandi Alford and Jessica Kramer Others Present: Joe Schultz, Wallace Phillips AGENDA ITEM NO.1: Call to order. Chairman Scott Shafer called the meeting to order at 11:05 a.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consider absence requests. None. AGENDA ITEM NO.3: Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes for August 26, 2005. Ms. Sawtelle motioned to approve the meeting minutes, Mr. Goodwin seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0). During the discussion of item # 4 Alan King arrived at the meeting. AGENDA ITEM NO.4: Presentation, discussion, consideration and possible action on a Planned Development District (PDD) Concept Plan for Castlerock generally located on the proposed State Highway 40 near its intersection with Greens Prairie Road, north of the Castlegate Subdivision (MH, JR 05-173). Staff Planner Molly Hitchcock presented the staffreport stating that the adopted purpose and intent of this PDD was a "single - family residential community with amenities that provide for an enhanced quality of life". The applicant proposed 295 residential lots on 76.662 acres (3.85 dwelling units/acre) with approximately 3.5 acres of buffers, 3 acres of greenbelt, and 5.9 acres of park area. Buffers are proposed along the boundary with State Highway 40 and the future minor collector Helmsley that will traverse the property. The highway buffer will include a concrete wall and natural vegetation while the collector buffer will be landscaped to help screen wooded privacy fences. Greenbelt common areas are proposed for pedestrian connectivity to the adjoining areas and to help break up block lengths in excess of City standards (a subdivision variance for block length will be required from the Planning and Zoning Commission to be successfully platted). Similar to Castlegate, the park land will be dedicated to the City, but the developer will construct the park facility. Homes. will vary from 15 to 35 feet in height. The subdivision will utilize a storm sewer system and existing drainage facilities. The applicant requested that modifications to building setbacks and lots widths be considered with the concept plan. A modification to the required block length was also requested, but as it is a variance to a Subdivision Regulations, it must be decided by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Design Review Board may make a recommendation on this item. Review Criteria: 1. The proposal will constitute an environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony with the. character of the surrounding area; 2. The proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, and any subsequently adopted Plans, and will be consistent with the intent and the purpose of this Section; 3. The proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses in abutting sites and will not adversely affect adjacent development; 4. Every dwelling unit need not front on a public street but shall have access to a public street directly or via a court, walkway, public area, or area owned by homeowners association; 5. The development includes the provision of adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to, parks, schools, and other public facilities; 6. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 7. The development will not adversely affect the safety and convenience of vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian circulation, in the vicinity, including traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use and other uses reasonably anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses on the area. The concept plan was approved by the Parks Board and Recreation Board at their regular meeting on May 17, 2005. The concept plan was also reviewed by the Greenways Program Manager in April of 2005 and met with her approval. Mr. Wells voiced his concern with the safety issues of giving these variances. Ms. Hitchcock stated that Fire had looked at the plans and they had requested a temporary emergency access from the cul-de-sac on Highway 40 until the Helmsley connection, was constructed that will be gated, and will not be used except for emergencies. Mr. Schultz stated that TxDot had been asked if the road could be a permanent road way and the decision has yet to be made. The Board discussed the setbacks and what affects it would have on the other lots and the landscaping. Mr. Phillips expressed that with the houses closer together he does not want it to look like track housing. Mr. Schultz stated that the setbacks that are being requested are also the setbacks that are used in Castlegate. Mr. Schultz stated that several meritorious modifications to the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance are being requested to accommodate the proposed plan. 1. The minimum front and rear setback distances will be 25 feet and 20 feet respectively, as required for R-l Zoning, except lots that front on cul-de-sacs, which are requested to have a 20 foot front building setback. It was also requested to change minimum side setback distance from 7.5 feet to 5 feet. The minimum distance between the residential homes would be 10 feet. The 5 foott side setback has been used successfully for single- family dwellings in Sections 4 and 9 through 13 of the Castlegate Subdivision. Ms. Sawtelle motioned to allow a 20 foot minimum front and side setback on cul-de-sac only; Mr. Wells seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0). Mr. Wells motioned to allow a 5 foott side setback distance on all lots; Mr. Goodwin seconded the motion which passed (5-1) with Ms. Sawtelle voting against. 2. The minimum lot width at either the front or rear building setback would be 45' instead of the 50' required for lot width on R-l zoning. The minimum lot was requested to be 5,000 sq. ft. as required by R-l Zoning. Mr. Goodwin motioned to approve the minimum lot width as proposed but limited to cul-de-sacs andcurves with a maximum of 12 lots; Ms. Sawtelle seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0). 3. The proposed block length exceeds the 1,200 foott minimum block length required by the Subdivision Regulations. The adjacent property cannot be developed since it is a conservation zone: therefore, there is no need to break the blocks along the perimeter with streets that could not be extended in the future. Pedestrian access is proposed through the open space / common areas to connect to the adjacent properties; hence the requests for a greater allowable block length. Mr. Wells motioned to approve that the variance on block length be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Mr. Goodwin seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0). AGENDA ITEM NO 5: Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A Design Review Board 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. No items were discussed. AGENDA ITEM NO 6: Adjourn Mrs. Sawtelle motioned to adjourn the meeting; Mr. King seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0). Scott Shafer, Chairman ATTEST: '-f{L~