The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/06/2006 - Agenda Packet - Planning & Zoning Commission ALE cow ~["1'l' OF CCH.L~(~~ ~'[AI'it)N Ir~~nnirrg CG'1)ra~rujrtnnrt 3`ra•~rrer AGENDA Workshop Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday, April 06, 2006, at 5:30 PM. Council Chambers City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas • 1. Call the meeting to order. 2. Discussion of consent and regular agenda items. 3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update of Texas Department of Transportation projects in the College Station area. (KF) 4. Presentation, possible action and discussion on an item to update the Commission on the status of items within the P&Z Plan of Work (see attached). (LS) 5. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.2.K Alternative Parking Plans. (KF) 6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.2.J Drive Through Queuing Requirements. (~) 7. Presentation and discussion regarding an update on the Northgate Ordinance. (JD) 8. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming Meetings. • April 22, 2006 ~ Dedication ceremony for Wolf Pen Creek Trail Systems and Earth Day presentation and related events. • Apri122-26, 2006 ~ APA National Conference, San Antonio, Texas • October 18-20, 2006 ~ APA State Conference, Corpus Christi, Texas • 9. 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. 10. Adjourn Notice is hereby given that a Workshop and Regular Meeting of the College Station Planning and Zoning Commission, College Station, Texas will be held on the Thursday, April 06, 2006 at 5:30 PM. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda. Posted this the day of March, 2006, at CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Connie Hooks, City Secretary I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City's website, www.cstx.gov. • The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said Notice and Agenda were posted on March _, 2006, at and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and time: by Dated this day of , 2006. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of , 2006. Notary Public- Brazos County, Texas My commission expires: This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request . for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.gov. Council meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channe119. • a. CCI"1' C)F ~C)I.t.FI,E ST~TIC)N 1'Lrrra~rrs~ ¢~' £3~s~, lrrprrrtrit Jrnrrer AGENDA Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday, Apri106, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, College Station City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 1. Call meeting to order. 2. Hear Citizens. At this time, the Chairman will open the floor to citizens wishing to address the Commission on planning and zoning issues not already scheduled on tonight's agenda. The citizen 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.) All matters listed under Item 2, Consent Agenda, are considered routine by the Planning and Zoning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. These items include preliminary 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. There will not be separate discussion of these items. If any Commissioner desires to discuss an item on the Consent Agenda it will be moved to the Regular Agenda for further consideration. 3. Consent Agenda. 3.1 Consideration, discussion and possible action on meeting minutes. • March 2, 2006 ~ Workshop Meeting Minutes • March 16, 2006 ~ Workshop Meeting Minutes • March 16, 2006 ~ Regular Meeting Minutes ~ J 3.2 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Sendera • Subdivision, consisting of 23 lots on approximately 98.7 acres located on FM 2154, just south of Bentwood Estates in the City's ETJ. Case #06- 500008 (JR/CC) 3.3 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Indian Lakes Phase VIII, consisting of 36 lots on 69.67 acres, generally located southeast of the intersection of Indian Lakes Drive and Chaco Canyon Drive, in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction. Case #06-500047 (JP/CC) 3.4 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat for Aggieland Business Park consisting of 17 lots on 117.48 acres located at 5942 Raymond Stotzer Pkwy generally located at the northwest corner of FM 60 and Jones Road in the College Station ETJ. Case #06-500048 (TF) Regular Agenda. 4. Consideration, discussion and possible action on requests for absence from meetings. • Scott Shafer ~ May 4, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting • • Scott Shafer ~ May 18, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting • Scott Shafer ~- June 1, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting • Dennis Christiansen ~ Apri16, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting • John Nichols ~ May 18, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting • John Nichols ~ June 1, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting 5. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action. 6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a variance from Section 8-K.1 (Lots) of the Subdivision Regulations for Lakeside Village Subdivision, and presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat consisting of 56 lots on 13.79 acres generally located along the proposed extension of Eagle Avenue and west of Longmire Drive. Case #06-500012 (TF/CC) 7. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to a Master Plan for Crescent Pointe consisting of 137.14 acres located at 3500 University Drive East in the general vicinity of University Drive, State Highway 30, Copperfield Parkway, and Crescent Pointe Parkway. Case #06-500025 (LB/JN) • 8. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat for Crescent • Pointe Subdivision consisting of 16 lots on 137.14 acres located at 300 University Drive East in the general vicinity of Copperfield Parkway between University Drive East and State Highway 30. Case #06-500004 (LB/JN) 9. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a rezoning for Crescent Pointe Subdivision consisting 137.14 acres located at 300 University Drive East in the general vicinity of Copperfield Parkway between University Drive East and Harvey Road from M-1, Light Industrial to a combination of C-1, General Commercial, A-P, Administrative Professional, and R-4, Multi-Family. Case #06-500003 (LB/JN) 10. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Replat for High Ridge Subdivision consisting of 3 lots on 8.138 acres located at 1201 Earl Rudder Freeway South, generally located on the east side of the freeway between Harvey Road and University Drive. Case #05-500090 (LB/CC) 11. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Rezoning from C-1 General Commercial to C-1 General Commercial with the RDD Redevelopment overlay district for the Culpepper Plaza consisting of 19.15 acres located at 1505 Texas Avenue South, or the northeast corner of Harvey Road and • Texas Avenue. Case #05-500222 (TF) 12. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a possible recommendation to Ciry Council regarding streetscaping in the City of College Station. Case #06-500049 (JD) 13. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a thoroughfare plan amendment in the area bound by State Highway 6, Rock Prairie Road, and Greens Prairie Road. Case #06-500039 (KF) 14. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 3.15 Administrative Adjustments. Case #05-500023 (jP) 15. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.3, Access Management & Circulation, related to driveways. Case #05-500023 QP) 16. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Sections 7.2.F-H, Off Street Parking Standards, related to surfacing and curbs. Case #05-500023 (JP) • 17. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an • amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.1 General Provisions to address building permits /setbacks and porches policy issues. Case #05-500023 (TF) 18. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.8 Solid Waste. Case #05-500023 (TF) 19. Adjourn. Notice is hereby given that a Regular Meeting of the College Station Planning and Zoning Commission, College Station, Texas will be held on the Thursday, April 06, 2006 at 7:00 PM. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda. Posted this the day of March, 2006, at CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Connie Hooks, City Secretary I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meedng of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a • true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City's website, www_ c~ov. The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said Notice and Agenda were posted on March _, 2006, at and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and time: by Dated this day of , 2006. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By. Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of , 2006. Notary Public- Brazos County, Texas My commission expires: This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces ate available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.gov. Council meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channe119. C: Consent Agenda 4 Presentation, possible action and discussion on an item to update the Commission on the status of items within the P&Z Plan of Work (see attached). (LS) 1 r • • • .ti a~ y 0 ~ ~1r ~' V ~ ~ ~ ti O "~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ n ~ ~; a ~ v ~ ~~ A = h o ~ ~ ~ o 0 ~4 N i' V y ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ 'ZS ~ y N z ~~ ~ o ~ 0 0 Q O y~ _~ :? O ~ 0 ~ N ~ ,--~ w b ~ O O ~ ~ '~ w .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ o ~' ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w .~ ~~ y ~ ~ w ~ ~ i/~ • N ~•i ~ ~ A ~ a+ .~ ti U ~~ ~ V ~~ ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~ y ~ ~ ~, ~~ C •~ ~ ~ ~ a o U U ' O O .N 0 ,y ~ ~ w w ~ fi o o ~ N a„ :~ ~ ~qa 0~ ~ "~ ~ ~ o ~ o ,~ U ~ '~ ,~ d x ~, ~ :~ ~~ o ~ ~ ~~ . a y y ~ N ~ ~ a ~ ~°' o ~ ~~ o f]. ~pp cd a .~ 0 U O Q b 0 0 S ~ o p' ~O ~ N ~,o ° a ~ c ~ U a.~ N ~ ~ co O ~ 7+ ~ . C U N _ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~" .~ p .b q > ~ y Q S ~' ~ a ti I ~' I ~ bo °' ~ N ~3 p ~ h '~ ~ •~ o A c ~ ~ a, ~o ~ x .V y Q 'N b ~ S..' O ~ }` o ~ Q ~ 'b ~ N ~ 'b N r O O ~ ~ '~ Y O N ~ >' ~ cd w .'d' ~ C 0p t~.' c~C O . ~ ° ~ ~ a 0 0 ~ ~ ° ' ' U ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a a a ~, .~ .~ ~ ~, ago ~ ~ ~ s ;. -° (~ K ~ Ri ~ ~t . 4 ~ ~~ ~ a ~ a ~ ~ a o v U _~ ~ ~ ° ~ •~ b0 'Zt ~ a ~ ~ o +.. Q 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ q O O fi ~ U .~ '~ U > ~ O U ~~ ~~ ~~ ~. 0 o ~ b ~ p O • is ~ N O CS ~ R y a C ~ Q o ~ X ~q ,p A. ~ ' ~ _ ~ 1. O ~ ~~ w Y °' O ,~/ w~~ o ~ 3 O ~ Pr ~ .~ ~ > ci ~ p Qi ~' ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 3 , 3 Q ~ °~' ao ~' i ~ ° ' [ 1 > q an RS °' ~ 3 a? ~ o 0 0 o •" ~ b ~ °'~ o ° -' q ~ o~ v~ E~UU ,~ v~ .. .~ a C7 NC7 as Q Cq Q ~ N M ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 s i m N J .Q o_ 0 N rn m a • • ~ 'ti o o ,~ A, ~ o o ~ o ~ e a ~ b vs ~ a > A b ~ ~ o e ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ v c. ti p N g ~ ~ ~ w a i ° °~ ' ~ ~ ~ a, oo N o 0 0 ~, ~ o~ ~w wN o ie•~ i g oo ~ ' p y ZS .~ ;~. ~ ~ o~ .~ ~ °' ; ~ n. ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° o e ~ o, a~ ~ p o v ~ ~ ~, o . o. ~ ~ ~~. ,?~ ~ ~ -o ~ ~ o w ~ m ~ '~ o o ~ " a °' ° ° ~ ~ ~ U • o ~ ~ ~ on ~' ~ ,~ ~ , ~ ~ O ~ o ~ ~I v o ~ „~°', ~ a ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a O "' ~ y °- ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ :~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ¢ ° ~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ '~ ~ . a y ~ N ~ ~ ~ H .ry •1.+ ~ ~ ~ Q Q i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ U tl '~ ~ m ~ ~ ti Q ~ ~ C F~ O U ~ ~' ~ W p 0 Q p p Q p p ^ r 1 y ~ O ~ ~ M h+y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s. ~ ~ . ~' V~ o •c, ~ ~ ~ bo •ts ~- ~, ° C ~ o ~ ~ 'on ~ w ~, o N a 'on ~ ~ ~ ~ 'on ~ w ~, O ~' ' 0 ~ 'r ~ o °' ° oD ; °3 a i i °' a~i aq N ts„ o ;ts ~ ~ ~ ~ ° b o ,~ ~ b o ,~ L ~ •v o b L y ~o ~b ~~ bw ~ bw 0 '~ ~ ~ ~/ Li ^ y C~ ~r y ~ ~r . y ~ '~ V ~ ~ ^3 ~- V bQ 0 ~ ^.~ ~ U O O ~ ^.3~ V ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ y D a~ y ~ ~.s~~ ~~~b ~~~b ~~~b ~ `~ ° o ~ a e ~, y ~ ~ ~ ~ o / ~ ~ H ~ v ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ' tl ~+~ lr v ~ 'C ~+ a~i '~ ~ C .`~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ N = fi~ o o a Q a ~ 4 a ~~ ~.~ o o~ ~ ~ ~~~~ o VO R;a Q Qv~ Q~ wwA ~ N M ~ N ~ 0 t m N J T a ° N N (6 d • '~ 6~ ~ ~ " .~ ~" ~ V l t/1 ~ t/1 ~A ~ ~ ~ p O p O ~ N O O ~ O -~ O ~ ono ~ 'd' V i^ QI c~3 LJr N (i ~ ~ ~ ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ .-i ..-~ 00 A O O ~ 'a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c°~i c ~~ ~ ~ ~ 3 , :~ ~ z ~ d' y ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ A~w c~ ~ ~ ~.c o ~ ~ y ~ ~ , -~ ~° ~ U ~ o , a ~ ~ o p4 ` y ° O ~ ° p c~ c~ = ~ ~ ~N N ..~ A U 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 • U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ a~ U cn U o N ~ ~ ~ a~i ..~ ~ ~ o~ u. a ~i ~ a~i '° ~+ ~' . ~ ~ w ~ w ' ~ O w~ H U U a~i , °; .~ ~ w +., O ~ a Q ~ u `~ H uu, a4 ¢ x w x A y ~ nil ~ a ~ . y W i. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ [ .~ o, 0 a 0 a a a cs. • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~,, U U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U ~ . u ~ . ~ a o ~i ~ :: ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ W "' o ~ ~bA ~ ~ Q o ~ U Q, ~ ~• y ~ o ~ ~:~ ~ ~~b ' b A ~ o~ ~ ° ~ . ^~ ~ ` a ' p a ~ LL .~ U ~ b ~ ~b ~ ? ~ y :b 4-. v ,,y ~ ° ^: U ~ ~ r. U ~ .~ a ou o ~" ~ ~ C!3 ~ ~ ~ a `o ~ ~ ++ ~ v *+ v U y ~ a ~; V ~ O p , ~ ~ ~ a '~ .~ a~ ~e A . ¢ o ~ o ~ ~ c q ~ Y a i . , a w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ a o ~ U a 3 ~ • a~ i :~ a i •~ 3 ~ y ~ ir, _ 3w ~w xw U m a ~ A3 xa H ~Ua vi ~o 0o ri Q PG W U M U ~ U A 0 L (0 ti N J a 0 M m rn m d • • • ~; ~ .~ ~ CL 'F+ ,~ O ~ 0 U 0 U ,~ ~ z z v ~ .~ .~ a, \ ~ ~ w ~ ti .~ ~~ ~' A ~ ~ c °' ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~; , U U ~ '> i V O Vl °3 U ~ ~.. ~ ~ ~ _A -- N A N A Q cV O z o v, ~ ~" o ~ 'o ~ N '-, ~ o Cq ~; b e b~ • ,, 3 0 i y o> w " w ~ o~ ~ 0 0 o ~, v~ a a: p w ~ ~ ~ ~ V v ~x ~x • ~ o r~ w ~ .p ~, l~l ~ A ~ (C~ U ~ , Q ~ r-1 ~ ~ a ~ ~Q ~ v~ o O V ~ ~ > ~ ; ~ b~~~ 3 3 ~ ~ U ti W~ U d a ~ a ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ N o a °~ V ;~ O .^., v~ L ~ ,v .N ~ ~ x v ° U ;, N ~ " z w ~ `' " w H y ~ o ~ d a . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ U ~ ~ a N ' ~~ ~ .~e 3 X23 .~ • ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ '° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 u a o . ° ~ a o ~W ° ' ~w .~ ~~„ • , ~•o ~ v H P; ~ p Obi ~ ~ .~4 ~ ~ cd . ~ ~ N is, ~ ~~ ~ '~~ ~ v~Q' ~ ~ ~a •0 0 0 -. W U U ~ o z w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w 3 a, ~ ~ ~ G' A A v ° o ~ C7 U ~ W ° o j • 0 s m a v 0 v m rn co a • ~ /J~1 ^~i B City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 28, 2006 TO: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner THROUGH: Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services SUBJECT: UDO Annual Review - 7.2.K Altemative Parking Plans • At the direction of the Planning & Zoning Commission at the January 5, 2006 meeting, the Annual Review of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) has been divided into several smaller amendments for consideration. The following background information has been prepared for your review prior to the formal consideration of amendments to Section 7.2.K at the April 20, 2006 P&Z meeting. In this section, the change would remove the provision of bicycle parking as an acceptable alternative parking plan since bicycle parking is required through Section 7.9.F "Pedestrian/Bike Circulation & Facilities". Attachments: • Redlined Copy of Section 7.2.K "Alternative Parking Plans" Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7_2. Off-Street Parkino Standards ~ K. Alternative Parking Plans • 1. Scope An Alternative Parking Plan represents a proposal to meet vehicle parking and transportation access needs by means other than providing parking spaces on-site in accordance with the ratios established in Section 7.2.H, Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Required. 2. Applicability Applicants who wish to provide fewer or more off-street parking spaces than allowed above shalt be required to secure approval of an Alternative Parking Plan, in accordance with the standards of this Section. The Administrator may require that an Alternative Parking Plan be submitted in cases where the Administrator deems the listed standard to be inappropriate based on the unique nature of the use or in cases where the applicable standard is unclear. 3. Contents Alternative Parking Plans shall be submitted in a form established by the Administrator and made available to the public. At a minimum, such plans shall detail the type of alternative proposed and the rationale for such a proposal. 4. Review and Approval Procedure The Administrator shall be authorized to approve Alternative Parking Plans. Appeals of the Administrator's decision may be made to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 5. Recording An attested copy of an approved Alternative Parking Plan shall be submitted • to the County Clerk's office for recordation on forms made available in the Department of Development Services. Proof of recordation of the agreement shall be presented to the Administrator prior to issuance of a Building Permit. An approved Alternative Parking Plan may be amended by the Administrator. 6. Eligible Alternatives A number of specific parking and access alternatives are described below. The Administrator shall, however, be authorized to consider and approve any alternative to providing off-street parking spaces on the site of the subject development if the applicant demonstrates that the proposed plan shall result in a better situation with respect to surrounding neighborhoods, city-wide traffic circulation, and urban design than would strict compliance with otherwise applicable off-street parking standards. a. Shared Parking The Administrator may authorize a reduction in the number of required off-street parking spaces for multiple-use developments or for uses that are located near one another and that have different peak parking demands or different operating hours. Shared parking shall be subject to the following standards: ~-ia Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas C7 Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7_2. Off-Street Parking Standards 1) Location • Shared off-street parking spaces shall be located no farther than 250 feet from the building site. The Administrator may waive this distance limitation, if adequate assurances are offered that van or shuttle service shall be operated between the shared lot and the principal use. 2) Zoning Classification Shared-parking areas shall be considered accessory uses of principal uses that the parking spaces are intended to serve. Shared parking areas shall require the same or a more intensive zoning classification than that required for the most intensive of the uses served by the shared parking area. 3) Required Study and Analysis The applicant shall submit a shared parking analysis to the Administrator that clearly demonstrates the feasibility of shared parking. The study shall be provided in a form established by the Administrator and made available to the public. It shall address, at a minimum, the size and type of the proposed development, the composition of tenants, the anticipated rate of parking turnover, and the anticipated peak parking and traffic loads for all uses that shall be sharing off-street parking spaces. The Administrator shall have the authority to require a revised study and analysis should conditions change that may result in a change in site parking conditions. 4) Shared Parking Agreement A shared parking plan shall be enforced through written agreement among the owners of record. An attested copy of the agreement shall be submitted to the County Clerk's office for recordation on forms made available in the Department of Development Services. Proof of recordation of the agreement shall be presented to the • Administrator prior to issuance of a Building Permit. A shared parking agreement may be revoked by the parties to the agreement only if off-street parking is provided pursuant to this Section, or if an Alternative Parking Plan is approved by the Administrator. 5) Revocation Failure to comply with the shared parking provisions of this Section shall constitute a violation of this UDO and shall specifically be cause for revocation of a Certificate of Occupancy or Building Permit. b. Off-Site Parking The Administrator may permit all or a portion of the required off-street parking spaces to be located on a remote and separate tot from the lot on which the principal use is located, subject to the standards of this Section. 1) Location No off-site parking space shall be located more than 250 feet from the building site. The Administrator may waive this distance limitation if adequate assurances are offered that van or shuttle service shall be operated between the shared lot and the principal use. ~-ls Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas • Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7_3. Access Management and Circulation 2) Zoning Classification • Off-site parking areas shall be considered accessory uses of principal uses that the parking spaces are intended to serve. Off- site parking areas shall require the same or a more intensive zoning classification than that required for the use served. 3) Off-Site Parking Agreement In the event that an off-site parking area is not under the same ownership as the principal use served, a written agreement among the owners of record shall be required. An attested copy of the agreement between the owners of record shall be submitted to the County Clerk's Office for recordation on forms made available in the office of the Administrator. Proof of recordation of the agreement shalt be presented to the Administrator prior to issuance of a Building Permit. An off-site parking agreement may be revoked by the parties to the agreement only if off-street parking is provided on-site pursuant to Section 7.2, Off-Street Parking Standards or if an Alternative Access and Parking Plan is approved by the Administrator. c. Bicycle Parking The Administrator may authorize a reduction in the number of required _ off-street parking spaces for developments or uses that,JTlake special roeieced provide bicycle parking provisions to accommodate bicyclists. Examples of accommodations or that include bicycle lockers, employee shower facilities, and dressing areas for employees. 7.3 Access Management and Circulation A. Location of Existing and Planned Multi-Modal Routes Any proposed development shall take into account the location of existing and planned multi-modal routes (i.e., bikeways, pedestrian ways, and transit • routes) and provide pedestrian and/or vehicular connections to the route(s) within or adjacent to the development. B. Easements 1. Street Access No use shall be permitted to take direct access to a street except as allowed in this Section. a. Local Streets All residential uses may take direct access to local streets. Nonresidential uses shall not take direct access to local streets, provided that any lot located within a nonresidential subdivision or any parcel adjacent to a street within a nonresidential subdivision may take direct access to the local street internal to the subdivision, and provided that any corner lot abutting a local street and an arterial or collector street or freeway may take access to the local street if such access is required by the highway governmental authority having jurisdiction. b. Minor Collector Streets No single-family dwelling, townhouse, or duplex shall take direct access to minor collector streets except when permitted by the Subdivision Regulations. 7-16 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas C7 • ~~~ City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM • DATE: March 27, 2006 TO: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner THROUGH: Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services SUBJECT: UDO Annual Review - 7.2.J Drive-Through Facility Queuing Requirements At the direction of the Planning & Zoning Commission at the January 5, 2006 meeting, the Annual Review of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) has been divided into several smaller amendments for consideration. The following background information has been prepared for your review prior to the formal consideration of amendments to Section 7.2.J at the April 20, 2006 P&Z meeting. The changes proposed to Section 7.2.J will provide requirements for the design of drive-through queuing lanes for businesses that serve drive up customers. Attachments: • Redlined Copy of Section 7.2.K "Drive-Through Faality Queuing Requirements" • Article 7. General Development Standards Section ~ Off-Street Parking Standard, _ __ _. _ ... _ _.._ _ _ ._ _ . _.._ . _ _ _ _ _ _ , • * OverFlow parking above required parking spaces may be grassed rather than paved. All unpaved Per Ordinance No. 2753 dated September 23, 2004 spaces shall be shown on site plan and organized for efficient traffic circulation using wheel stops and other appropriate measures as required by the Administrator. ** No more than 25% of any shopping center square footage shall be utilized for intense uses (uses that, individually, have a parking requirement greater than 1:250 in C-1 or C-3 and 1:350 in C-2) unless additional parking is provided in accordance with the above requirements for that square footage of such uses in excess of 25%. DriverThrough Facility Queuing Requirements 1. Minimum Number of Spaces Drive-through aueuing spaces shall be ravided as indicated in the folioUVinq table: MINIM M OFF- TREET E ING RE UIREMENT Automated Teller Machine 3 Teller Bank Teller lan 4 Teller or Windoav Car Wash Stall Automatic 4 ervice Position ar Wash Stall. Self-service 3 rvice Position Qr Cleanin ar Lau_ndr 2 Window Oil Chance Station 3 Service Position Photo Lab 4 Pick-U Window Restaurant Drive Throur h 4 Order Box Re taurant Drive Throu h 3 Order Box to Pick- 1,'Vindow Other As determi ned b the, Administrator. • 2. Design and Layout Oueuina spaces or aueuing areas shall be d.~signed in accordance with the following criteria. a. ueue spaces or queuing areas may not interfere with ~arking_spacesx parking aisles, loading areas, internal circulation or driveway access. b. Eac~l queue space shall consist of a rectancular area not less than ten f_et (?0' wide and eighteen and one half feet (18.5'Z long with a vertical clearance as specified in the building code. c. Queue spaces are not interchangeable with parking spaces except for the following uses where the~ace providing services may count toward the parking requirement: bank teller, car wash, and oil change station. d. A twelve foot ~12`~ by-pass lane ma~~be required adjacent to queue " lines to allow vehicles an opportunit~to circum~.;ent the drive-through actiyit~and exit the site. e. Queue areas and drive-through faciliti2s shall be clearly identified with the appropriate signing and marking_ f. Spaces within a car wash facility or drive-through oil change station m~ be_ counted toward the gUeuin re uirement, Unified Development Ordinance 7-13 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas Formatted: Bullets and Numbering .Formatted: Heading 4~ Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Formatted: Heading 4.1, Tabs: Not j at 1.05" Formatted: Bullets and Numbering I~ Formatted_Bullets and Numbering J • Regular Agenda 3.1 Consideration, discussion and possible action on meeting minutes. •March 2, 2006 ~ Workshop Meeting Minutes •March 16, 2006 ~ Workshop Meeting Minutes •March 16, 2006 ~ Regular Meeting Minutes r 1 ~ MINUTES Workshop Meeting ~_ Planning and Zoning Commission CInrOFCOLLEGESTATION Thursday, March 2, 2006, at 5.30 p.m. • PlanningerDevdoOmenrServices Council Chambers, College Station City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Scott Shafe ''~ ~ ~~nnis Christiansen, Bill Davis, and Ken Reynolds. W~, ~~~~ "'°'`° COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Marsha Sanfo .; ~ ~John~~ " ~~ ols and Harold ~.~If ~~~,p~~ Strong. ~r, ~4,~~,~~ .,::, ' ~ ~ CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENe~~ No,~e. ~~~~;~~~~~,~~~~~, -~,. ~~~ ~ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERV~~C~ES~B~~TA`FF PRES NT: Staff Planners Lindsay Boyer, Crissy Ha;~,tl, and Jennifer'Rf eves, Senior Planners Jennifer ilia Prochazka and Trey Fletcher, Senior ,~~ 'stant City E'iil;ileer Alan Gibbs, Graduate Civil Engineer Carol Cotter, Transpo ~~ ' ~, ~I':' nner Ken Fc>~le, Director Joey Dunn, Assistant Director Lance Simms, D~ opm ,~4;: rdin~aor Bridgette George and Staff Assistants Jessica er and Deb `race. Ifl~~~' '~~` ,a , it gyp. {C~` ;,'~,' ~'~~~!ii OTHER CITY S '~' `: F P ,$,ENT: Ass! ant City Attorney Carla Robinson and Brian Cook, OTI~. ~~ ~N~~:. ~ ~~N;~;I~i,,,;,, 1. 2. rezoning for calleclry;the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. and regular agenda items. discussion regarding the Aggieland Business Park and the Highway. Commissioner Christiansen expressed concern regarding the urgency of proposed changes in the Northgate districts and acting on all the changes at once. Commissioner Shafer asked for a specific date of the review that TIP Strategies had done. Joey Dunn, Director, stated that the date of the review was • September through October 2005. He informed the Commissioners that staff had received updates, comments and other input since that time. He also P&Z Minutes Workshop Agenda March 2, 2006 Page 1 of 4 • 3. 4. commented that he was prepared to present the changes to the Northgate area and the new Ordinance. He informed the Commission that if they felt more time was needed, there was some flexibility; stating that if the Commission wished for more research to be done on a couple of areas then staff would be glad to do that. He also stated that staff did not want to put heavy breaks on the Ordinance and begin again. Mr. Dunn reminded the Commission that there had been a great deal of work done on the Ordinance, including a lot of input and compromise. He stated that he wanted to make sure the Commission knew that they did not have to approve item tonight if they were not comfortable with the ro osals. ~ ~~"i~~~r" ~~" P P ~~~~~,~i ~~' Mr. Dunn mentioned that Item 6 on the Work Regular Agenda were pulled from the age ,_' tonight. `~~' ~~' r°" :'~;. ' Presentation, possible action, and dis~cusl Development Ordinance, Section 5.4 N ~~ia~e he Unified Standards. Crissy Hard, Staff Planner, gad ~.~~ ntation <<~~rig the updates on the Non-Residential Dimensional S ~ ' ~ d ~ ~:. n ~ , f.ta~ie Unified Develo ment Ordinance. '~, ~~~~~"'~ p ~, ~,~, 'y. Presentation;: ~ ~ cassil~le ""'` on, and dis ssion regarding an update to the Unified Develotinient ;' r~linan Section 7.9 ~ ,~-Residential Architectural Standards. (JP) fifer ProL~ , ~ , , Se the Non- ~ ~ ~ en ~looment Or ~ ~~n~ 5. for them."""~~~ agenda item. Planner, gave a presentation regarding the updates ~~,~'' ~~hitectural Standards section of the Unified ~ssed concern regarding detention areas and screening that he would like to discuss that further as a future Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update to the Unified Development Ordinance, Article 11, Definitions. (CH) Crissy Hartl, Staff Planner, gave a presentation regarding the updates on the Definitions section of the Unified Development Ordinance. • 6. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding a possible Streetscape Resolution. P&Z Minutes Workshop Agenda March 2, 2006 Page 2 of 4 and Item 8 on the got be considered This item was pulled from the agenda. • 7. Presentation, possible action and discussion on an item to update the Commission on the status of items within the P&Z Plan of Work (see attached). (LS) Lance Simms, Assistant Director, presented the Plan of Work and reviewed the updates with the Commissioners. ,.,~~~~lI,U~~,,~t,. Commissioner Davis asked about detention area. ' ~~ wanted to know which document contained requirements for detention eas. wii~'''r`~h e,., ,~,h. ~N~I , Alan Gibbs, Senior Assistant City En : eer, Mated that°~~Y~I ~ ~. 'defines for detention areas were in the Drainage' F 'Guid 'nes Manual. 1, „N,iu~~° Commissioner Davis stated that he woult~li~'e to see the City's guidelines address the areas of use and~~ibility for the do iition areas. He stated that he would like to see this as a fu ~~;tt~nda item. ,, 8. Presentation, possible action, ar~~~ disc" ~:~'~ ~'' ~ , egarc~ltig the P&Z Calendar of b I~~~r, • Upcoming Meean~ ~~~;~~~~ ~, ~" ~~ o• Marc ~ ', 2006 5 ~ Planning ~ ~ d Development Services Department Forum, { oi~tcrencc Center, Ro ~ ~u~~~~~27, 11:30 a.m. • March 23, "20(1(> ~~ ;] oi~~~~~rorks~ ' p with City Council ••• ,~~III~~ ~ ~ ~0(~~>~~ 1)c~~l~cari~>ri""~eremony for John Crompton Park, P' 5:30 ~ ~i ,~~~ p• ~i i~ .,, ~~ a,,~~~~i~~ i ' April 22,~~~N,`' ~`~ 6 -~-` L~~dication ceremony for Wolf Pen Creek Trail ~~~ ~~ Systems an ' rth I~'ay presentation and related events. • I,~~~ o• '' ~ ~ 22-26, ' 06 ~ APA National Conference, San Antonio, Texas • I ~~ ~~er 18 ' , 2006 ~ APA State Conference, Corpus Christi, Texas Joey Dunn, )~"ector, reviewed the upcoming events for the Commissioners. 9. 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. • Commissioners Shafer and Davis stated that they would like to see a future topic on detention facilities, screening and landscaping for them. P&Z Minutes Workshop Agenda March 2, 2006 Page 3 of 4 10. Adjourn • Commissioner Davis motioned to ad'ourn. Commissioner Re nolds l Y seconded the motion, motion passed. Approved: Scott Shafer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Attest: ~~ Lisa Lindgren, Staff Assistant Planning and Development Services • • ~~ ~~ "~ ~' .. _ n ~ ,ry ~ .+~. ,,p. .y~,~ , i ~ Ip4 ~4, ~~a ~ '~~. I~I,, ~. ~~~,~: ~~'`~ ~~ y, ~~ ~°~`~", ~'I ~IpI~m~1'~~~jf1µ~j'I~pu~y~ .ill IW9YIIIIIN~11~11~~'v~.. r~ :. P&Z Minutes Workshop Agenda March 2, 2006 Page 4 of 4 MINUTES Workshop Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission • Thursday, March 16, 2006, at 5:30 p.m. Council Chambers College Station City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning er Development Services rw "~ ~ a- v, ~II6H~ ~,~~` k~~~i~~~ BMIe COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Cornt~ `~ Toners ~ hn Nichols, Strong, Dennis Christiansen and Marsha Sanfo~. `; ..~l~l,k;u. },,, ~A:u,~a ~F,~~ w;. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT a~ . Chairman Scc~ "~, Shafer, Commissioners Ken "P~llr., .,~ ~T Reynolds and Bill Davis. '' "I~~~ ; ~ ~ " ~~ CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRE, ANT"~"'''ilaN~!h~l~i'~Ya~aUNone. "° "9 ,~~~~~~r'~ WW u,~"~ ~p~l'~ ~~~ilp~ ".ili ~i PLANNING & DF~ELD~MENT S ~'tVICES S~~ AFF PRESENT: Staff Planner Jennifer ~ ',',yes, Sc~ii~r Planners''~~N,ennufer Prochazka and Trey Fletcher, ~~ ~" r~ ~, Assistant City Enginccr >>I.~n C~~bbs, Gradua ~~~~ivil En neer osh Norton Director ~ J , Joey Dunn, Assistant I~ir~rr~>r~~~I~arice S~'t ms, GIS Technician Adrian Welsh, m~" ~"i~'I~iIIi I, I ~~ 911u ,. Transpor~~„~~~"""qi j~'`~~,I~plr Ken l~c,~lc .u~~l Staff Assistant Lisa Lindgren. i ~ h I~ (ul~~ib ~I OT : ~' ' CITY ST '' ~ RESNT: First Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinso ~~,~~~~~~ OTIS Bry.~~.~Cook.~ 1. Call to called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. 2. Discussion of consent and regular agenda items. Commissioner Nichols asked for clarification on Item 11 on the Regular Agenda. He asked for additional information on Renee Lane and how it connected. • Jennifer Reeves, Staff Planner, stated that a portion of Renee Lane was abandoned and that the cul-de-sac shown on the plat has been constructed. P&Z Workshop Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 1 of 4 Commissioner Nichols asked if Passendale would connect to Victoria. • Ms. Reeves stated that Passendale would connect to Eagle Drive and that Renee Lane goes to Barron and to Eagle Drive through Passendale. Commissioner Nichols inquired about the variance issue on Item 7 on the Regular Agenda, regarding the connection of Indian Lakes Drive and where it leads to. "~!`'"' ~ja~rh~a;!~,, ~~~:,~ ,;, '~~J ' Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner, stated tha ~ir;i!~~''; F y connection Indian Lakes Drive has is to Aaron's Road. He star 'that ' ately Indian Lakes Drive would come out and connect to o" ee wlu't: `. "' ~~~ onnects over to Highway 6. "~ ~'° ' 'y' ~~ Commissioner Nichols asked for cla ' `~'~ `;motion o~~. the discuss regarding access to the property to the South. ,,~, i Mr. Fogle stated that staff ha ' ~~ erns about t~hc property outlined in red on the map that was displayed, ~ ~c ~, he tract cif lend that staff wanted to give access to at some point. H tate '''Q ' ~~ roperty is owned by the same ~~U~; ~~ I t o. person that ow e majority f ~ e pr ' ~' ~~ between Highway 6 and '~~:~ Wellborn Roa ~ ~ ~ t ~ f the area. e stated ~ ' at one difference was that part of Peach C ~x ran this ~~ ~~ h the area d for that ro er to be connected to ,~,~ p P tY the rest of ~the'~~pi~~pett~ fiat a bridge ~ ~l~d have to be built over Peach Creek. He went on to s~,~'~ - t s~ra ~ ~ '~a;~t~c~,n~, o see connection through Indian Lakes M~" '~+also stated tfi'at staff had s oken to the develo er about on 811 ~ ~~;,,; ty ~, P P viding tfie~~~i,!, nectic~:'~ as part of Phase X. Mr. Fogle stated that the ,;,,,;~ . ' eloper prop ' ~ m of w~ the future phases to have a connection from In ~ ., Lakes Dri ~ ectl~ 'into the adjacent property. He stated that staff felt that section wo,~.~"d be sufficient. 3. Presentatid~'! ~I~ ~;~'~'ible action and discussion on an item to update the Commission the status of items within the P&Z Plan of Work (see attached). (L ~) Lance Simms, Assistant Director, presented the P&Z Plan of Work. Items discussed were the Comprehensive Plan Update, the Annexation Plan and the Unified Development Ordinance update. 4. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding an update to the Unified • Development Ordinance, Sections 7.1 General Provisions and 7.8 Solid Waste. (TF) P&Z Workshop Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 2 of 4 Trey Fletcher, Senior Planner, gave a presentation on the General Provisions • and Solid Waste of the Unified Development Ordinance. 5. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 3.15 Administrative Adjustments. (JR) Jennifer Reeves, Staff Planner, gave a presentation on the Administrative Adjustments of the Unified Development Ordinance. h~ ti 6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion re h' ~' •, i update to the Unified Develo ment Ordinance Section 7.2 Off-Street;.: ry arkin~ ,~~°t~~;ndards. (JP) P ~ ~ Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Planner, gaST a presentation reg~~l' g Off-Street Parking Standards of the Unified Dev ~ ''~,,: ent C~~ dinance. ~ ~ ~` ~, ,~.~~ 7. Presentation, possible action, and discussioi~`:,~e~; girding an update to the Unified Development Ordinance, S~ ,,tion 7.3 Access ~,~`R~ ~.nagement and Circulation. (JP) "i ~~~I~~Ij~llil„~~w~~ ~ ih ' ~,~ , id~uy ~~~ ~~, , Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Pla er, res~ntation regarding Access „~, • Management ari~d ~ ulations of ~ ~~~ fie ~ '~opment Ordinance. ~- ~au~.r. 8. Presentatio os~il~le Lion, and ussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming~Me~~in~;s ~ ~~~' ~~ ~. ~~~ 9llfil';hN~~~iH~l!i'~~'~, ~ ~~~~ , ~' ~~ ~~l(~ ~ ~ ~ i nt \~Go"rkshop with City Council, 3:00 p.m. `~~ April , ~ ~'~'`~,6 ~ ~~ dication ceremony for John Crompton Park, ~dll~~~ ~a~~~i~ ~~! 5:30 p.m. NiI ~jii'~, • I~~ pri122, 20~~ Ii ~ ~~ D~clication ceremony for Wolf Pen Creek Trail ' ~ terns and ~ ` rth Da resentation and related events. YP • A'~~! ~ "ICI I. 2-26 ~ ~ ~ 06 ~ APA National Conference, San Antonio, Texas • Oct~i,~'~~20, 2006 .~ APA State Conference, Corpus Christi, Texas Lance Simms, Assistant Director and Joey Dunn, Director, reviewed the upcoming meetings and events for the Planning and Zoning Commission. 9. 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. P&Z Workshop Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 3 of 4 • • C7 10. Commissioner Christiansen asked for a future agenda item regarding the process of how items get on the Planning and Zoning Commission agenda. Commissioner Nichols asked for a future agenda item regarding the Bryan Comprehensive Plan and to take a look at Rules of Proceedure. He suggested that we take a look at the Rules of Proceedure after the new Commission would be appointed in May 2006. Commissioner Nichols asked fora future assessment within the last two years regarding work. He would like a list of the top three and n Commissioner Christiansen motio Sanford seconded the motion, motion Scott Shafer, Planning ar P&Z Workshop Minutes March 16, 2006 item"' regarding a staff ;fat worked and did not iourn. projects. Page 4 of 4 • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION MINUTES Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday, March 16, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, College Station City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: John Nichols, and Marsha Sanford. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Chairman and Ken Reynolds. , ;,; CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Davis STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planner J'°"'' er Reeves, Seniof ~'lanners Jennifer Prochazka I II ~~~ q~~,. ~~ii~'~IP and Trey Fletcher, Assistant City En ~ ~ijl n Gibbs, ~r,~Ed;}~~te Civil Engineer Josh ~~~" Norton, Transportation Planner Ken Fo ~ ~ D ~~ oey Dung, Assistant Director Lance Simms, GIS Technician Adrian Welsh, S f ~ q''~,~i,j;~ ~L'indgren, First Assistant City • ~ Attorney Carla Robmsc-mand`OTIS Actionj'~,p~ ter Repre'~~ntative, Brian Cooke. 'ii~lliiti I 1. Call meeting tt~~orc1~~~ . ~ p`i, ~;~ h~~~~h ,yip, ~,GU Ac+I~in~i'f,~~, ~'"~Iillu~man,IJohn Nirh~~ls celled the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. i, X11 ~~~~ ~ ~ ~i~ 2. ~~! ~~r Citizens. ~~~i,~~~~~~~~}1 ,~,~,~~iil1 ~ lN~~~~u ~~i~N::i;!r~1~~ 3. and possible action on meeting minutes. March 2, 2006, Minutes -Regular Meeting Commissioner Christiansen motioned to approve the minutes. Commissioner Sanford seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0). • ~!, ~~,~r~,~,tiansen, Harold Strong P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 1 of 5 • Re lgu ar A eg nda 4. Consideration, discussion and possible action on requests for absence from meetings. * Harold Strong ~ March 2, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting * Bill Davis ~ March 16, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting * Ken Reynolds ~ March 16, 2006, Workshop & Regular Meeting Commissioner Christiansen motioned to approv ~~'~11'"~~~~",,habsence requests. Commissioner Sanford seconded the motion, moth;passed (4-0). 5. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on"'~~I~ms ref'Y''1`~'d from the Consent ~,, "I~ . Agenda by Commission action. ,II;ti~,;;, ,,;,,,,;,,,, ~ ,. ~ gi;lil „ ~I~~~",~ ~~~~li ~~ "I~I~ I No items were removed from the Conser~'"i~ , genda:'~~~,. ~ '~~~II'~;~u,,,;~ "' ~'° fVli~~ u I'~~'''''' II~i11~Ili`Il:il:,i, ~ ~ (~~IIli4~~,~n .i"x~,;. 6. Presentation, possible action, and discussiorit' ~,' '' I ing~~~a project proposal for the Statewide Trans ortation Enh cement Pro am'~~~I; li`ilr;;~, ~, III"~'flli~., ,,II~~ ~,~ ~, Ken Fogle, Transportation Pla~l~' er, ~~~, a presenta ~ 'ilt"'egarding the Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program. ` I II~~~~ ~,~,~ ;,„ ul~illll~ t'N~~h~IiIII (Ii ~; i ,,,ii It(~h~ I Ilj''I' I~II;IU I I i~~li I ~il Commissioner .Sanford motioned ,, to apprg: a the project proposal and recommend-- i~' to CityCouncil. Commissioner Christiansen seconded the ,~i~~ motion, motion passed (4-0). ,,,~,,:. 7. Prese p~ ~ x~~~ible arti~~n, and discussion on variances to Section 12-L7 (Cul- de ~~~~ ~ , ti©n 12-1t? (131ock Length) for Indian Lakes Phase X; and ' ~ sentation, po'i' action, and~diseussion on a Preliminary Plat for Indian Lakes ~~''~i X, consistin ~ 41 lots un 79.71 acres, located southeast of the intersection of Lakes Dri d Chaco Canyon, in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction. Case ~ 00035 (J ;;r C) Jennifer Pi'~I ~' ~; Senior Planner, presented the variances and Preliminary Plat, and recomm ~ ed approval of the preliminary plat pending approval of the variances. Travis Martinek, 3608 East 29th Street, Bryan, Texas. Mr. Martinek spoke in favor of the project. Commissioner Christiansen motioned to approve the two variance requests as submitted. Commissioner Strong seconded the motion, motion passed (4- 0). • P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 2 of 5 C~ • Commissioner Christiansen motioned to approve the preliminary plat as presented. Commissioner Sanford seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0). 8. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding a possible recommendation to City Council regarding streetscaping in the City of College Station. Case #06- 500049 (JD) 9 10. Joey Dunn, Director, presented the item. Commissioner Strong made a motion for staff to and bring it back to the Commission at the ea order for them to review it again and possibly City Council. Commissioner Sanford second ~~ . N~i~G~~~ha ~'`~,, 11Np Public hearing, presentation, possible n, and Ponderosa Place Section 2, Tract E and., ~~ 1, B1ocI~~~ 4-A, consisting of 2 lots on 5.29 acres lo~,atw~d at~,~ generally located north of the Rock Prairie Ro'~;`~. Graduate Civil Noone spoke during the public Commissioncr``C'h ris Strong seconded the struct the document '~,~ilable meeting in a recommendation to ~,otion, motion passed 0 of Pond $~,~~0 State Case #06 a replat for ~"e Section y 6 South, ;2 (TF/JN) and recommended to approve the replat. Commissioner ,~ .ion passable action, and discussion on a rezoning for 3850 onsisting of 1 lot on 1.678 acres generally located north cxit,;~from C-2 Commercial-Industrial to C-1 General 500(TF/LB) inner, presented the rezoning and recommended approval. received one phone call inquiring about the rezoning during the public hearing. Commissioner Christiansen motioned to approve the rezoning as presented. Commissioner Sanford seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0). 11. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Replat of Bald Prairie Lots 4&5 and a Final Plat of Edelweiss Gartens Phase 7 consisting of 50 lots on 10.715 acres located off of Eagle Avenue east of Brandenburg Lane. Case #06-500032 (JR/JN) P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 3 of 5 C7 Jennifer Reeves, Staff Planner, presented the Replat and Final Plat and recommended approval of both. Steve Arden, 311 Cecelia Loop, College Station, Texas. Mr. Arden spoke in favor of the project. Commissioner Christiansen motioned to approve the Replat and Final Ptat a\s presented. Commissioner Strong seconded the motion, motion passed (4- ~)• ,rl~l,~,. 12. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, ark '~~iiscussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinan ~I~~~ ~ ~;~ • ~ ~ 5.4, Non-Residential Dimensional Standards. Case #OS-500023 (JPl °` ~ ~~~i81lIG~~~~.~, Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Planner, pre (ed the Non-Resid" ~ Dimensional Standards. She recommended that the ~ missio : take no action ~' item, or, table the item in order for staff to go~'~~ac ~;Ir~~;, d toc}~~~~„r other possi `~ resolutions before going to City Council. '~~~h~~H~~~i;i;h~~~~~u Noone spoke during the • The Commission took no actiorin~ n th'~~' ' ''' ; nd di~;,~'cted staff to go back and make the appropriate changes. ~~ ~ ~~i! ~q~r~" ~~ ~ !a~~~ ~kiiiji~~ ~x ~ ~I ,. 13. Public heari ~~~" t~rE,~ntation, possi ~~ action, and discussion regarding an amendment~f~t~Unihe ,~YDevelopmen ~dinance, Section 7.9, Non-Residential Architectural Star3t~~~rds. _Casc #OS-5000 ~~(JP) ,.~- '~- ~' f ~ e ~ er~ ~ ka,~'~"`nior Planner, presented the amendments for the Non- ,, ,,~~'esidential ~ ~, turatandards. hearing. Commi~'~ er C "~istiansen motioned to approve the amendments and recommen~y to City Council for approval. Commissioner Strong seconded th ~ otion, motion passed (4-0). 14. Public hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Article 11, Definitions. Case #OS-500023 (JP) Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Planner, presented the amendments for the Definitions section of the Unified Development Ordinance. • Noone spoke during the public hearing. P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes March 16, 2006 Page4of5 • Commissioner Christiansen motioned to approve the amendments and recommend them to City Council for approval with one change. The change was to take out the word "primarily" in the defmition of a hospital. Commissioner Strong seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0). 15. Adjourn. Commissioner Sanford motioned to adjourn. Commissioner Christiansen seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0). r~ • Approved: Scott Shafer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Attest: .;::: _:. ._ f, ;~_ _ Lisa Lindgren, Staf£~s~istant Planning and Develo~~m~i~t services P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 5 of 5 Regular Agenda 3.2 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Sendera Subdivision, consisting of 23 lots on approximately 98.7 acres located on FM 2154, just south of Bentwood Estates in the City's ETJ. Case #06-500008 (JR/CC) • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Jennifer Reeves, Planner Report Date: March 9, 2006 Email: jreeves(g)cstx.gov Meeting Date: April 6, 2006 Project Number: 06-00500008 Item: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Sendera Subdivision, consisting of 23 lots on approximately 98.7 acres located on FM 2154, just south of Bentwood Estates in the City's ETJ. Applicant: Joe Schultz, Agent for Owner/Developer Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat as submitted. Item Summary: The property owner is proposing to develop a rural residential subdivision consisting of 23 lots, ranging in size from 1.35 acres to 8.8 acres. The Commission recently approved the Preliminary Plat in February with a variance to Section 12-K.2 (Block Lengths) of the Subdivision Regulations. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The Land Use Plan shows most of the land in the ETJ to be developed at a rural density (very low density residential development with agricultural and support uses). The City does not control land • use in the county, but does share platting authority. FM 2154 is designated as a Major Arterial on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. Item Background: The subject property was brought into the ETJ in 1995. To the north adjacent to the subject property is Bentwood Estates which was platted in 2003 and developed as rural residential lots. Across FM 2154 from the subject property is Duck Haven Estates that was platted and developed in 2004 as rural residential lots as well. Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the final plat. The options regarding the final plat are: ^ Approval ^ Denial Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) and Aerial Map 2. Application 3. Copy of Final Plat (provided in packet) • / I - = ~~ ~`- - i i ,"_~_ - - ---- ~ ii ~ - s ~ . ,~ f ,s , , -.,,...~ t --i _ f ~::. J '^,~ ,~` :~t~:~ ;' :; r / ~ ~ i \ ; x 1 ter'. i,+~. •''~~ ~LL~°. .- s,s W ;~: ~::~< '/ ' iE :r .'~ , i ~ r -. -__ • • ~'mra•hr ,~ c-1>+r-4onrrr Jerelrr. (Check an,:) J._ Minot I, J Amondigg 'Final J _ Vacating _ J Rvplat i530b.Ofl} 15300.Q0- 1540.00} I>*~04.09- t8600.u01' ~~`? '~5S ~ 'InC wJuS ' :di IC Ir!:,r no tPe Is this plat in the ETJ? (I,~fes r No ~ti~ he~z~~ 4.~.C: t FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Pfl,L CASE Nd._ ~ JJ ~~~ __ DATESU6MITTEI): ~ tG ~ ~I, FINAL PLAT APPLICATION The follawir,g itcrns roast be submitted by an established filing deadline daEefor Pr51Z Comrri+gsion considcratfnn. MINIMUM 9UBMITT'Al. REQUIREMEt+ITS: I~ Firng Fey ;see above} NOTE: hluryiple ShePls - #SS.~o per 9hditianal sheet ~ ~ #'j~ N~1 Variarta~e Request to Subdivision Regulalinns ~ $1oi] (i(appliC~rble} ~; . ~~~ ~ Oauelapment f'ermrt ,4pplicalion Fee of $~Ot7.00 {if applicable). tJ~ InfraSlruclurt InspPe!ian bee of $G!!t}.00 ±applrcable it any public rn~rasttuclure is beano construrtpdj 1/ ~.pplicaGon Completed in full. ,~jd, Lapy of oriyirtal deed restriction5ltioYenants fur reoi2ts {if applec:SbleJ ~ Thirteen q13) `olded copies aFp(at. {A signed mylatoriginal niu~l 5e subrnitked after staff ~eview.j ~; Oite {1 j copy of the approved Frelirninary F'la! anrf!or one {1 }Master Plan {if 8pplicablei- Paii1 tax certificates frcrrn Ciiy or College Sialion h.3reuos County and College 8t:~lion 1.5 C r~ copy of th~c aktached checklist with all ferns checked affar a briolf explanation as to ~~I-y they are na:. sL Twc {2 j copies of public: infrastructure plans associated with this plat {it applicable}. (Jj$~ Parl~antl Dedicaticxi re uincm!eni a roved by the Parks & ReLreativn Ba:~rd, please plpvice a•o~f vi ~ ff approval (if aptslirable). ~ ~ r ~ - .pr~J ~~:t.t 4 Date of Pr>~application Conference: O 7~ ~~~ r_ NAME OF SUt3UIVl:'?t(7N ~1~ rc~~ M'~c~ ~'„t}~ tY 1'~t.b~_~ ~rl ~..T'.~ ~ - - // SPCCIFIFn ~OCJiT1flN OF PRt3POSCQ SUBDIVi810N 1Lot & Block} L1rt ~~a~rr~~f}. Warx.~ ~S}a~fiCS APPL.IGrLNTlPR4JF{:T MI4IUAGER'S If+tF{"lR~titATION [Primary Gon:acl for the Pmjc:rx;~ Name ~zf~1~4.tr><. ~!>?.ll ~v~ L~c~ `~ . L . aC~~ ~, reeA Add revs ~t} 0 ~v1-twaC~ ~r`c v 'v Glti ~`.v ~~ e ~ta-4~ ~r L_ $[at° _ , ~ ~ 7i~1 Gcde -_'J~~j~~, -.__. h-Mall AdlireSS t~lrl~ 4Y}1r~J ^~[~ ~I:~C--s~ii r~i'~^rJ Nnone Nttrntrer 1~iG -- ~ t`I ~ --- Fax Numtret ~~~7`J' ~ _ PROPGRrY O'oVNCR' i INFORMATION tP.LI ~~ne^s nusi be laertifi?d. Please a(:rc•~ an addl'IirJnai s^re; fw inuldple owner j. Name ~~...o~~ 11~;a_l ~ ~~~•Y.M1 ~_~~_ _ __ StrcetAAdress ~ ~t~`4 T,~;~ia x~~ -l~r;J~.. Ciiy ~' ~{.~.^-~1 ~"~ __ Stale •__ ~ k Z p ::ddc - ~~~~•~ ._ C Mad hdcness "' __. _ _• 1'hona fv~rmbnr ~_ 4 ~ ~ 4~ -..__-- Fax Number ~~ 7q.}j ARCHITCGT UZ ENpGINCCrt'S itilFOf{h1.rlTI~N S1rePl ~.ddrAss ~~ZIC~1~ir till; mod.. _ •^ ~~ ~v11 F.r~~. ~~~;~.~"i .`date , „~ _ I.Ip i;ode ~~}~ F ~4ad r,d:a~ss ~JG~„y,'. [{?--~''` {-~~(LAn .~~t' P":1114 ti1J11'1•::~ ...~{~~~7~~ rr. w..,-bc _-~~-~1.'~~~`f 1"1 .r ~_ ~ 1 ~~~ ~~ W~~ti r+n(rtar ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ v~ ~~T ~~k ~~. ~.tkac,L.k a us ,r<J~{~ • • Go any dee<J restrictions ar cxwe Hants e~xisl fnr this prpperty? Ye S No __ is thane a temporary blanket easement on this properly? If ~, please provide the'JU;ume ~~ artd Page tl~ ~reagp ~ Total Pro``p__ert~~y ~~~~~ 4~ AL . Tcfal ~ of Lots _ 2.~_ 1Z•{}-W Acreage S , ~_~L . t ExtSting Use: _ 1~11t[1~sL~_ Rropose~ Ilse _ _~~ 6~ - ~F.vY~ ~~ ~~4i~ P~~ ~t 1 Fdu mbar vl Ltats k3y zarri! iy D~sintK ~ ~ ! _ ..~ r _ Auerac¢ Acr`tpagc O`Earh RGSidCltiel Lot Ay Zcning l?isUic:: N~ 1 r- - F lorxlplain J4creagc ~~ A stetarrrer~t addrrssing a•~y drfTerences k~a~,~ren the Final P,at arxi approved Master ('lan artdfof Preiimina~y Plat fif applicable): - ~ ~~ - - fdeq:lested Va•ianCes To S~i~di~isipq Regulations &. Rcas~n For Same: U+i+arid~~ .~X b lOr_~ ~.,n5 fihquestetl Overs Paniripatian: Total Urtieat Eoalage of ~+ / Propocad public: - ~'T~ _~ Streets _ Sidgwalks . Sanitary Sewar Lines _ Wafer LrneS Channels stator Sewers F3ikC Lanss 1 Paifrs i •-- -- Parkland Qcdicatlon dus prior to filing tirc Pirral Plat; a~,taEaGE~ ~ ~~ _ # of acres 1o Qe dedic~~ted + $ _ devul~ypmenl !ee __ # of acres in tkyodplain # of ~u:res in det+~ntip;r # of acres in gtesntvays IUR EEE IiU (IrtJ OF L~AttiQ: # yr Single-~:iinily Dwelling Units X X556 = S _ _ _ {datej Approved aY Barks $ R~crcation E3oard NOTE: pIGITAL 4OPlt QF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTEd PRIQIZ Td FILING. TfM appticJRt t.-ts,rx+~,yarc~ i!hrs appJricat+7R.7 and ccrirr!c~ Ihaf tJac fads sfatep bere+n grad uxbrbNs a~:sC~red j.+er>,to a~~ T!ue cwrrer.'. ttr~f aarryJf~le. Ttic ~rullcrsiyu~d hcrr:by rrv~ue~ls nrH:r:avbi ty lJir: ;:itY of CrarJrgr: St2.ti'an of tix: nL~nVe-+rienld~c:,' ~;rrr~l nlrrr srd 8tiiesi5 fh.,1 this rsgUesr dOeS ~!Of 8117Hro do}' 4~CiAi7~f!t3 C! (Z75ir~Y:~ ~r1'1S ASSOC~a~dL~ rth~; ~r)fS f)!Ar ,~ r 4ic~nat.~re and T dle ~~~~~ ~~ • .. • a.:. Regular Agenda 3.3 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Indian Lakes Phase VIII, consisting of 36 lots on 69.67 acres, generally located southeast of the intersection of Indian Lakes Drive and Chaco Canyon Drive, in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction. Case #06-500047 (JP/CC) • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Jennifer Prochazka, Planner Report Date: March 27, 2006 Email: jprochazkaCa~cstx.gov Meeting Date: April 6, 2006 Project Number: 06-00500047 Item: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Indian Lakes Phase VIII, consisting of 36 lots on 69.67 acres, generally located southeast of the intersection of Indian Lakes Drive and Chaco Canyon Drive, in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction. Applicant: Travis Martinek, agent for Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd., property owner Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat. Item Summary: This item is for consideration of a Final Plat for a new section of the Indian Lakes development. Phase VIII continues the general pattern of development in the larger subdivision. The proposed lots range in size from 1.08 acres to 3.49 acres. A variance to the maximum block length was granted for a portion of Indian • Lakes Drive at the time of Preliminary Plat approval. The proposed block is 1760 feet (a variance of 260 feet). Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The Land Use Plan shows most of the land in the ETJ to be developed at a rural density (very low density residential development with agricultural and support uses). The City does not control land use in the county, but does share platting authority. Indian Lakes Drive is shown on the Thoroughfare Plan as a major collector. Item Background: A Master Development Plan was approved for the Indian Lakes Subdivision in 2002. Phase VIII Preliminary Plat was approved earlier this year. Commission Action Options Regarding the Final Plat: The Commission has final authority over the Final Plat. The options regarding the Final Plat are: ^ Approval • Denial Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) and Aerial Map 2. Application • 3. Copy of Final Plat r II I ~"-- I II - ~~ - ~ - III `\- ~. - - - -' - ~~ ,I - ~ ~ _ - - - I ~ i I ' .`~~.. ~ I I I 1 ~ ~ I I I I ~ ~ ~ I_ I - _ { ~ ~ ~ ~~;_ _-__- - I ~' / I ~, 1 `~~ , :~ i ~ I ,! ~w 1 ~ .l I 1 I IL __-T- ~ •'I~ _ _ _ ___ ___ _____i _ I •~ I ' _ :., ,,- -~~ -- ~~ I~ '~. .~~ "ice'`' I ~'-''~ /~~~~ti_-- _ - _ ~ I` 1 I~ - ~_ _. _ '' '~ '~ fi/ _ ~ z I -~--i - ~ ~ :I I": -I_ I I I I I If I ~t t~`~l ~`~•, ~~• i f ~ ~\ ,, i ~'ti 1~ '1, ~,1` ! ,, \`, • ~ '~ H ~d ~~ ~i co z rn w Y d J Z 4 D Z w w Z W O J W W d • • ~~ ~1'I'Y L}r~ ~r iI.1.F'.(;k ~ 1'At'r(3N 1'lanriug es FRusrbpvneRr .Sr*vim (Chedt anef ^ Minor ^ Amending ~ Final ^ Vacating ^ F~+Mplat (ti341}.Otlj {58ao_oaM ~~4Q0.OD' {saoo,aa} isaoo.ao)~ 'Includes public hearing fee is this plat in the ET,I? ®Yes [ Na FOR4FFI/C~EIl~U~SE LY P8,L CASE Nt).: V lx DATE SUBMITTED: ' ' ~: FINAL PLAT APPLICATIOMN ~ ?h~ iollowing Items must be subnnitted Iry an established filing deadline date fir PAZ Comml$slon aonsldsratlon. MINIMUM SUBMITTAL,. kEQUIREMENTS: X Filing Fee {see above NpTE: Multiple Sheets - $55.00 per additional sheet N1A Variance FZer~uest to Subdivision Regulations - $14d (if applicable} N!A Development Permit Application Fee of $200.U0 {if applicable). lyjg Infrastructure Inspection Fee of $6Q0.00 (applicable if any puttlic infrastructure is being constructed) X Appucatian completed in full. ~~, 3G Gopy of original deed restrictianskovenants for r~plats (if applicable}_ '~ X Thirteen {13) folded copies of plat. (A signed rnylar original must 6e susmitted alter staff review-} X One ('1 }copy of that approved Preliminary Plat andlor one {1 ~ hAaster Plan {if applicable). X Paid tax certifrcates frorts City of Gntlege Station, Brazos County and College Statipn I.S.D. X A copy of the attached checklist with all items Checked elf ar a brief explanation as tr3 why Ir,ey are not. X Two {2}copies of putrlic infrastructure plans assaeiated with this plat [f applicablej. N!A Parklant! Dedication requirement approved by the. Parks & Recreation Board, please provide proof of Date ~f Preapplicativn Canfierenca: tJnkrtQw» NAh1E QF SUBQIVI$IdN: 71h~ ViNAQAS 0! inr>tlan LBAres Phase VIl1 SPECIFIED LOCATIt]N OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ~t_ot 8< Binckj: Enp' of fndran Lakes L?ri~~ APPLIGANTlPRQJEGT MANAGER'S INFORMATIrN (Primary Contact fbr the Project): Name: Travis Mi;rrfrnek b`traet Address: 38+?$ EeBf ~t~' Street, $aife iQD State; Texas Zip Code: 77802 Phone Number: (9T9) 846-4384 CITY- ~?`s+~ E-Mall hddress: travis~clarkewyndFr~rn_~v~rr Fax Number. (979) $dh-JdG? PROPERTY OWNER'S. INFORMATION iAL< owners must bB identified, please altaetti an additional sheet far multiple vwne~s}: Name Srrt+ting Metlar'r;• Develcrlxr+enl, Ltd. Street Address: 3&OBEasf 29"'Sireet; Suite fQQ Cit~r_ Bryan State; Texas Tip Code: 77802 E-Mail Address: fravrs~r.Jark9wyAdtrem.carrt Phone dumber: (p7+s} 848-4384 Fax Number: (979) &4Gi46i ARCHITECT 4R ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: Name: McGuro 8 Browne,. !nc_ Street Address; f (a(l$ I/l~aa~creek Dr-we, Brute T03 State: Texas Zip Code: 77845 Rhone Number (979J d93~838 6113.09 City: CalJege $rANOtt E-Mail Address: m+7remi~rncclurebrowne.corrr Fax Number: (979) 893-2534 loft • • DO any deed reS7iG#IQ ns t?r t:t)v8n2nls 4xisi fqr Khis propert}r? Yes IS there a temporary Wankvt easement on this propert}rr No A,preag9 -~ TpG~I Properly 89.97 Yo tal # bF Lots: 36 R-O-W A.Creege: 8.99 Existing Use: Vacant Propwsed Uae: S1r'~le Fam!<yRes~dentlal Numtxr of Lals @y ~.bning Dist?ICI l 1 ! A~erageAcreage Of Each Residential Lotey ~aning DlsSrict: l r l 1.-- .. . FloOdplain Acreage: t7.OU A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat end apprrnred piaster Plan andior Pr6liminary Plat iii applicable: hlafAoprlceble Requested variances To Subdivision Regulations ~ Reason For Sarne: Nvt Applicable Requested Oversize Participation: PlotApplreable Total Linear Footage of Prap~eetrd Public: a,1~7 Streets 0 Sidetivalks 0 Sanitary Sewer Lines 5.274 Water Lines 0 Channels 0 Storm Sewers 0 bike Lanes' Paths Parkland Dedicartion due prior to f9ling the Final Plat: ,ACREAGE: # of acres to be dedicated + $ dt:v~eloprne~t fee # of acres in floodplain # bf BGreS Ill detenti8n # of acres ih greanways OFt FEE IN LIEU QF LAND: # of Single-Family Dwelling Units X 355fi = S (date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Board NOTE: l?IGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SU6MITTED PRIOR TO FILIhIG. Tlae applicant has prepared this appl~catian anri certifies ffasl the !acts stated herein end exhibits alfacf-ed hereto are hue. oorrei:f, and camplat'e. The iunderslgrrad heraky raquasts approve! bye the tarty ai GaAege Sfahbn Gf the abo~-identified final plat and attests that this re~uesl does not amend any Goverranfs yr rt2StliCtiOr7s a5socnated with ffTis p/aL ~.~wr.:a. fi d~~ Signature and Titl Dk~riF+v F Cr~+us7R~c7ro~ l~~fN~t~E+~ '~~ L. ~O 6 Date • fir13~YY3 ^_ urZ • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Trey Fletcher, Sr. Planner Report Date: 03-23-2006 Email: tfletcher(c~cstx.g_ov Meeting Date: 04-06-2006 Project Number: 06-00500048 Item: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat for Aggieland Business Park consisting of 17 lots on 117.48 acres located at 5942 Raymond Stotzer Pkwy generally located at the northwest corner of FM 60 and Jones Road in the College Station ETJ. Applicant: Jim Jett, Agent for 60-Jones, LLC dba Aggieland Business Park, Property Owner Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat as submitted. Item Summary: This item is for the consideration of a Preliminary Plat for Aggieland Business Park which is proposed with three phases. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The location of this Preliminary Plat at the northwest corner of FM 60 and Jones Road is in the College Station ETJ or • Extra-territorial Jurisdiction. The land use plan projects Single-family Residential Low Density for this area, but the City has no authority over land use in the ETJ. On the Thoroughfare Plan, FM 60 is shown as Freeway. Jones Road extends from FM 60 north to Villa Maria immediately west of SH 47 but is not classified as a thoroughfare by either College Station or Bryan. Currently, the water supplier for this development is Brushy Water Supply and sewer will be on-site septic. The City of College Station has filed a Sewer CCN (Certificate of Convenience and Necessity) application with the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to provide sewer collection and treatment in the ETJ. Being in the ETJ, the Parkland Dedication requirements do not apply. Item Background: The Master Plan for this development was approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission on March 2, 2006. Budgetary & Financial Summary: The City will not participate in the cost of the subdivision or utilities outside the City limits. Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the preliminary plat. The options regarding the preliminary plat are: • Approval • Denial • Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) and Aerial Map 2. Application 3. Copy of Preliminary Plat (provided in packet) • • ... /, ~ ~ l: %~rj ~: ~ \ ~ pp / Sri a ~ \t : ' ..?~ , ~ ~ ` `.~ iii e \• \•.~ ~`" /' ~ .~ / '•i / ~ .<7 /\ `: ~. •\ .y :~F .y~( mil/ f~ „1 i _: - ~_J .' 4~ ~ i ~ i ~\ ~ ^~`-ti._ it \ ~` ~ ~, ~ i.,' ,.~ '~~ ~ •\•i ~~• .~.,. '-\ , :>. ~~^`'c it ~Tr ~•' Sy ~ ~ ~ _ , ,E--.__ \ ~' - i d ..•~ `\\ • alp ''\ ~; \ , }, - "• ?. - ~ r • l;l'1'Y ~~F (:()1.1.1'(1= $'1".1TTi)r1 ~Ynsr:fie: !L•~rrrp~wete~v[4~F. FOR (}F' ICE a ONLY t' FR~1CA5t RC-.:000 J ~.nTr_ 4r.~rr~ll rsa: . ,~ ~~ PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLI~ATI~N T,he Fallowing items must be subrriried by an established filing deadline date fpr P & Z Comrnissicn consideration. MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT9_ • / Filing Fee of $~tOp.00_ N ~ Variance Request to Sutsdiaision Regulations.- $1O0 {iFapplicable} AppliCBtian Completed in full. Thirteen {13j faloed capleas of plat. (A revised mplar original must Ise submitted after staff review.i ~ One {1) espy of the approved ~vlast~r`'Plan if aaplicable. ~ A copy of iha attached Checklist with aU iterrrs checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not. Rezoning Application If zone Change is proposed. Parkland l?edication requirement approved by the Parks & Recreation Board, please provide proof of approval {If applicable}. Qate of Preapplication Conferertcr3:_ ~I ~Zcx~~ NAME DF SUBDIVISION ~ i~,~gy~.7 ~`alr~e`.a`.~ ;~[xr ~~ ~~~['~ ~j~ SPECIFIED LOC~4TION OF PROPED SUBDIVISION f't~~uu,t ;~~ ~1~Y1 (~/; r~ru APPLICANT.~PROJECT MANAt;ER'S INFORMATIClhI (Primary Cvntaat ft+r the Project): Name • Jinn ~'e~ Streei Address~~~.nty ~ ~ ue ~ ~' ~ ~u«+P ~i) I •j3City ~'vl~ eae ~~~`~+-+ _ State ~~ (~_ Zip Code _~'~~•-,- E-Mail Address "" Phone Number ~~,!{ - (f,~~~ Fox Number -7{~,Q=?(~,'7~, _ PROPERTY OWfVER'S INFORMATIQN (ALL owr~rs must be icP,itif ed. Please attar:h an edditlanal sheet for multiple ownersi~ l ~ 4 Name ~ r .,,f pvl~ `.~ j r._.~_ ~ ~a A~t,P _t ~ vtiGr 1~,e ~ < „ k _ Street Address _aaZ~, t~nitt~r5,~ ~ JJ~" a.~F ~urf~ l~i~ity ~,(~,.ec[r ~-~ Gi-~~, Sta;,a ~~ 1 x Zip Cade ~-u .._ E-Mail Address '~' 0 _ f>hone tV~imber ~~pp; } F'ax Numtasr ~[r~~ -'r~,.~ (p _ ARCHITECT ~,R ENGINEER'S INFO~R~FAATf4O~h'. Name ~.~i.[ cxi.1 `.for' -mss.-~~~ r~ ~-r • -- Stree[Address 1~~ S'wti ~ _ Gity ~~ ~'~g~ L Stare ~ ~_ Zlp Code `~ E-Mail Aod,ress ~t7C'.}r~~~~ F'-~~P..k.t'cn<~I Phar•e Numbei .{~ ~~''~~7j __-• Fax Nur•.ner~~' L ~ - f ~ ~ `~ • • Total Acres Uf Subdivision ~ 1 ~ ''. S~`j~~L . R-C~-JV Acreage Total # Of Lats Nunthei 4f Lots By Zoning District N~ /_ ~ Average A~~cyyraa(ge df Each Residential Lot By Zoning District: -r`-'~~ ~ ~_ E i ~IoodplainAcre~ge ~_ Parkland dedication by acreage or fee? _ ~~~ A statement addressing any differences bet~reen the Preliminary Plat and approved Master Plan (if applicable) ~1 ~ 1 Requested variances to subdivision regulations & reason for same ~~{? , Requested oversize participatipn ~~~ • Parkla„d Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat: ACREAGt=: # of Acres to be dedicated # of acras in t1oodplsin # of acres rn deientron # of acres in greenwoys tJ R I FEE iN LIt`tl C7F LAND # ci Single-Family Dwelling Units X $S56 = y _____. ;date) App~oved by Parks & Recreation Board The ap~-lical~t has ,or~iaared Phis ainplicafiorT and Gerf+fes that the facts stated hei~eir~ and exlvbits atfachPd f~ereto are Prue ar>'d correct. Zhe tindersig~ted hereby regi:~est•~ apprvt~al try the City of Co/tege 5tatiorl ~f t,`!e above icirrrrli~red P1af anel attests That aJl tespE:cfiue oavt;ers na;fe been irfPntrfied 0» fr1rS a~j~lrrajit~r~. ', naturF a tt Tit • ~~;~ -~'~ ~ii L'~a~p • City of ~'ollege Station Absence Request Form For Elected and Appointed Ufficers Name: n ~ Request Submitted on: ~'IAr~1r~ a4 ~oo(e I will not be in attendance at the meeting of ~ ~ ~ ~ D01~ for the reason(s) specified: (Date) c~~ ~ ~- ~~ ~ `~l~c ~3 : ~°~ (Signature) • This request shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board one-weep r r t meeting date. • City of ~'ollege Station Absence Request Form For Elected and Appointed Uffieers blame: ~~c~h n l~ ~ th olg Request Submitted on: ~ ~.h ~ q a Onto .. I will not be in attendance at the meeting of: JuhL ~, c~0~ for the reasons} specified: (Date) ~' C~ l own C,~` tc. F~,RC~kd - _ ~ ~~ c~ m ~n (Signature) • Thts request shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board one-week r r t meeting date. Lisa ~,indgren Re May June P&Z and DRB meetings _ .Page 1 • From: "John Nichols" <jpnr~ag.tamu.edu> To: "Scott Shafer" <SShafer~ag.tamu.edu>, "Lisa Lin... Date: 3/29/2006 10:19 am Subject: Re: May -June P8Z and DRB meetings CC: <Jdunn~csUc.gov> Scott, this is a good time to look forward at schedules. t have several trips scheduled between May 16 and June 15. At this point I know the following: I will be in town for both April meetings. I will be in town for the May 4 meeting. I will NOT be in town for the June 1 meeting. I will likely be out of the country for the May 18, but it is not fully cont'irmed. Will keep you informed as the time approaches. John »> Scott Shafer 3/29/2006 9:50 am »> Lisa & Mardi -Looking ahead to May and June meetings t need to request several absences. Work related activities will require that I be out of • town during P8Z meetings on: May 4, May18 and June 1. At this time it looks like I am able to be in town for possible DRB meetings on May 12 and 24. I would not be available for a DRB meeting on June 9. I will ask John Nichols to act as P&Z Chair. If he is not able to do so on every occasion I'll work with other members to get it covered. Scott C. Scott Shafer Associate Professor Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences MS 2261 Texas ABM University College Station, TX 77843-2261 979 845 3837 office 979 845 0441 fax sshafer~tamu.edu • • City of College Station Absence Request Form Far Elected and Appointed Officers Name: ~~~nl~ U1r%~ia'1!?~n Request Submitted on: __ ~fl~P~ a 8 _ a00CP I will not be in attendance at the meeting of: A r ~ ~ ~ c~00 for the reason(s) specified: ate) ~i3! of 7~wn ~n l3uy~nnr~ C.Su, 0 c~ (signature) ~~1~ a~ • This request shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board one-week r r t meeting date. Lisa Lindgren - 4/6 Planning and Zoning Meeting Page 1 • • From: "Christiansen, Dennis" <Dennis-c@tamu.edu> To: "Lisa Lindgren" <Llindgren@cstx.gov> Date: 3/28/2006 8:06 am Subject: 4/6 Planning and Zoning Meeting CC: <sshafer@rpts.tamu.edu> Lisa, I will be unable to participate in the 4/6 Planning and Zoning meeting. I will be in Dallas on Texas A&M business. Thanks for handling this request for absence, let me know if you need more information. Dennis Christiansen Deputy Director Texas Transportation Institute 3135 TAM U College Station, TX 77843-3135 979/845-1713 979/845-9356 (fax) dennis-c@tamu.edu http://tti.tamu.edu • • City of ~'ollege Station Absence Request Form For Elected and Appointed officers 1'~1ame: Request Submitted on: ~Arl! ~1 a Q a00(P I will not be in attendance at the meeting of for the reason(s) specified: l~! ocx~ (Date) • Out- 4~ ~wn ~'~ ~t~~ ~e~ ~ etc -=I-?~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ • This request shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board one-weep r r t meeting date. • City of ~'ollege ~'tation Absence Request Form Fpr Elected and Appointed Officers I~1ame: _~~ ~? der Request Submitted on: ~~~ a a OCXt r I will not be in attendance at the meeting of ~ ad(~{ far the reason(s) specified: (Date) m~~J ~~~ ~e',~- • This request shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board one-weep r r t meeting date. • City of College Station Absence Request Form Far Elected and Appointed Officers Name: .~ ~d~ aver Request Submitted on: f 1A r~ ~Qq a4~.! I will not be in attendance at the meeting of ...)I~n~ 1 c~~ for the reason{s} specified: (Date) ~ (~I- 0~ lown On l3~~n~i L.~cc ~N~{xd ~-Ir)t~~ 5~ ~s ~,e~ • This request shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board one-weep r r t meeting date. Lisa Lindgren,.... May.... June P&Z and ORB meetings ~ • Prom: Date: Subject: "Scott Shafer" <sshafer~ag.iamu.edu> "Lisa Lindgren" <Llindgren~cstx.gov>, "Nandi AI... 3/29/2008 9:51 am May -June P&Z and DRB meetings CC: "John Nichols" <JPN cQag.tamu.edu>, <Jdunn~cstx.gov> Lisa S Nandi -Looking ahead to May and June meetings 1 need to request several absences. Work related activities wil! require that I be out of town during P8Z meetings on: May 4, May18 and June 1. At this time it looks like I am able tp be in town for possible DRB meetings on May 12 and 24. 1 would not be available for a DRB meeting on June 9. 1 will ask John Nichols to act as P&Z Chair. If he is not able to do so on every occasion 1'N work with other members td get it covered. Scott • C. Scot# Shafer Associate Professor Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences MS 2261 Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-2261 979 845 3837 office 979 845 0441 fax sshafer~tamu.edu • Regular Agenda 6 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a variance from Section 8- K.1 (Lots) of the Subdivision Regulations for Lakeside Village Subdivision, and presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat consisting of 56 lots on 13.79 acres generally located along the proposed extension of Eagle Avenue and west of Longmire Drive. Case #06-500012 (TF/CC) r 1 • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Trey Fletcher, Sr. Planner Report Date: 03-24-2006 Email: tfletcher(a~cstx.gov Meeting Date: 04-06-2006 Project Number: 06-00500012 Item: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a variance from Section 8-K.1 (Lots) of the Subdivision Regulations for Lakeside Village Subdivision, and presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat consisting of 56 lots on 13.79 acres generally located along the proposed extension of Eagle Avenue and west of Longmire Drive. Applicant: Ron Lagrone / Lagrone Construction Co. -Property Owner Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat if the variance request is granted by the Commission with Staff Comments #3 (attached). Item Summary: This item is for the consideration of a variance request to the Subdivision Regulations regarding the configuration of the lots, and a preliminary plat for the Lakeside Village Subdivision. The single-family residential development consists • of a single phase and lots vary from 5,000 to 15,245 square feet. Section 8-K.1 of the Subdivision Regulations states that "an arrangement placing adjacent lots at right angles to each other shall be avoided." Right angle lots occur at two locations in the proposed development, where according to the applicant, alternatives have been considered. The Subdivision Regulations Section 5-A state that "The Commission may authorize a variance from the regulations when, in their opinion, undue hardship will result from requiring strict compliance. In granting a variance, the Commission shall prescribe only conditions that it deems not prejudicial to the public interest. In making the findings hereinbefore required, the Commission shall take into account the nature of the proposed use of the land involved, the existing used of the land in the vicinity, the number of persons who will reside or work in the proposed subdivision, the possibility that a nuisance will be created, and the probable effect of such variance upon traffic conditions and upon public health, convenience, and welfare of the vicinity. No variance may be granted unless the Commission finds: 5-A.1 That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; • • 5-A.2 That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant; 5-A.3 That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this chapter; and 5-A.4 That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this chapter." Additionally, block lengths exceed 800 feet in both sections of the planned subdivision. Per Section 8-J of the Subdivision Regulations, "In blocks over 800 feet in length, there may be required, near the center of the block, an access way...An access way may be required at the end of a cul-de-sac to facilitate pedestrian traffic movement." No access ways are proposed, but may be required by the Commission. The area containing Blocks 1 and 2 will be a gated community. As noted on the plat, a Homeowners Association (HOA) will be established to maintain the private street and associated common areas in accordance with Section 8-W of the Subdivision Regulations. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: • The Land Use Plan projects Single-family Residential Medium Density uses for this and surrounding parcels. The parent tract is bisected by Longmire Drive. A short segment of Eagle Avenue will be extended through the development of this parcel. Longmire Drive is a Major Collector and runs north-south connecting Barron Road to FM 2818. Eagle Avenue is a Minor Collector and runs east-west ultimately connecting the SH 6 Frontage Road to the SH 40 Frontage Road. The southwest corner of the parcel is adjacent to a Lick Creek tributary. As such, this Floodplain /Streams area is planned to have a bike path adjacent to the creek. Item Background: This tract was annexed in 1983 and was zoned R-1 Single-family Residential in November 2005. The tract has not been previously platted. Eagle Avenue has been planned to cross this property for some time per the Thoroughfare Plan and Longmire Drive was extended by the City of College Station bisecting the parent tract last year. Dove Crossing Subdivision is developing to the northeast, and existing single-family subdivisions are to the south. Budgetary & Financial Summary: OP for the 12-inch water line along Eagle Avenue will be requested. Related Advisory Board Recommendations: • • Parks Board: The City Manager or his designee is authorized to accept the Fee for dedications of less than three (3) acres where: • There is a sufficient amount of parkland existing in the park zone of the proposed development; or • The proposed dedication is insufficient for a Neighborhood Park site under existing park design standards. Commission Action Options Regarding the Variance Requests: The Commission must consider each variance request prior approving the preliminary plat. The options regarding the variance request are: ^ Approval ^ Denial Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the preliminary plat. The options regarding the preliminary plat are: ^ Approval ^ Denial INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES Water: There is a 12-in waterline along Eagle Avenue that will be extended with this development. The new system for this area is required to meet • B/CS Unified Water and Sewer Design Guidelines for domestic and fire flows. A Water Design Report for the subdivision is required at the time of Final Plat to ensure compliance. Water Service: Water to be provided to each lot, as required. Sewer: There is an existing 18-inch sewer line along the southwest property line that will be extended with this development. A Sewer Report for the subdivision is required at the time of Final Plat to insure capacity and compliance with the BCS Unified Water and Sewer Design Guidelines. Sewer Service: Sewer to be provided to each lot, as required. Streets: The Developer is providing access to all lots with conventional-width streets. Lakeview Drive will be gated and private. Eagle Avenue is a minor collector and on the City's Thoroughfare Plan and will be extended with this subdivision. Longmire Drive is an existing major collector on the Plan. An additional 5 feet of ROW for Longmire Drive will be dedicated with this development. Off-site Easements: N/A Drainage: This development is required to meet the Drainage Ordinance. Detention is planned for a portion of the development by means of a retention pond in the gated area of the subdivision. Direct discharge is planned for the remaining area. • • Flood Plain: N/A Oversize request: OP for the 12-inch water line along Eagle Avenue will be requested. Impact Fees: N/A Parkland Dedication Fees: Based on 56 lots, the Fee-in-lieu of Land will be $11,088. The Park Development Fee will be $20048. Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) and Aerial Map 2. Application 3. Staff Comments #3 4. Copy of Preliminary Plat (provided in packet) • • / ~ ~-a~ W. /~ d. J 9 ,~.. 6 / (r, ;Y b W c~• .. ~~/ ~~ r' ~.C~G '' , .~j "~ ~ ~. f 4 e r.' r 4 a ! ~ \ \ wF $,r Y"; ( ~, `y fee ~`.I ~aJ'TtIK~ ~. ~fxF! Y ~ r • ~ ""-4• t .• 1 ~- ~ ~. _ x `! ~ ~, f . t . 1` r . v. a '~ ~'S,, r ~•x °~~,t ` a, 1 y.;, N ~? ~ V•v. >\ k _ r / : s `~ P `~„~ ~6~~•.'' sue[. _ •yR•i i~7t . Can r a4`` yl~s l3-. sy 'R~sf'"r~_-~r ~~. y ~ ~ rte.. ~: J ~t \ ~ `.~ ~~c' {ti ~^ r.,a,, ! ';; 'S ~Y 1 r~ ~/~'a \. a :A E/ a ,°RI `er ,~.J+~`" ~$Y~ ~~P~' • • J~;~'~ sa, ~~ •'dt~ ~7~• ~:r' ~•. l~ `~f"'~, `~(r ~Rt~ Y 4p p t F~ / t /~` nr~ ~ Se i _r 7 ! i .,- !~i.~ ~+' ~ rK.4s \Y ~ ~ ~~rf5 :R~ 4 ~~.. I t"a, r, ~ f` T T ~ / /• ti_ \ •.^ , ~~ ~ r~ , u , ~ 1 pia. o~l .. ' r Y _ ~ .*•li' • ••~ f£~~s ~ ~ J 1~ \y$r .. w' jtr~.~.C a,s r•.. < ~ 1 .:, ~~ t ~ ~ ~ F~ ~ .~.l •w ~~ r ~'' `\ `rat. ,tf, 1~ 'f pit ~, ~.s y, ` 1..` rt}x'11`. ~ >> /~~ - ~ W N ~'. ~ x ~ i s''~ . • ~ ra,~r ~i,Q ~ aS '`+<~ ~L~4 A ~ ~, ;F . • ~ S ~ •!#.77w.. O -~+5 ,h._~ ,_ ~~ ,~ ~o r mar/ 1 y. / - rtr $A"t,r~~ ~ ~C ~. l'r f . \ of ..~.; f~ ~ 4~ f I - {t~•S' rte-, \ .p/ a ti~5-` I Ic ~ ~ ~ +. ~'. - .\.: . -~fa ate ~ _: R '\: ~. ,~ yr Y~c~Z7~",~~~' ` `:--y .J'~-: ~ ~ ~s i,': /tyC"~\1 i ~"~aCr7r.~ Y,/. .\ '_? r 1 \ •'° .^i~*~,t'~try?f't~ "yep - ~ , ~ a's xg ~ •~'• '7a% ~- f,C,~ l / p' ~ / yi~YPr 4,±~ ~`~,1 ~ r ~ '7i .: ,: «I ~ ;~ •~',~ 1 / \`~;: >< l •` "`h,~~ xsc ~~ }~~ ~ 'tic i.`~7t~ ~P :k.•' ~'`:`.~ r' ~ }• ~ ,, J ~~ 1~ ` >=?.~~a r.... r~ ~ ~ .~'C r'~ ~rS~ ,t` t. qT(~ f6m~~f.,. ~ ! • "~• ,'C. .~ ~qF'~ `~ k•~\, r~'• r ~3'p • t s .V~?~„ Sb:q~L''AS,Iy. +^.ji (~ J,~, • f~,f -~ ~.; µ1i eJ f _..- ~3'fl OF ~a)I_IrF.G L• ST11T1i71~ LEA ~ E 5U6h11~ rtu_ PR~LIIVIINARY PLAT APPLICATIUN ThC Irllcrv,~ing ile+r+S +rrir~t Ix: sub+r,;ttrsi by nn establ,shed filing dt~~tAine ~iab~ Fvr P 8 7 CC~rnmessiun consitieratiott_ MIWIMUM SUI3MITTaL REQUIREMENTS: • 'Y Filinil Fee of $µ0U.40. 1~+L Y.+riirx;r. Request to;iotxlivisi~n FtecJulaliuns •- $14)0 (if applir.;~blc) Application cap*+pleIE~c1 in f+,ll. ~_ Thirtc.n (13? tald~d copies oi` pla•#. {A ~QVised mylar urif7in~~1 must he, sahmittpd after staff review.] gf~ Qrrc { }} Cgpy pf thU i7pprV"1c4i A~iasier Plan i( 4ippliCat>le, .X.._ +`'~ copy of the elltacf*ed 4:hmcklist wiiUr alr hems Cherkxl nff or a #~riGf cxpianativrt as to wiry lh~y are rx>t. y~ Re~nninq /tppGcaiivn ii zi,ne chanye ES f-rUposad. Parkland Ued~catiati requirement approved by the Pahcs 8, Recrealiar~ Baarr~, please Qrovide proof of approval (if a~plicablej. -Pending Date of FreappHcatian Cointerence: ; ~ ~¢r zoo NAfr1E OF ~Ut3t31YISIOH 1.e+kP.91 [?P. ~r ; I l aye SubL`.iY.i:;lvn SFE411FIED LDCAI IUI~i t3F f'k~PC75ED SVBElIUISIC}H .. Rest ,id ~ u~j~n+E ce llr. ~ v • ~l• -_T.stglc kvP _ and lfridl a C:aLr Af'PLICANTl~'HOJECT MANAGER'S INFCRMATION tPrimary Gontatt fir the Project)' Name Rc,ie Lagrnue Siree'Ihddrrss ?,any r avl~9tr rn~~rr Stale 'iak$$ 7irf:~dP 7,'843 Phone Nwn;mr 9 y• t3'LU.45JY C:Ity t_iiih~a 5rarti~n E-rlail >~~td~ss F~+x Nun+il~er I'1~iOf'ERTY p-Y1~FtFi~B INFt3Rh1ATfON {AI.L pwncrs must fie idc`nlif~d. Please attach :~n addiiiunal sheet for multiple o+,v~rs): NdrllE _ i.agr<~ne l:uuyCrus~l:,,i l:U. Street Adilrc : ~ µ6U3 Gasldi~ Court - _ _ _ ,--. airy C.al leKe tilul iuu SlalB 7nx,a~ ZipCOde .'?1545 E-htail/lddress Lapron~~~cax.ncC Phone Nwnt,rr 979.69p,p18Z F~,x tJumt,er 9i9.5~J(l.St532 --- ARCHITE=CT !)iZ ENGINEER'S INF~RNiATICN: Name _ C5C ~pfi~ne er~.x~r; b l;n4 lron~en=al CBnsvltsntu. Iill_. :~h~BtaCk]nCSS 3µU7 T~bm- Rnxd St7ti~ ~;exas Jilr Coij~~ 7 JRC4 t•'hor,e Numt>Cr 9 i y. 7 r'8 . 'Lti.l U +: ~ ~~+~ _ t:ity _-Jiryu,i E-hlaiiAddress ctic~~rc~y~~S S;tim Fax hlurnber. 479.778.0820 ._ 1 Cf • ~~ • Tnt81 A,c:res Of 3ubdi~risian t 3, 7~~ ~_ F~-O•ti"! Acreage _;~_~ , r Tctal ~ {3F Lnts y5 Nuititihrr Of Lots 8y ZOnin~ C+istrtioi: ~__ ; !t-i ! __ r • .'1verrcle: Acrcag•~ of Each Rcsiderrt-a; Wt By honing bistrici: F>!oodplair: P,rrrac~~: U -.-- Parkland ded'u:aliun by acreac~c orfec2 I~ee _ A Str'~tfrrYlt'•r1i c:~idrr.~siny ::ny diff~n;nCCS t~tween Ihs: 1'rr:liminrrry Plat and 3pprr:vrr1 M~iStGf PIS (ff applle`~ble) ?, /+~ Reyuesled vari.~nrr_s In subdi~•is~a ~gulaiions ~ rr_nsnrti #cyr s~mc Request vatlauce Co Section 8-K vJ: 5ubdivisiou SegulaLiur.:.. We reCuea~__ChaL LCCS $, Y ~ iQ vi 81ock 1 and Z2, ~3 ~ 24,x25 of Bivek 3 be fermi d Yt rich an~l.~ ~~ b np the mast nrlrtinnl•a=r~prr~nt Rrciuested oversize participation uiL Ciir lots. V!F parkland DeditaEicn due prior to filin{{ tFre FiF~al Plat: ACREA~F. _ zr of Aa.'es to be dedic8[ed _ ~ of ~x:res in Aa ;f of :acres in detention __ .__ ~ of aces in grt OR FEE IN ~iEt1 [7F LAh1D: •'h # of Sirx,~lc-Family DwQpin9 Units X $556 = $ 7 t ~ t ~~ (~;~lr} Apµruveti tiyl~arfcs ~ Recreatiun Eio,Arrl T.hC applicant has prepared this eppricatra~ and certiaties trtat tMv acts stafed her~fn end exhibits attacfrad i§eretn ar•d true arrrl carrecl TJ~+e rrndersi~rrecl herer<ty r~rlests ap~rpvat by lt~a C`ty of Gvlisge 5t~~tion of fJre a~ve ici'enfifetf plat .'rnd ~rttesfs fFra[ all rescectrve awrrers have been iderrlified fir? t1ri; appficatio~~. Signature arrd ~tit[c S~vti aM ~-~t1n~e~` 1}ato cYi vat 7,1~ •r • • ~T~ CITY QF CvLLEGG JT.gTiQN lYrtraning tr Urtxfrx~mrnt Scrtricr! 1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM March 28, 2006 TO: Ron Lagrone / Lagrone Construction Co. via fax 690-9532 FROM: Trey Fletcher, Project Manager SUBJECT: LAKESIDE VILLAGE (PP) -Preliminary Plat • Staff reviewed the above-mentioned preliminary plat as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed on the Preliminary Plat. These comments are being integrated in to the Staff Recommendation. tf you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc: CSC Engineering & Environmental Consultants, Inc. via fax 778-0820 Case file #06-00500012 • Home ofTexasA&M Unlverslty • STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 3 Project: LAKESIDE VILLAGE (PP) - 06-00500012 PLANNING /ENGINEERING 1. Include Right-of-Way dedication area within the subdivision boundary lines, indicated by heavy lines, and the computed acreage of the subdivision. 2. Please add note to plat to state that common areas will be maintained by a Homeowners Association (HOA). Reviewed by: Trey Fletcher /Carol Cotter Date: 3-28-2006 • • NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City, will constitute a completely new review. 2 of 2 Regular Agenda 7 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to a Master Plan for Crescent Pointe consisting of 137.14 acres located at 3500 University Drive East in the general vicinity of University Drive, State Highway 30, Copperfield Parkway, and Crescent Pointe Parkway. Case #06-500025 (LB/JN) • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Lindsay Boyer, Staff Planner Report Date: March 25, 2006 Email: Iboyer(c~cstx.gov Meeting Date: April 6, 2006 Project Number: 06-00500025 Item: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to a Master Plan for Crescent Pointe consisting of 137.14 acres located at 3500 University Drive East in the general vicinity of University Drive, State Highway 30, Copperfield Parkway, and Crescent Pointe Parkway. Applicant: Stewart Kling, engineer for the owner. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the Master Plan. Item Summary: This Master Plan is an amendment to the Master Plan that was approved in May of 2005. Changes to this plan include greater delineation between the types of uses being proposed on the tract, a defined parkland dedication area and a change in the type of zoning on this property. Originally this property was designated to develop under a P-MUD Zoning District. According to the applicant, they have been unable to market the property with • this zoning classification and are seeking to establish standard zoning classifications to meet the same intent of the mix of uses on this property. The Master Plan did not change the type and location of uses approved on the 2005 Master Plan and include office, retail, apartments, and townhomes. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The Land Use Plan designates this area as Planned Development. The property was included in area 4A of the 30/60 Small Area Plan which originally identified this area for Mixed-Use and made the following statement: The area should be reflected as mixed use, with an emphasis on uses such as office, commercial, clean industrial, and higher density single family and multifamily housing. Low density housing should be discouraged. Housing that appeals to professionals should be encouraged. The PDD district could be used to facilitate design innovation and more intense commercial uses. Standard zoning districts that permit high density single family, multi-family, clean industrial, offices, and commercial uses that are conducive to tourism would also be appropriate in this area. In March 2003, the Mixed Use Opportunity changed the Mixed Use Designation • in this area to Planned Development, which it has since retained. • P rkwa as a minor arterial. The Thoroughfare Plan designates Copperfield a y Construction has been completed by the City. Item Background: The subject property was annexed in 1979 and subsequently zoned M-1, Light Commercial. Portions of this property have been platted as Crescent Pointe, developing as the First American Bank building. Also platted is Crescent Pointe Phase 1, which is a plat for approximately 4 acres at the southwest corner of Copperfield Parkway and Crescent Pointe Parkway. One of the lots is currently under site plan review for a law office. Budgetary 8~ Financial Summary: N/A Related Advisory Board Recommendations: This property was discussed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on March 7, 2006. Their recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission is fora 5.05 acre park located in Phase 2, east of Copperfield Parkway on property with frontage on Crescent Pointe Parkway. Additionally, unless the park is constructed by the developer, an additional $292 per Dwelling Unit is required in Park Development Fees at the time of Building Permit. Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the final • plat. The options regarding the final plat are: ^ Approval ^ Denial Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) and Aerial Map 2. Application 3. Copy of Master Plan (included in packet) C7 ~ ~ 1 1 1 ~ r ~ r ~ ~ ~ Y ~ .\ ~ _ ~ \C ` i`` _ ~ / ~ ' r A 7 } _ ~ F- ~ W ~ ~ W Z w as ~ ~ E {j} Q ~ N (~ //~~ V ?.} _ G F ~ ' ! 1 .. . <~~+. ~ cv .f.~ ,, , •• 2 .~: , ~ ' ' ~ ~ W ' i ti. _ ~ F- ~. .~ ~ \ O y ~ I ` E'- i i y S ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ I i , ~''. i , ` ~ i ~ -- ' : J i~ b 9G ,, y a! W J 7. l- ~ 1 '/` W .. J ` G • b ~ x ~ / 0. .. ., ~ 8 o s r: -~~ _ : ~ w 7 ~ S. r ~~ ~ .. ,~ S .,, W a . . . . ~ .~ ~ ~Y1 ,.: s., ~ F a`' ~~ ~ ~ a ~ ~. ~~i ~ .` v , ~ ~ V 1r u ~+,['JY U:~ ~:()I.LF.f:F- 5'fAl'lt:lti ~ aadnr ~ tarsefo~pAUmt &ntire: ~~ l~~ FORaFFIGE U8~ HLY Ptl.Z GABE ND.: ~ ` Q}ITE SVBMITTEU: f.j MIAS'~ER PLAN APPLICATI~I~I -~ ;',, ! IC v!! t 1~!"iC YII ~: 1_~ The following items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for P & Z Commission consideration. • MINIMUM SUBAtfITTAJ. REQUIREMENTS: ~ Fling Fee of ~OQ,Qt). ~_ APPGcatian completed in full, _~(_ Thirteen (13) folded copies of plan, (A revised mylar aii9intaJ must be submitted offer staff review} _~ A Dopy of the attached checklist with all items checlcad off ar a brief explanation as to why they are nat. ~{_ Rezoning Application if zone change is prapased. Date of Required PreappJJcation Conference: NAME OF $Ut3pIY1S1ON Crescent Pointe -Phase Z SPEGiFIEb LOCATION OF RROPpSE[3 SUBDIVISION On each side of CovQerfield Raricwav~etween nivers' pr, [FM 60t >~ State Hwv 30 APPLICANT.FPiZOJEGT MANAGER'S INFORMATION {Primary l:nntad far the Pto~ect): Na»re 14ff»ri J=n~i»eerlrra ~ Suruelrlraa Street Address 41 t}1 S_ Texas Avs. Suits A City ,B1Yert Sta'~a T~4 Zlp Cade 7;"80 E-!Nail Address stewart~klingeng.cam __ Phone Number 979-846-fi212 Fax Number 9T9- B-8 52 • J'RaPERTY OWNER'S INF{aIZMATION (ALL owners must be Identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple owners): Narrre CnasCeftt i°o~r-i~a HoJ~df»y~ lrac_ Street Address 4500 Carter Croak Parkway, Suite 901 Gity Bnran State TX Zip Code 7F802 Phone Number 878-84~-6878 ARCHITECT OR EJ+IGINEER'S INFQRMAi1flN: E-Mail Address Fax Number 679-$4t3-0783 Name it11n~! Enorr>p Inv 8 Sutrtrevlnv Street Address same as above Gity State Zip Code E-NEail Address Pfione Number Fex Nurrtber ~ta~w tors • TOTAL ACREAGE OF SUBONISIC?N: 119.3 TOTAL ACREAC,E BY ZQNING UISTRIGT: 2$.5 /C-1 49.T5 1R~C 47.79 /A-P TOTAL FLp4DPLAINI ACREAGE= NONE WILL PARKLAND DEDICATION 8E MET Bl' r1CRFAGE OR ~€ ? (GIRCI.~ QI+IE} (if acreage, please show approximate sloe and location an plan} REt~UESTED VARIANCES TQ SIJ$DIVISION REGULATIt}NS & REASON( FOR SAME NONE • REQUESTED OVERSIZE S'ARTICIPATION NONE Tlh~r applicant Eras pr~parad fhrs application and cedrfres tttst fhe facts stated hen~irr and exhibits alfact~ed r7erety are lure acid c~orraCt. The ernderslg~rat! hereby regr~esfa apprvsraJ b}+ fhe G+ty of Gollegs StaPran of fhe above-~dentrfied plan. Signature anet Titl Date • a~~sacc xa3 Regular Agenda 8 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat for Crescent Pointe Subdivision consisting of 16 lots on 137.14 acres located at 300 University Drive East in the general vicinity of Copperfield Parkway between University Drive East and State Highway 30. Case #06-500004 (LB/JN) • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Lindsay Boyer Report Date: March 8, 2006 Email: Iboyer(~cstx.gov Meeting Date: April 6, 2006 Project Number: 06-00500004 Item: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plat for Crescent Pointe Phase 2-4 consisting of 16 lots on 137.14 acres located at 300 University Drive East in the general vicinity of Copperfield Parkway between University Drive East and State Highway 30. Applicant: Stewart Kling, engineer for the owner Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat with the condition that Staff Review Comments #3 are met. Item Summary: This plat is a preliminary plat for Phase 2-4 of Crescent Pointe Subdivision. The plat includes 16 lots on 137.14 acres for a variety of proposed uses, including: office, commercial, and multi-family housing. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The subject property is designated as • Planned Development on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The plat includes property with frontage on University Drive East and Harvey Road, both major arterials, and Copperfeld Parkway, a minor arterial. This property is part of the 30/60 Small Area Plan which identified this area for Mixed Use Development. In 2003, the Mixed Use Study reclassified this area as Planned Development. The 30/60 Plan, listed a variety of uses that would be appropriate in this area: office, commercial, clean industrial, and higher density single family and multi-family housing. This plat is in compliance with the approved Master Plan as well as all subdivision regulations. Future driveways along Copperfield Parkway and Crescent Pointe Parkway will be determined at site plan and must comply with all driveway separation requirements. Item Background: This property was annexed in 1979 and subsequently zoned M-1, Light Industrial. Phase 1 of Crescent Pointe was platted in 2005. This plat included 4.2 acres divided into 4 lots at the southwest corner of Copperfield Parkway and Crescent Pointe Parkway. A Master Plan was approved on this property in 2003. In 2005, the Master Plan • was approved again after the expiration of the previous plan. This Master Plan • has been submitted for an amendment, as well as a rezoning. Additional development in this area includes the Citibank, formerly First National Bank building. Budgetary 8~ Financial Summary: None Related Advisory Board Recommendations: This property was discussed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on March 7, 2006. Their recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission is fora 5.05 acre park located in Phase 2, east of Copperfield Parkway on property with frontage on Crescent Pointe Parkway. Additionally, unless the park is constructed by the developer, an additional $292 per Dwelling Unit is required in Park Development Fees at the time of Building Permit. Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the final plat. The options regarding the final plat are: ^ Approval with conditions; ^ Approval as submitted; or ^ Denial. INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES • Water Service: The subject property is supported by a 12-in water main which runs along Copperfield Dr, an 8-in water main which runs along Crescent Pt. Pkwy, and a 12-in water main which runs along SH 30. Sewer Service: The subject property is supported by an adjacent 8-in and a 12-in sanitary sewer main. Street(s) required for plat: none Streets/Access: The subject property takes access off SH 30, SH 60, Copperfield Dr. and Crescent Pt. Pkwy. Off-site Easements required for plat: Easements may be required for storm sewer and/or sanitary sewer. Drainage: The subject property is located in the Carter's Creek Drainage Basin. The development is required to comply with the City's Drainage Policy. Flood Plain: None on-site Oversize request: See Budgetary and Financial Summary Section. • • Impact Fees: None Parkland Dedication Fees: See Related Advisory Board Recommendations Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) and Aerial Map 2. Application 3. Copy of Preliminary Plat (provided in packet) 4. Copy of Master Development Plan (see Case #06-25) 5. Staff Review Comments #3 • • ~ a 4 K F. t 4 :4a ~ i. ^ `€ !; ~ ~ ~ ° , ~ ' ~ _ / ~ y /. ~ , / y~ ~ . , ` •% Q ,' ~ '~ , " _ s 1 r i ~ M ~ Z ~_ J J d W /•~ LL ' ~ ~ ~ Q U ` ~ ~ ~ 1 ~•~ ':f ' : r `. . / ~;. /' ' N / K . ` K I..L • ~. L ~ ' ~ - Z ~ : ~,. ,~ 1 / ' / l /, W ,' :: U ~ r ~. , m$ ~ ~h ~ ' ~L• ~ a ' / /' 'a' ~ / _ N ~ .~ ~ ' /'~ N k y Q • ~ :~ / ` r ~ F /, ~ O • k 1 y L ` V r d. 4 If 0 l ~ ~ ~ V: W . ~~ •. CCp ~ ~ ~• ~Y. ~~ f ~ • ~`/. ~{ -` ~LA <` 4 ~ C 1 `~ A - ^y1P~ S.'~ • FpR OFFI S6 pN v P8Z CASE NO_: C~I"t'Y(]F t:~pi.I_EGE S'YA!'ION L1+ATE SU>e7MIT7ED: (~.I ~' Alan ninR d' 1ka~ofAUa! 5ervietS .+~. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLI~A71~N r'-~ !~.. The fvllovriitg Items must be sutxnitted by an established filing deadline date flor P & Z Commission cansideratit3n. MINIMUM SUBMi'ITAL REQUIREMENITS: X Filing Fee of $4QO.QI}_ NlA Variance Request tv Subdivision Regulations ~ $100 {if applicable) X Application .completed In full K Thirteen {13] faded copies of plat. {A revised rnylar Qtiginal must be submitted after staff review.) X One {9j copy of the approved Master Plan if applicable_ ?(,. _ A copy of the attached CheCkllst with all items :checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are nat. }C R~oning Application iF zone change is praposed_ _. Parkla.~d Dedication requirement approved by the Parka ~, Recreatiars Board, please provide proof of appmval {iF applicatrie)_ babe of Preapplicati+on CoRfr3rsnce: University dr. (FM SQi 8~ State Nvar~,'}8 NAMI` 4F StJ B!}iY1SIQH Crescerrt Poirrte phase 2 SPECIFIED IQCATION OF PRC7POSED SL1k3DIVISION n each side of ooaer#ield Paricwa~eiween APPLICANT/PRQJECI' MANAGERS INFC7RMATIOty (Primary Contact for the Protect): Name KIin9 EnttineerinQ~ Survevine Street Addre95 4101 5. Texas Ave Suite A Giiy ervan State _ TX Zlp Code 778112 E-Mail Address stewart~klingeng.com Phone Numt~er 979-8q6-6212 Fax Number 979-1346-82;;2 PRQPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATIQI~k FALL owners must he identified. Please attach ors additional sheet far multiple awnersj: Name crescent Pflinte Haldines. Inc. Street Address 4500 reek Par y, Suite 1C1 City Bryan State TK Zip Cone 77842 Phone Number 979-5~6-8878 E-Mail Address Fax Numt~er 979-8d6-a783 _ ARCHITECT 4R ENGINEER'S If~FOR1UlATldJ4: Nam$ ICIi~ Erxlineerlno $, Suryevina 5lreet Addresg Same as above City State _ dip Cade _ E-Mail Address Phone Number Fax Number • l.'ii:Ut left • Tptaf ACrBS C7f Subdivision 53. T~ R-O-W Acreage U Total # Of Lats 8 Number 4f k.ot;s By Zoning Distriet 3 1 C-7 2 f R-~ 3 fA-P Average Acreage Qf Each Residential Lat 6y Zoning aiStrict: 14.0 !R-d 2.0 /C-7 6.0 1A-P Floodplain Acreage none parkland dagic2~tion by acreage orfee? yes A statement addressing any differences between the Preliminary Ptat and app-nved Master Plan {if applicable} Wane Requested variances to subdivisiorS regulations & reaso~t for same Wane C~ Requested oversize partlapatlon none _ ParklatiQ Dedication due prior tia fllfrtg the Flnal Pl+~t; ACREAGE; # of Acres u, be dediCaLed # of acres in detention OR FEE ItV LIED QF LAND: # of acres in flavdplain # of acres in greenways # of Single-Famil}r Dwelling Units }C 5556 =$ (date) Approved by Parks & Recreation eoarri The apAJrcant has prepared this appJicafiorr and ce~Jres thaf the far#s st~fed herein and exhibrt5 attached hereto are true and carr~ecf. Tire r~rro~ersiQned hereby requests approval by the City of College Sfatiorr at the above idertfrfieG prat and attests that ill respective owners have 6eerr idenlrfred on tftis application. _t~ Signature and Tide f t pate C7 • ENGINEERING Please change note #9 regarding the "Drainage Facility". This note should state that the "Drainage Facility is privately owned and maintained by the property owners association or some variation of that. At this time there is no indication that these "Drainage Facility" will be accepted by the Parks Board as Parkland Dedication nor have we seen construction documents indicating the required improvements. If prior to final platting these "Drainage Facility" are accepted as Parkland Dedication and the appropriate improvements are made, the issue can be dealt with at that time. Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: March 30, 2006 • • Regular Agenda 9 Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a rezoning for Crescent Pointe Subdivision consisting 137.14 acres located at 300 University Drive East in the general vicinity of Copperfield Parkway between University Drive East and Harvey Road from M-1, Light Industrial to a combination of C-1, ~~, General Commercial, A-P, Administrative Professional, and R-4, Multi-Family. Case #06-500003 (LB/JN) 1 1 • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Lindsay Boyer Report Date: March 8, 2006 Email: Iboyer@cstx.gov Meeting Date: April 6, 2006 Project Number: 06-00500003 Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a rezoning for Crescent Pointe Subdivision consisting 137.14 acres located at 300 University Drive East in the general vicinity of Copperfield Parkway between University Drive East and Harvey Road from M-1, Light Industrial to a combination of C-1, General Commercial, A-P, Administrative Professional, and R-4, Multi-Family. Applicant: Stewart Kling, engineer for the owner Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning if the amendment to the Master Plan is approved with the condition that no fence or wall be built between the park and the adjacent R-4 lot (Lot 1, Block 3, Phase2) located on Crescent Pointe Parkway. Item Summary: This rezoning request is being brought forward by the owner in conjunction with an amendment to the Master Plan for this property. Originally • this property was designated to develop under a P-MUD Zoning District. According to the applicant, they have been unable to market the property with this zoning classification and are seeking to establish standard zoning classifications to meet the same intent of the mix of uses on this property. The Master Plan did not change the type and location of uses approved on the 2005 Master Plan and include office, retail, apartments, and townhomes. This property is surrounded by property that is zoned M-1, Light Industrial to the west, developed as Texas A&M, and undeveloped A-O, Agricultural Open, and PDD, Planned Development District to the east. Comprehensive Pian Considerations: The Land Use Plan designates this area as Planned Development. The property was included in area 4A of the 30/60 Small Area Plan which originally identified this area for Mixed-Use and made the following statement: The area should be reflected as mixed use, with an emphasis on uses such as office, commercial, clean industrial, and higher density single family and multifamily housing. Low density housing should be discouraged. Housing that appeals to professionals should be encouraged. The PDD district could be used to facilitate design innovation and more intense commercial uses. Standard zoning districts • C:IDOCUME-11LLINDG-11LOCALS-11TemplStalf Report.DOC Created on 3/28/2006 10:35:00 AM • that permit high density single family, multi-family, clean industrial, offices, and commercial uses that are conducive to tourism would also be appropriate in this area. In March 2003, the Mixed Use Opportunity changed the Mixed Use Designation in this area to Planned Development, which it has since retained. The Thoroughfare Plan designates Copperfield Parkway as a minor arterial. Construction has been completed by the City. For consideration of the multi-family rezonings, currently there are: 1100 acres designated on the Comprehensive Plan 1335 acres zoned multi-family 798 acres zoned and developed for multi-family development 213 acres zoned for multi-family and undeveloped 183 acres zoned but developed for uses other than multi-family Current occupancy rates for multi-family: 90.6% *Source: Texas A&M Real Estate Center This property was discussed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on • March 7, 2006. Their recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission is fora 5.05 acre park located east of Copperfield Parkway with frontage on Crescent Pointe Parkway. The Board is also concerned with park frontage and access from the adjacent residential development. They would like for the park to be visible and accessible from the residences with no fences impeding access to the park. This property is surrounded by property designated for Texas A&M on the west and Planned Development and Single-Family Residential, High Density to the east. It is bound to the north and south by roads. This rezoning will be in compliance to an approved Master Plan if the amendments to the Master Plan have been approved prior to this item. All of the zonings meet minimum lot dimensions for their respective zones. Item Background: The subject property was annexed in 1979 and subsequently zoned M-1, Light Commercial. Portions of this property have been platted as Crescent Pointe, developing as the new Citibank, formerly First National Bank, building. Also platted is Crescent Pointe Phase 1, which is a plat for approximately 4 acres at the southwest corner of Copperfield Parkway and Crescent Pointe Parkway. One of the lots is currently under site plan review for a law office. • C:IDOCUME--IILLINDG-11LOCALS-11TemplStaff Report.DOC Created on 3/28/2006 10:35:00 AM • Related Advisory Board Recommendations: N/A Infrastructure and Facilities: Water: The subject property is supported by a 12-in water main which runs along Copperfield Dr, an 8-in water main which runs along Crescent Pt. Pkwy, and a 12-in water main which runs along SH 30. Sewer: The subject property is supported by an adjacent 8-in and a 12-in sanitary sewer main. Streets: The subject property takes access off SH 30, SH 60, Coppe~eld Dr. and Crescent Pt. Pkwy. Off-site Easements: Easements may be required for storm sewer and/or sanitary sewer. Drainage: The subject property is located in the Carter's Creek Drainage Basin. The development is required to comply with the City's Drainage Policy. • Flood Plain: None on-site Oversize request: See Budgetary and Financial Summary Section. Impact Fees: None Commission Action Options: The Commission acts as a recommending body on the question of rezoning, which will be ultimately decided by City Council. The Commission options are: 1. Recommend approval of rezoning as submitted; 2. Recommend denial; 3. Table; or, 4. Defer action to a specified date. Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) and Aerial Map 2. Application 3. Rezoning Map (included in packet and on wall) • C:IDOCUME-11LLlNDG-11LOCALS-11TemplStaff Report.DOC Created on 3/28/2006 10:35:00 AM • NOTIFICATION: Legal Notice Publication(s): The Eagle; 3-21-06 and 4-11-06 Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 4-6-06 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: 4-27-06 Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200': 25 Response Received: None as of date of staff report C7 • C:IDOCUME-iILLINDG--IILOCALS-11TemplSfaff Report.DOC Created on 3/2fl/2006 10:35:00 AM '+ N r ~ ~ i U.1 f E y ~ k u ~ . L ~ •• ~ y ~ ,~ ~ _ ;'~ 1j ~ / ~' N '/ 1= ~, ` a t4 ,. Q ti < q '~ r ~ v '~ 1 d ~ ^ . 4 ` x - ~ 4 J ~ •1 l` ` - n.j '`ice i ` 7 l ~~ l _ _ i ~ ` ~ 1 ~ , 4 ~ I ' w \ ~ ~ L: ~ _ ~ L ~ ~_ VII ~ W ~ _ i ~` l r - - '~.'~ ~~ W ' ~~ W ;~ ~ ~ ;' ~ ~ ~ iz ~ a =~ o w ~~ ~ i W L ^ .ry 'i ( ,1 ~ U 'y _+. c _. v • ~1"'Y(lr ~;{?l.:.r•.{;r.~iT.4Tff)N L'L'Nl:IN~~ 4° Dsi-riepav.~nt Serwa: FOR OFFICE ~1SE ONLY i~~ .; ~ SASE N8_ DATE 8UBMITTED ~~ ~}l.r ~' I~ f' ZflNlNG MIAP AMENI~iVlEI-IT (REZC}NIN~) APPLICATIC,~N ' MINJMUM SUBMITTA4 REQUIREi41ENTS If 8 petition for rezoning is denied by the Cliy Council, another application for rezvtting shall net be filed within a period of 1B0 days from the date Gf denial, except with piarrnission of the Planning ~ Zoning Commission or City Council. The follovM+inp items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for consideration: X Application completed in full. X $500.170 application fee X Tuv~o (2) caples of a fully dimensioned reap an 24"x36" paper shawin$: a. Land affected; b. Legal description of area of proposed change; C. Present zoning; d. Zoning cEassification of all abutting land; and e. All public and private rights-of--way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land. Written legal description of subject property {me~es & bounds or tat i3 block 4t sul~diviSiDn, whicheuer is applicable). ~ Trie Rezoning Supporting Infanmation sheet completed in full. A GAD {dxf/dwg} or GIS tshp~ d"egital file may be required for more Qamvtex rezAnind requests. Date of Required Rreapplicati~n Cv~ference: APPLtCAhfT'S INFORMATION: Name _.__ Crescent Pointe Holdirtos. Ina. Street Address 4504 Carter Creek Parkway, Suite 101 City Bryan _ State TX Zip Cade 778x2 E-Mail Address Phone Number 978-846-8878 Fax Number 97g-846-Q7~3 • PROPERTY ©WNER'S INFORMATION: Name same as above Street Ac4drass City State Zip Code E-Mai 1 Address Phone Number fax Number This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated and recorded in Volume 511 ~, Page 10 of the Brazos County Deed Records. General Location of Property: On each side of Conoetfield Prkwv btwn university Dr ;FM 601 S#ate Hwu 3Q Address of Property: nfa Legal. Oesf~ription: various laarrels Acreage -Total Property: 57.29 Existing Zoning: !u{-1 Proposed Zoning: C-1 and A-P Present Use of I'rapelty: vacant-undeveloped Proposed Use of Property: professional office and general canmercial r„~3V3 Page t of 2 r~ REZgN3NG SUPIy(?RTtNG INFORMATION • 1.) List the changed ar changirt® caQnditians ire the area or in the City whir„t1 make this zone change necessary. To successfully market this aroyerty. more flexibility is needed than P-MUD ar P-PD!} provide 2.) Indicate whether or nat this. zone change is in accordance vrith tt~e Comprehensive Plan If it is not, explain why the Ptan is incorrect. The enanfle Is cxrnalstant with the Gamvrehensiye Plan 3.) Ust any ether reasons to support this zar3e cahange. There was a time in which P-MUD and RPDa were in vos~ue._howaver. after having processed a few of these projects through the P PDD Gr P~MUD pfacedure both city ste(f end the trevelavment cammurtity prefier to develao under the standard zanlnp designations to achieve the safe and orderly development of the city. The aApNcant has prepared fh+s af~l~-rc2~tion and suppartirlg irrtormsEiQn a+?d cerfafes that the facts 5fat~ed herein acrd extrlbrts attached hereto a~a fnue acrd c~omect. JF APPUCATi'pN !S ~1LEa 8Y ANY~N~ OTC-tER THAN THE O~wNER ~~ rNF PRQPEf77Y, aPPL1CA r~oly MusrBE ACCQMPAIVIED 8YA POWEl4 Q~AT-FORA-EY S7ATF14fEN7'FRt7+~ THE OW/UFR. Signa#ure of owner (or ag~rtit) or'~pp~"ant r ~ - ~~ '?-F' Oat • Regular Agenda 10 Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Replat for High Ridge Subdivision consisting of 3 lots on 8.138 acres located at 1201 Earl Rudder Freeway South, generally located on the east side of the freeway between Harvey Road and University Drive. Case #05-500090 (LB/CC) • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Lindsay Boyer, Staff Planner Report Date: March 22, 2006 Email: i Iboyer(o~cstx.gov Meeting Date: April 6, 2006 Project Number: 05-00500090 Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Replat for High Ridge Subdivision consisting of 3 lots on 8.138 acres located at 1201 Earl Rudder Freeway South, generally located on the east side of the freeway between Harvey Road and University Drive. Applicant: Brett McCully, engineer Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the final plat. Item Summary: This property is being subdivided to prepare the property for commercial development. Lot 2C is currently developed as a satellite parking lot for Varsity Ford. Lot 2A is under site plan review for an Ashley Furniture store. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identifies this area as Retail Regional. The property has frontage on Earl Rudder Freeway, a designated Freeway on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. This area was updated in 2001 • with the 30/60 Plan. This property includes a 1.675 acre greenway dedication area. The properties will take access from the existing Varsity Ford site through access easements throughout the subdivision. Any future driveways must comply with the City and Texas Department of Transportation driveway separation distances. This plat is in compliance with City of College Station Subdivision Regulations. Item Background: This property was annexed in 1958 and subsequently zoned R-1. In 1989, the property was rezoned in 1989 in compliance with the Industrial designation on the Comprehensive Plan. The property was platted in 1993, and a portion of it was developed as additional parking for an expansion of the service area at Varsity Ford. This property was rezoned to C-1 in October of 2005, and currently a site plan is under review for a portion of the tract. Budgetary & Financial Summary: N/A Related Advisory Board Recommendations: N/A Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the final plat. The options regarding the final plat are: • Approval • Denial • Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map 2. Aerial Map 3. Application 4. Copy of Final Plat (provided in packet) • U I• ~~~~~ ~~ ~ r ,c. b ,p~t^ L ~9 ~oG A - 0 a ''~~ C~I~~r~LS~tVeV7 ° (L~o~ PGA ~ 3 C~Z R- ~ C-7 ' C-2 G3~DC~C~ rR 2 s ~s A-P r ~~ ~ '~ ~c}~ r ``~ 1R ~~y-~ V - Z I&1f ~~ ~~ o r ~~~P.~ ~ sMi D~Mn G°3a© a~ax r ~ ~ ~ ~ `a,~ s G~OC~G~LQG3D ~ COQ ° ~ °~ r C - 7 + G°~L~1G°3[~ C~Laa u LG~`1La~l 2,~oa~,~ R - 3 oQ G~ o ~ o ~;~,~ ro 4 pia o~~, 8 ~~ 3 7 ~q#~r $ ~ocxl B p~ r 2 s ~~~~ . ~ 8 `,~ ` r HIGH RIDGE BLS 1 LOT 2 c..G P & Devel menu 05-90 [7 r ~~ • • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Alarming d Development Servica '~ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY P8Z CASE NO.: O~~ DATE SUBMITTED: -J'~` v ~ ~~~~- FINAL PLAT APPLICATION I -~-~ Pte' (Check one) ~f Minor ^ Amending ^ Final ^ Vacating ^ Replat (5300.00) (5300.00) (5400.00) (5400.00) (5600.00)' 'Includes public hearing fee The following items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for P8Z Commission consideration. MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Filing Fee (see above) NOTE: Multiple Sheets - $55.00 per additional sheet ,~ Variance Request to Subdivision Regulations -- $100 (if applicable) ~ Development Permit Application Fee of $200.00 (if applicable}. Infrastructure Inspection Fee of $600.00 (applicable if any public infrastructure is being constructed) ~ Application completed in full. U-Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (if applicable). Thirteen (13) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after staff review.) +r1a- One (1) copy of the approved Preliminary Plat and/or one {1) Master Plan (if applicable). ~ ~ Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station l.S.D. ~~ 7 A copy of the attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not. ~v Two (2) copies of public infrastructure plans associated with this plat (if applicable). Parkland Dedication requirement approved by the Parks & Recreation Board, please provide proof of approval {if applicable). Date of Preapplication NAME OF SUBDIVISION Z-7•o5 N/G h~ R/pG __ - -- SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (Lot & Block) LOT 2 ~ ! N« R~DiE APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project): Name 13R1t'T7' 1rI~C LILLY -- BLEYL !~ .4sSOC~~1T1~ street Address !?2~ BR0~401WO0~O1C 'M'2!O city TSII:YAN State TX Zip Code 77802 E-Mail Address llwfGe~!lY~t ji~/1y~MtllM4lO/'~/,- • COJrI Phone Number ~ V~ 112 S Fax Number _ 2 `O • ~'~q 9 PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION ALL owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple owners): Name /~-1 /V 77NOJV?~ ~AJOi/ZS Street Address 13S/ Ejrl~L ftl/AVl~il x~1/Y City C~L6G~ STATE/ State TX Zip Code ~ 7~q ~ E-Mail Address Phone Number ~ir1 ~• 2~2Z Fax Number it 7 3 - ~ ~OO ~ ~ ~3. ~ 7 ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: Name ,1~~`22 SURVEY/NCr • Street Address 505 <NU2LL/ ST. City ~oLLEGE' STATjO/V State YK Zip Code ?71341 E-Mail Address /elit. ~~[.t•162 ~V~'Qt~w~t. IUCT Phone Number Z G8. 31 °~ S Fax Number !. T! - 8104 6!13/03 1 of ~ (~ n Do any deed restrictions or cover _.,is exist for this property? Yes I . _ Is there a temporary blanket easement on this propertyt If so, please provide the Volume and Page # .Acreage -Total Property Total # of Lots ~ R-O-W Acreage Existing Use: VRLI~IUT Proposed Use: GO~IMFIZG/+l~ Number of Lots By Zoning District / ! GZ / / Average Acreage Of Each Residential lot By Zoning District: Floodplain Acreage , A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and approved Master Plan and/or Preliminary Plat (if applicable): Requested Variances To Subdivision Regulations & Reason For Same: Requested Oversize Participation: Total Linear Footage of Proposed Public: _~ Streets _~, Sidewalks Sanitary Sewer Lines Water Lines _~ Channels _~ Storm Sewers _~ Bike Lanes /Paths Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat: ACREAGE: # of acres to be dedicated + $ development fee # of acres in floodplain # of acres in detention # of acres in greenways OR FEE IN LIEU OF LAND: # of Single-Family Dwelling Units X $556 = $ (date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Board NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FILING. The applicant has prepared this application and cen~es that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true, correct, and complete. The undersigned hereby requests approval by the City of College Station of the above-identified frna! plat and attests that this request does not amend any covenants or restrictions associated with this plat. Signature and Title • Date 6/13!03 n ~ SUPP~cMENTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT t,_.~ORMATION application is hereby made for the following development specific site/waterway alterations: ~i~l~tn~lwaeK - Fi~L ACKNnOWLEDGMENTS: 1, ~IQII;'Tf M~ Cif LLY ,design engineer/owner, hereby acknowledge or affirm that: The information and conclusions contained in the above plans and supporting documents comply with the current requirements of the City of College Station, Texas City Code, Chapter 13 and its associated Drainage Policy and Design Standards. As a condition of approval of this permit application, I agree to construct the improvements proposed in this application actor in to these dot nts and the requirements of Chapter 13 of the College Station City Code. ` I Property Owne ) Contractor CERTIFICATIONS: (for proposed alterations within designated flood hazard areas.) A.I, certify that any nonresidential structure on or proposed to be on this site as part of this application is designated to prevent damage to the structure or its contents as a result of flooding from the 100 year storm. Engineer Date I, certify that the finished floor elevation of the lowest floor, including any asement, of any residential structure, proposed as part of this application is at or above the base flood elevation established in the latest Federal Insurance Administration Flood Hazard Study and maps, as amended. Engineer Date C. I. ~~~~ I '/ ~~ULCY ,certify that the alterations or development covered by this permit shall not diminish the flood-carrying capacity of the waterway adjoining or crossing this permitted site and that such alterations or development are consistent with requirements of the City of College Station City Code, Chapter 13 concerning encro hm nts of flood ys and of floodway fringes. s~3~oS Engineer Date D. I, , do certify that the proposed alterations do not raise the level of the 100 year flood above elevation established in the latest Federal Insurance Administration Flood Hazard Study. Engineer Date Conditions or comments as part of approval: 1n accordance with Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, measures shall be taken to insure that debris from construction, erosion, and sedimentation shall not be deposited in city streets, or existing drainage facilities. All development shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the City Engineer for the above named project. All of the applicable codes and ordinances of the City of College Station shall apply. • 6/13/03 Regular Agenda 11 Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Rezoning from C-1 General Commercial to C-1 General Commercial with the RDD Redevelopment overlay district for the Culpepper Plaza consisting of 19.15 acres located at 1505 Texas Avenue South, or the northeast corner of Harvey Road and Texas Avenue. Case #05-500222 (TF) • STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Trey Fletcher, Sr. Planner Report Date: March 27, 2006 Email: tfletcher(a~cstx.gov Meeting Date: April 6, 2006 Project Number: 05-0500222 Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Rezoning from C-1 General Commercial to C-1 General Commercial with the RDD Redevelopment overlay district for the Culpepper Plaza consisting of 19.15 acres located at 1505 Texas Avenue, or the northeast corner of Harvey Road and Texas Avenue. Applicant: Dan Muniza, CA New Plan Texas Assets, l_.P., owner. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning from C-1 General Commercial to C-1 General Commercial with the RDD Redevelopment overlay district. Item Summary: According to the application, "The redevelopment of this site will renovate the building facades as well as upgrade and enhance the parking lot and landscaping from that which is currently on the site..." To facilitate this, the • applicant is requesting that the Redevelopment District be applied to this parcel which is already zoned C-1 General Commercial. According to the UDO, "the purpose of this district is to facilitate the redevelopment of existing nonconforming commercial centers through flexible or relaxed standards, which can accommodate existing physical limitations and take extraordinary circumstances into account. [Further] The Redevelopment District (RDD) is an overlay district. The permissible uses on any site shall be governed by the underlying zoning." There are four supplementary standards that apply to this district, including location, standards, criteria for evaluation, and procedure for establishment. Location: The UDO stipulates that RDD may be established upon any commercially-zoned property where the initial development was established a minimum of 20 years prior to the rezoning request and the proposed redevelopment redevelopment meets the intent of Sec. 5.8.B. Culpepper Plaza, according to the property owner's website, was established in 1976. It was renovated in 1996. • C:IDOCUME-11LLINDG-11LOCALS-11TemplStaff Report.DOC Created on 12/9/2005 2:32:00 PM • Standards: Through Redevelopment districts, waivers up to 50 percent of required parking standards and landscaping where physical limitations and the site's location and relationship to the goals of the Comprehensive Plan warrant consideration. Culpepper Plaza consists of approximately 214,000 square feet. Waivers to be considered by the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council through the rezoning include: • Section 7.9.H Parking Lots (to address NRA Landscape Requirements) • Section 7.2.C Dimensions and Access (to address Parking Lot Dimensional Criteria) • Section 7.9.1.3 Landscaping for developments with greater than 50,000 SF • Section 7.4.M.7.b Freestanding Commercial Signs (applicant is requesting variance to allow an additional freestanding sign, where the requirement is 600 feet of frontage, the applicant has 555 feet along Harvey Road.) • Section 7.4.M Freestanding Commercial Signs (to address existing pylon sign that is non-conforming in height and square footage) Waivers to be considered, independent of this rezoning process, by the Design Review Board following the rezoning include: • Section 7.9.1.1 Building Mass & Design for developments with greater • than 50,000 SF (to address the existing portions of the main center where facade articulation is not feasible) • Section 7.9.D.3 Building Materials (to address the utility of split-faced block that is color coated versus tinted) • Section 7.9.C Building Mass and Design (to address the applicants request for alternative design elements on the Kohl's elevation and the south end of the existing center) Criteria for Evaluation: A thorough review of the site plan and elevations has been rendered. Several iterations of all the plans have been considered through this application. Improvements from previous iterations include improved design of the throat depth from Texas Avenue, improved access and circulation patterns on the interior parking areas, enhanced levels of compliance with regard to landscaping and non-residential architectural standards. Each of these has been evaluated based on the six criteria for evaluation stated in the UDO. Procedure for Evaluation: A copy each of the site plan, landscape plan, elevations of the main building (including Kohl's) and elevations of the Kohl's building were reviewed for this report and are included in this packet. The site plan components shall govern • the redevelopment of the site following the approval of the RDD. As noted in the C:IDOCUME-11LLINDG-11LOCALS-11TemplStatf Report.DOC Created on 12/J/2005 2:32:00 PM • standards section above, there are three issues for the DRB to consider following approval of this rezoning request; however, none of these factors should affect the site or landscape plans associated with the rezoning request. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The Land Use Plan shows the entire block bound by Texas Avenue, Harvey Road, George Bush Drive East, and Dominik Drive, as Redevelopment. The comprehensive plan defines Redevelopment as: "Currently-developed areas which will experience redevelopment as a result of increased land value." Culpepper Plaza has frontage to three streets: Texas Avenue and Harvey Road are Major Arterials and maintained by TxDOT and Dominik Drive, is maintained by the City and is not classified between Texas and George Bush Drive East. Culpepper Plaza occupies most of the bound by Texas Avenue, Harvey Road, George Bush Drive East, and Dominik Drive. Other uses in this area are general commercial uses, drainage and some vacant parcels along George Bush Drive East. No buffering of these uses is required. A small parcel still needs to be acquired to accommodate the proposed location of the Kohl's. Sidewalks will be provided along Texas Avenue by TxDOT in conjunction with Phase I of the project to widen the street. Sidewalks along Harvey Road and Dominik Drive do not exist, but will be required for this project. • Item Background: This area was annexed in 1956 and was platted as Culpepper Plaza in 1969. Significant development, redevelopment and street improvements are occurring in the vicinity of the location of the request. Related Advisory Board Recommendations: As previously noted, the applicant is seeking some relief associated with Section 7.9 Non-residential Architectural Standards following the adoption of the Redevelopment district. The UDO gives the Design Review Board (DRB) the purview to consider such requests. Commission Action Options: The Commission acts as a recommending body on the question of rezoning, which will be ultimately decided by City Council. The Commission options are: 1. Recommend approval of rezoning as submitted; 2. Recommend denial; 3. Table indefinitely; or, 4. Defer action to a specified date. Supporting Materials: 1. Small Area Map (SAM) & Aerial 2. Application 3. Infrastructure and Facilities • 4. Copy of Conceptual Site Plan C:IDOCUME-11LLlNOG-11LOCALS-11TemplSta(f Report.DOC Created on 12/8/2005 2:32:00 PM • 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. IN Copy of Overall Elevations Copy of Kohl's Elevations Landscape Plan Culpepper Plaza Pylon Sign (Existing and Proposed) KohPs Low Profile Sign (Proposed) FRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES Water: The subject property is supported by various public water mains of various sizes. Sewer: The subject property is supported by various public sanitary sewer mains of various sizes. Streets: Texas Avenue is Major Arterial and is being widened by TxDOT. Harvey Road is also a Major Arterial. The development also has frontage along Dominik Drive, but this street in this area is not classified on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. Off-site Easements: Judging by the site layout that was submitted by the applicant there will be the need to relocate utilities, abandoned easements, and dedicated easements. • Drainage: The subject property is in the Wolf Pen Creek Drainage Basin. Judging by the site layout that was submitted by the applicant the issue of FEMA Floodplain/Floodways will need to be dealt with at the time of the site plan submittal. Floodplain: The subject property does encroach into the floodplain/floodway identified on the FEMA FIRM Panel 144C. Oversize request: NIA Impact Fees: Not in an impact fee area. NOTIFICATION: Legal Notice Publication(s): The Eagle; 3-21-2006 and 4-11-2006 Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 4-6-2006 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: 4-27-2006 Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners within 200': 24 • C:IDOCUME--IILLINDG-11LOCALS-11TemplStaff Reporf.DOC Created on 12/'9/2005 2:32:00 PM Response Received: Three phone calls have been received and were • of general interest. r~ • C:ID000ME-11LLINDG-1 U.OCALS-11TemplStaff Report.DOC Created on 12/9/2005 2:32:00 PM ` b / : / ~~~ / N / y: ~ ~: \ ~ / 'cx~ w ~g a .. / :' 0 ~ __ 11r~~ , " f''S ~ \~Cl~\,',\ ,,~~ / \ Y, ,icy / .f //~~'r~~ ~ _ Ir 1 ~, /' Cif ~ /.„ ~• /i / \. i (6 ~•~ = III' ~ .' ' . ~ ~ '.Y-r. / ~ . ,X ;: 1 ~ , I ;. •~ ~ • ~ t .~ ~[1 J • `\ \ I~•1 \ _9,1.,1 - ~i ~• ~ w ~ ~ 7 ' a- J ' •••1. ~~••• ' •11 I ,r J'- ~y, LJL `,~~y `. .. 1. • ,'f',' • ~. ~ ' .:. \ ac i /~a~~~;~/..~~•y%•'' /:~ ~~~C.. :•~i~' \ = \ ~ `• -- •.r •• _--""jam Q. .y ~ ~ ' (~ ~. _ ~ ~, ~ ~ H / •f ~ • • • • 12i ©11265 t 4: 4 3 71;" `1H;01 ~ITYOF C07.].EG£ STATICI~1 ~lrauira ~ L1n~,'spux~u Srroirrr '4Ek Pt.!'~N '.L =l~C-~ @2l~:~ FOR OF ~~JSFt~11 Y CA$E NO. ~~~' ngTE StrBM1T71:D l ~~ ~~ ~~TIING MAP AMENDMENT FGE~ RDD i[RF.~("1NING~ R~~EVELf~PMEN7 l] ISTRICT ~~ ~~ • MIIHIMUM SVt~IVItTTAL REQUfrREMEMTS ff a petlHon far rezoning is denied by the City Council, annthar aQpli~tion for reZOrting shall not be filed within a period aE 1B0 days from the date of denial, except with permission. of the P!dnning & ~oning CommisslC7r1 ar City Council. The following items must be submitted by en eS1~bNsht;yC! tiling deadline date far considerations X Appfcatian completed in lull. _ X X500.00 application fee. X Ter (10~ espies of tt19 site plan_ ~ Tan t10) copi©s of bui]cling elevations far proposed straGtu~$s. X Two (2J copies al a fully dirnensiorted map an Z4" x 36' paper snrnving: a. Land afieCted; b. Legs! descrlptlon of area of prapaeed change; c. Present inning; d. Zoning classification of all abuttirg land; and e_ All pu6lio and private rights-c~-sway and aasernents 6purrding and intersecting su6~ecl land. X Written legal descrptian of sui~}ect property (metes & bound9 ar let 8 black of subdivision, wh~attever is applicable}. X The atfached taheckliat and RQZVnIn Su porti Infvrmatian sheet ream leted in full. Date of Required Pree~~lcattan Conference: c~ctoisar 13.2t}d5 APPLICANT'S INFORMATION: Names} Dan Mums . Sr_ V_P. Canatructicn Street Address ellaire 61vtl City Haustan State TX Zip Code 77025 E-14iail Address dmuniza nrnvolan.eom phone Number ~?731 fi6U-4355 Fax (dumber 73 3fiA-70513 Pf{OPE`RTY QWNER'S INFORMATION: I~fame{s} CA New Plan Texas Assets. L.P Street Address ~q a City Houston State TK Z'ip Grade 77©25 E-141x11 Adereas ~~IUniaaCdlnewplan.com Phone l~'um`fer {773} 660-4355 Fax Numtaer 1;7931 3P9-?'Da6 This prdperty was canvetned to owner by deed, dated and recon•ied in Volun',e Paige of tfie Brazos County peed Records. General Lacaflon of Prpperty: Lacatetl on the northwest oarnerof t-lsrv Road anc Texas Avenue Address of Pfn a ~~~~ P rty: Legal Descrip~on: 19.1 ut Cf BIDCk .gx Pernel 1 & II B P 467 Total Acreage: ~ 9.1 ~ ac Existing ion I ng : C-1 Requested Zoning: G-1 vritt* f2DD ovarlav &'~ ~f09 Pa95 ! ai 2 ~I J • 1210;.20®5 14; 47 7i` F]yL~l :VFW 'I N`I = ~ Present Use of Property: relall c~ommerclal Propo9ed Use crf Property: I ccm F nGf ~ =! 83 RQD REZQNING SURFORTIN~ INFORMATIt7N 1.} 1+Vhat will the aesthetic cant~~buticn of the ptaposed development be? Trre re~fsvelaaamertt Gf thls siin w(tr ren~ayate the bulldlna fat:s~es as webr as UASrradl~ ana enhartcw~ the ~rkln4 tot ang,iarrdscanrna tram that vrh' (s cum?nt on the site, 7ne ur~rrt bulkllri s are outdated an +ra th ire A n %+R" wily enhance thPs ahgppJrao centbr• tflat is ttacat~cf of a rt~ar irrtersactrovr and rn the fret of College Stetiorr. 2.~ What one the physilcal Ilm~t~tions an ate site that w+auld pre~renE the develapmertt from meeting eli curretrt ~equirernenfi9? The size r~ the euristlraa s(te JGtt?lis acrd the amcwn[ al narklrra that re[allers rtaw rwt vn~y esJr~ but rp !re ham era lose rrruclt of the rkin ere a to adaG " at lendscanirta or lslsr>ds. 1G Adalifian t179 State n~tat _of-IN"dYS aria so cJase to nhe exrstirrv narldna fheF if wi!( be diYfr'ouff [a meet au the streetsaece revutraarneflts alorra tlxgss arl9as wlTiaout errcra,actrin in tho rAahi-cd'-x~v. We have redesr4ned ~ much as Avssible the ~aMrintx a~a acid o-eenspace as uch as vnssible e _ these fr+xltaaas. 3.J Wha# variances are being bau~ht with ttais rezoning? SNe era seekirac7 s varisaace fa flee larrtlt~ ~ue~fremrfigts for the site. 8ace~rse cf ffre sly encl aonFxrurat(on acdte site snot the lack of avarfaEl;e aka i~r pi(anting alarag the Texas Avcnuo a~ Harvey Roe d irorafa and the need fo prrav(d& ader7u8fe ~L4 >'dr the terrarats we arse reauesfrn4 ~ verrancae tv the lsndsu~r~lnn re aui~+nertts. ~,) LiSt any other teasans to Support ibis zone change" !t the c~rrfer (s tea redevelop ,grad complete a fade anti 8itg ngnoyatJyl- fo t~ecome an eye Gatchin4 asset 9 the camrrruraity, ecaaamlGellsr sueakina tlrt3rp must be r+ell~ef 10 some of the ant ardlnaraces. ~ tg asked to meat aN al the s~arrcier~ds as cumeratf,r rtm~eri It rrr'll remalGt (ra Rs cumer,! state urifN the ecanomlc :siteralican lmnmyes. A general statement regarding pr~o-pased drainage a4niral: T'he site fS c+,rrnantJv afevedaramentand tfrr's t~rnaosal wi~C nut attar those afralr7aae nsttems or amount of atrrat€ {pl0as0 noto tlta! a "Gtxnplete site plan" must be submitted to I~evelWyl~ent 6errir~e far A forr~l#i revitrwsfler the "concapt~ual" plarti hea been apprgned hY the P8rZarld QitY I;auncii prior>ho the Issuan~ae Qf a bufldlna Hermit 1 Tnc appJGcant has prepared ihls $o13(kk:atlarr acrd supporting irrt~omratrora end cert~5e3 thgt the facts slated her~elp and exhibits attached rfereta sr+a true snot 4brrac~" IF APPLICAT70N 1S FJLED t3Y ,4N1'ONE (3THE TNal~l THE ¢~(~ QF THE PROPERTY, APP~10,4T10N tiftlST t3E ACCOhfPANfEU 81" A PQ4 O~ A 7TO~i'NEY S7'A TEMr=NT FROAd TN6 OWrVt: F~, of Her cx g I nt inn rxa, A.I.A" 8anior Vrce Preetdettt '3avelopment. Date • W~~~~ Page Z Ot 2 • ~~ -~- CHELL PA U RC; +R ~~l City of College Stat an March 77, 7UUb Clevelcprnert Serv.~°s U 1 TcxaS Ave. S. college Station, TX 77t34Q Attr: Trey Fletcl per, Senior }larner RF: a4mended Yarr'ance Request For' Culpepper and K"crhJs Dea • I rey: V~de hate revie~~ecl ou r site plan and elevati:~n drawings in an ett:~rt to acr_ount for tl-I~ items that wi:l :.e ti'ariance r~q.rests a; part t~f our ~tl.`[) r~~gnir-g. 41JP have alsa reSFc:tded to y~er comments and there-care `r~subrttiTting t•t~s arncndec valiance rEquest. • In an eTfor; tQ ,'3rr~ani~e theSF items w~e have :olla~.ved the carte outline a5 the NRA 5t~riCldrds a5 depicrtPd in the UQa. 1~~1'e have do: it this for e~rh- alernPnt separat~'y (l.e. tii;e plait, Keltls a Lv3tion and Culpepper e evatian). Cu~oep~aer Site Plan Dptumsnts 5,ection 7.4 - Nfln-Residential Architectural Standards A. hpF~lic~-:.ail ily - NA 8. Screer•i:ry - ~lA C. Hr.i~,~inq I~liasslGesig7- A~.4 D. Ai:i.~:inq f+~taterials- N~1 F, 13uildin Ca~ars - NA f. p?destrianlQike Facilities -~~T'•rese facil.ties aye currently not sho+rln cn the site elan but ~~ill be added thrvughc~ut the site to meet the N(L4 standards. G. TIA - MA H. Parr:{inq lnt5 i .Parking Setback -1Qfeet Born ~QL'~' - aK ~. P©d Cnncepr -t-cyr eac_f~ nl :tie ~1C~L 5 sh~.u~ tin ,he attached draw'r•y ti•~e have hied to accomplish c:~e of .he cencep:s. TI :ey are as tallo•,+vs_ Ft~D 1 - NA FQD ~ - Cann. Ppt #3 F4D 3 -Concept ~+3 f OC ~ - Cr~rt[r,pt # 1 POC 5 Concept #.~ PUU 4 - Ccutccpt .#3 • ~tl INJ :I R:71r I)ai• d~.l. •...IIf. :::111.-: ~-~, ••• :au: - !'?!' f - f >::.=h ~4P~ T t, T !>: >it: t7 •X~Lf"'-O..`. •1~^('••ll 1 Y:o9.l:i.. - 11'l l't=•. - a:('< 'IT' : fl: '. 071::'.!.•. Y:Qi(~ :~f =~ i ~~ 11: ".~f .:F, - '::.lit 1' 11.E C •!"1•.11 •:Il_-1 ~..•l • Frcm the attached talvula~ data on the pion you can see that -vr each pad we Have not ath~eved the pe~ pad ~maunt of extra landscape area because tive tivere try~rg to baiantN this rey,~ rPmPnt al.~ng ~~~it~ the retailers required parking cr.:~nt_ M^~e have computed that 8verall we have rnet appraximat°ly a~~lo of :he Extra NRA stanclard ~anclscape rPC~uirement. 7'hrs will bQ ~ .variance requ$sf. In addition yc~u will glace shat ir1 Fa;l ~2 we da not maet .hc dimer.sicnal crite: is fc.',r arylec ^ar'king ar cne drive aisle. We have used correctly scaled vehicles as sl ~a~rrn on the sire plan and they da fit. L1te belieUe ih~ri your l;able i• i lf~ie UDC is based upon not a.lovring ar overhang by the vehicles. 4n[e pcu alidw t'tis tive tan reduce the s,z° of the parking space significantly as seen or the drav~ring. We rnrould Irke to request a variance tv a`his dimertsiona/ cri#eria. 1_ Additional 5;anr~ards for P.Idgs > SO;~uCSF 1 _ Building PAass & des gn NA 2_ Building Colors -14A • 3_ Landscaping - As seen or the landscape plan yrc are requesting a variance to S~% of tie landscape r+egrJrremanfs art the site. 4_ PedeSlfi~nfBiRe Faciliti^s - These facait:as are not currency shcrm out will be added throug,rcut the si:e try greet :h~ hi~A standards. 1. Additional tit8,~dprl; fnr 9'..5s ~ 15.1,~~C~DSF 1 _ P azalFublic Space ~~C•C•5F - TF.is plaza Brea will b~ the large side~~val< aid IandSCaF~e arr~a in fra;~t cif Kc~~ils. Kohls Elevations Section 7.~ - Nvn-Residential Architectural Standards A. ApL~Uc~bility - NA B. SLrccnir.y -1+',~e do not have enough devil a. this pa;ntto See rrti~chanical eauiurriert. We will have that infr~rrna.inn prior lc ~ruceedir-c~ l~ I?R3. C. 3uildinq MassfDesign - 1.~rartt : a;atle, • 3elier FUery 43ft - l~Je understand that you disagree that we have •net tFiis reauirernen:. We are rec~.resting tha: alternate 7'nat2rials/elerrAr.t, he ca.i.~tF:d toys-d this reyu~rerrerit, ~~3rne:y the colcr diffcrentiul, -he noble olock and tha alum turn ban~:,ing. This is a variance request. ~~ • Z_'Jther Facades ~`isih,~e fr~rn R~~ltt4' + ThF.~nly fia4~xle o`. Kahls that tiv.ll b2 visible >•rorn the SI 130 ~t7W wil be a portion aporoxir-tately $~J feEt long that is ~b(1 feet from. 5H3U. W2 do not believe that this pcrtiar. of *,hc KahlS binding lime should be s,abjeCt to Ibis -t:quireme~7~ ~ezaase of its d~stante from SH3C and are therel~or~e regtles>~.ing a uariance ro rite design requirements fir #hI~ ~e~tr'arr. 3. Roo' Urge - ~~ b. 3,~ildinq fvla;eri~~15 1. Colors - OK Z. Maleria~s visih.e from ~0~ - OK ~. M~~ler:a requirernen, far 25~/o brick, steno, etc. - CK - we t:~t~e u:il,zed pnr[ei~ r the t,~ break up the faYade materials_ f3ut we under~nd tha: the or!finance dins nvl allc~~ the spl.l F~;ted black to be color coated, therefore we are requesting a variance to #his requiremtsnt E. Buil;~iny ColarS-C]K F. Ped~Stri-~rJtjikz ~acili:ie5 - NA • G. f .+~ - NA ~. P~~rkint~ I.Ots - V:1 I. Additional Standards for Bldgs ~ 54,UUOSf 1. Iuilding Mass & Cosign - OK Z. Building Colors - C}K ~. LandSCapir7y - NA ~. PedestrianlQike fa~ili~ies - Nil ~. A~uitiona; Stanca~d5 for Bldgs > 1 ~~O,UU05 1. PlazalPublic 5r~ace ~1UU5F - hA C'al~,P~rer ~veral! E~evatior~s SecGan 7.9 - Non-Residential Architectural Standards A. Appl~ta~ility - N.A B. Screenitty ~ L~t~e da ~tc+_ nave enough detail at this ;.~Ui~l lv see rr~er_h~,r~.ic~+l equipment. 4'~'e w4~ill have that irtformattic•t prior :o prUc~eetliny to CRB. C. Duildiny A11855I13PSign - 1.frant Facade • bUe relieve a~,~e have trot phis requi-vment thrc.~uyh the usA of the colonnade ono tF.e cc'urnns. 1. Cltt2r facades U~sible Fora RU~f,I + These elements tivill r~ mick the from facade of the cent@r a•td at tl'2 rear of huildiny5 wle ::ill ulili~e landsca;:irty a5 much a5 passible fU• sc•eening. 3. Roof Line - CK ~~ ~~ • p. Building Matr:rials i :: n'~r.4 - tl1C ~. I~,ic3TCrlalS 11151,}le Iran ROW - OK 3. Nate~ia) reauircrnent ter 25rya brick, st;~ne, e:~. -~ OK E. Building colors - UK r. Ped2srtrianJ6ike Facilities -These are currently not sha~vn bu- w~!i fve added to meet :he NRA sldnrld~ds, u. IIA-NA F'. Far.{iny _ats - NA i. ~ddit~ora~ tt3ndards-or t3ldgs > S~,GGOSt' 1. Building Mass & resign - INe believe through the use cf -he ccdonnade 4ve have rnet this .E41UIrpment. Z_ Gu Id. r:~~ i.olr:rs - CK 3 t_ands:,aping - hA ~ . ~'cdest~isnBi'ce =Ut~lilies - I h~Se facilities t•.ave nul k;ee~7 5hov.rt but +t~ill hP added tc+ meet the (\RA standards. J. Anditinnal Standards fcr Bldgs 7 i5a,~0U5F 1 FlazatFublic cpaFe >2,~!,~5= - ~~is is the area in front rut KoF;s. • ~ldditranal Varrarrre Corasideratrons 1. Signage - We vrould like t:~ r~tai•i lh~ existing siy~ on the site and add erne IayJ profi.e s.~gn on the 5H30 side of tie site. Ciraphi~s of l'r~ic5e t`Pr~ sign el~rnertts are at[a,hed_ 1f this rs nor allowable under tf~e existing ordinance, we rvou~d like to request this as a variance. 1/~4RL4NCE SU+'VIMARY Outlined oelow is a variance summary. 'l. NRA Lar-dscape fl`equ+!rernent-From the attache: tahu~ar data un the ~'a~ yc~u ~~~n ~rc~ tFa; i•Ur each pod wz have n4[ d.ilieti~E?~': the per pcd am~uurt::jf extra IandsLape area. because rue were .ryi~g to balance this requi moment ;31ung with tl:e retailers required parking taunt. 1Nr have c:,rnputed ll~ia: o~+crall we have rnc~ approximately „a/a o` the extra NRA s-andard landscape requrcment. This wi!! be a varranre request. ~, ~'arkrng tat Dimensional Criferta - Iii addit ar you ,n,~il; note tnat .n Fcx1 :~7 we do net meet she dimensior~a. crite~ia for arglcd parki•~g or one dri~~e aisle We nave used correctly scaled vet•icles as sho~rrn on the si.e plan 3na the~yy da fit. We believe that y~u~.~r table in .he Ut~,fl uu k~ased u::•c~n not ~~ ~_~ • al~cuving an overndng by the vehic~as. Gn:e yut; allrnti' th~i~ we czar reduce the sine of t'ne ,r~arkir•.~ space -'ignificant!y as Seen on the dra•,~inc. VYe would like to request a varrartce to this dirnensvraa! criteria. .3. ~an~dscaping - A~ seen on ~nF IQndS~:ape plan w^ are requesting a ualriancae to 3090 of the lar,ds[ape requirements vn the sate. 4. Arrhi#ectura(Relie~every 4511 'r'da ~'nderstand *.na~ y0U disagf~:e that the t1aV@ met lhl5 rectUiferr~~it- '!~~ ~rre ret#uesting'rldt a~tercate mahcr'afslclernerts oc counted to~~~ard this reg,~~rerrrent. ~ On ~Cbh~'s ~Ne would reaues*_ that *_ne color diff~r_r?fiat lftar ~5 beiny Uill'IZer~ 75 W'I 85 iltie n^I:IIF bli)Ck v.'f.`:cF F:r:l`~ic:'.s hon7c~~•ttal '?lief rir: visual inter: s- ~i•ith the c25tinc~ oT s:~iada~~v .fines a5vfr_II as the air~rninun^. ban~ino ~rov;ded across th^ frost of trte building ae wonted tativard this rFq~iirprnent. vt~e feFi stror..^,ly tii~t t'7e5a plr=rnnns hPl~ break lap tfre rrr;:rtr~tuny of a flat plain ti•~raf~ ~vh;ch',n~as the i~ten: cf `rns reau rprnerit ~r the NRA starcards, i'hls is a variance regsres#. • • Thrc south ~•rt~d of lire Fauildlrrg llti?gyres both pil~~s~zrs grid deCa.aiive I~~hting which vae beiiPVe meets thF req.tirernent ;f the (?? ar~hit°ctural elemenL< e+rery 45 fe2'.. Th1s is a variance request S. 8ui(c>fin~ r'lgateric~ts -The or+~inance re~~4i~c~ teat t,ie split faced blatik be tin.e~ as o;~posed to color caat2d ~elaati~ 30 ir,~hps - It is Kohls policy to ~til;Lc a ~ralCr coating on al' sp~i~ face t}I~c{ fir. an eftort :o sFal the block from ti~u~rter peretra;rLn and protect it f~nrti l;V d~grada[icn. Tl~~e Grradu~t tha* Koh?s has fc;~nd *o be of#~tri•~~~ ~n Nr~~,ent:r,g v~aTer p~n~trat~on into their Stoic c.~alls is not ava~~l~ble m ~ ciea~• co ter. Thee ccfor v~gment in th? p-aduct,he:p5 ti~i~h rJV stat~ilicalion of the 5t~~it faces k;lock. VUe wiou(d there rare requests var7anc~ to this r+e4+ru+en~ent if that is what would be necessary tv atfow us to Use the on(ar coarrr~ on the b(~ck. 6. Faratte Artreuiatio~~~ -The existing Cuipeppcr stt•:ppin•~ renter darts nat techraa~y r^.oet the ta~ade articulation Sc~~C~~ - Guc to the 5tructur~' 1dtUrc ~f the col~,mrs anc+ c.U~cnna~'e or? ih.e building this sccl•r~rt v~,~id uc d~fiic,~d tc mitt without s~gnifit~nt r;ost to raw;: rl; the st:ucl~'ra) Elemerits ref lhQ b,~:ldinc~. Wr, ~~leulc like to b2 allowed w count the colonnade ,tsel~ as tfte fa4adc a rticulation ~Icment_ This wifJ be a lrar(ance request. ~. Signaye - ~'~c t+~~ould :ike'o r~*.ain the ~x`.stiny sign ran the s,te r~rc ad~i cn~ l~v~ profile liar; an ?ire SH3t; side of ts~E s~te. Grat;nics cf *hESC t~~o sign ~Icr7ents are attacF~ed. !f this is rrotattawatrle under the exestirrg ordirranre, eve vvva(d like to request #ftis at a variance. • • Nt«t`tie pct rrr~ kr;a~.r. iT ,.rt! I~.~r ar~y ~):k'st~'J.'1S. ~: k~~nl; titi;u ;+Cr ~~li vtsttc d55~st~ruH v'riih, ll~isprc~;2: *. r ~f 1 +~ ~fY. ~+~~~~ ~ ~ ~l. 1'. ti~rc~.:ca! ~ h~lc~rc;a~: P F. 'ti'9~r, ~.,,:~~ F'aRn~r t:c, T.ian h°ur~iza, Pd~~sr~ ~s~~ Ai Thorne. Js~aurn2 & i~'ane F~ 'J~~~~g, lV'~long &,,l.4ssvc. _'Tr ~I~t'Itij[1c~1~, ~ 'tIS • C7 '.• v .. .KYLE AVENUE SOUTH .yw. r -- - - -- -- - _ - - .I ~ __-- ~ _ _ _. - ~ I~ 4 -- - ~, _. ~ -- _ __ . _ _ ~ _. Li _ ..~ er^. .. _~ a. . ~.. I ' , ; Cot B I' ~.. l.oe it ;~ _; , \ ~"~'~. ~ ~ ~ ~.. ~ 1 ~ ZRNEG ^ c __ _.. - -toe a ~, a° Ptn-, ~ I ~ I k~ zc+,,E~, ; r I ~ r ~ ~ _ ~ ., ~; ~ I I ~, o -~ ~, .,~ ~ ~ '~ i __ g ~.,~.,F. ". },I e g _ io. ~ ~f i 1u~_:~ y 7°, ~~~ ~ ` i ~; yy?y r , ~ i ,~ ~. .1 4 I ~fi~ +>~ S i` ~ a ~ f I A Z h ~ t e~ r~ _ __;_ , ~ . r _ ~- -- --- - _- a e... _ _. r ` __...__ :~ a ~ ~ t ~ Lo ~ ~~~ ~'CvFP^-~ I~ ZdvtOC y~ ~ _.~ I _ ~I ~° ___ - ~~_~.. I I ~ T.F~~r ~ I _ ~. ~ tRT J S~_%L`•e,'7".~:.""".:.~ Q 4 I - _ ~ ~= ~ - ~ r~ ,. _ J V ... Af' 'L'f -J i b _ - _ ,_ _ __. _ 1, _ . r - .__-" _ __-~ _- - f ---- - ,.. 6 --- --~--__ STAT£ HIGHWAY 6(IEXAS AVEHU£). (t1O'-lfOfl) ~,~-, ~.e. ~~ _ ,a-->_.~s'.--tom.--_-{.`~_-:___._ _.l _C`~--g."~.--!~~-~` -s-~ _ .. .___-_.-__ ``{_:.,. ~_ .~~ / _ _ ~~: _~ O~ ~~~~ _. ~~~°'° a z ewer 1. nt. I• i• ~~~~~~~ ~,~. - , ~n, _ _, i• I• .._.... ..,, ,.. , .. , . _ _,.... _~,~.~..,: d~,~_.,~,: i r STA rF.~r~.i.... r~ ~ r *~~ a ~' '~ ~., ,.. _ ~,~ -' arc i a_:_ [7 i• ~ V rif S n RGiir" ~ G.T~iir -'- ~. L.v:,-„~ ~'hi !1-'-F-~ ~ -- ~__:` ~_ - W y __ f ~_.__"~_. __ ~~~ .. = ~ , I ~ ,~ ~ __ E ~ -~, ~ - -- -- ~ ~ ~ t ~_ _ ~ .. ' LLL111~~~/// . . ~ ~ i 4n... woNG ~ ....., II ~e : x., _ ' i• r-R ~` J T ~~ ` CULPEPPER PLAZA PYLON SIGN CULPEPPER PLAZA COLLEGE STATION OSBORN & VANE ARCHITECTS BRAZOSCOUNTY,TEXAS SCALE' 1/8" =1'-0" 05090 10 MARCH 06 «9 «8 «L-,Z .' ~' ~~ ...~ .~ ..~:~ ..~I o .. { -' O W~ a W W A O w a w O w r~ V I---~ w F---~ E-~ w t-~~ C/1 O ~ x H ~ ~ g d' Z O r~ O z . 0 ~~ ~~o V ~w'w0 V U Fq 4 ~~ WM W • T~ City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 30, 2006 TO: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services CC: Mark Smith, Director of Public Works • Steve Beachy, Director of Parks & Recreation SUBJECT: streetscaping in College Station Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a possible recommendation to City Council regarding a resolution addressing streetscaping in the City of College Station. Item Summary: The purpose of this item is to present a resolution addressing streetscaping Item Background: This resolution is a result of a series of subcommittee meetings of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board and Planning & Zoning Commission. This item was presented to the P&Z Commission at the March 23, 2006 Regular Meeting and at that time the Commission directed staff to prepare a resolution using draft language prepared by the subcommittee for the Commission's review. The draft language prepared by the subcommittee was also presented to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board on February 21, 2006, where the board voted to support the draft language. The resolution before you tonight is a result of a joint effort among staff. As you may note, the action steps included in the draft language prepared by the subcommittee has been removed and included as a separate document. This resolution will result in staff presenting the subcommittee recommendations to City Council at a later date. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Recommendations to the City Council • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, IN SUPPORT OF THE COLLEGE STATION PARK AND RECREATION BOARD AND THE COLLEGE STATION PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S DESIRE TO IMPROVE THE CITY'S EFFORTS UNDER THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION STREETSCAPE PLAN. WHEREAS, on , 1992, the Ciry Council of the City of College Station, Texas, adopted a Streetscape Plan developed by Newman, Jackson and Bi~11~~stein, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the Streetscape Plan recommends th~~ ' "n '; Hof trees and other vegetation along public roadways in the City to enhance the comtn~iiis appearance; and WHEREAS, on this date, the Colle e Station 1'arks~~ . d Recreation Board and the Colle e g 4,,~ - g Station Planning and Zoning Commission, resented ,~, number of~`recommendations to improve the City's Streetscape along its public road~~ s tQ the`f Council of the City of College Station, ,.;. ~, v Texas• and ~ `~ r WHEREAS, the City C~un~il of the.' City of College Station, Texas, desires to improve the streetscapes along the ~ity's public ro~d~ay~ to enhance the community; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY~ THE C~`~Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS: ~ '"': • PART l: That the City ~oncil hereby supports the College Station Park and Recreation Board and College Station Planning and Zoning Commission's desire to improve the streetscapes along the Ciry's public roadways. PART 2: That the Ciry Council hereby directs staff of the City's Planning and Development Services Department to prepare and present a report to the City Council at a future meeting addressing the recommendations of the College Station Parks and Recreation Board and College Station Planning and Zoning Commission regarding improvements to the City's streetscape. PART 3: That this resolution shall take effect immediately from and after its passage. ADOPTED this day of , A.D. 2006. ATTEST: APPROVED: CONNIE HOOKS, City Secretary RON SILVIA, Mayor APPROVED: City Attorney • C: IDOCUME-1ILL/NDG~! ILOCALS~I ITemplDrajt Resolution.DOC • Recommendations of the College Station Park and Recreation Board and Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council College Station's existing Streetscape Plan must be updated in order to reevaluate and reinvigorate it. Of primary concern is the planting of street trees. Roadways developed in public right-of--way by the City of College Station, or with the city's participation, should include trees as a required element along with utilities, drainage, sidewalks, traffic control structures and other elements. The Parks and Recreation Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend the following steps be taken to renew efforts that will enhance the visual quality and, hence, the economic value of our community. 1. Update the city's streetscape plan. The current plan was adopted in 1992 and must be revised so it reflects an evaluation of exiting conditions and updates recommendations pertaining to the quality of College Station's streets and roadways. Such an update is needed to evaluate the status and landscape potential of all existing roadways and to lay out a plan for street planting and landscaping along roadways projected for construction in the next five to ten years. 2. Require that all Capital Improvement Projects that involve the construction of new, or redevelopment of old, streets and roadways include language that specifies how comprehensive street tree planting (or preservation of existing trees) will be integrated into the project's initial funding, design, construction and long term maintenance. • 3. Provide an annual update regarding the planning and design of all roadways designated as a Major Collector or higher to ensure these projects include all required elements including street trees and other Streetscape elements integral to the project. 4. Develop standards that specify the inclusion of street trees along roadways in much the same way that current standards specify the inclusion of sidewalks. Design standards should allow flexibility to complement situations presented by different types of roadways and their adjacent landscapes. The "inclusion" of street trees as a required design element may require new plantings, but should also embrace the preservation of existing trees in aright-of--way whenever possible. 5. Require that the Public Works Department, the Department of Planning and Development Services and the Parks and Recreation Department work together from the first stages of roadway design when right-of--way acquisitions are being considered to ensure that street trees are factored into street design at the same time as utilities, drainage, traffic control structures and other required elements. 6. Assign the city's urban forestry division the responsibility to maintain streetscapes, and provide it with adequate resources to do this properly. 7. If the City Council adopts this resolution the City's Strategic Plan should be amended to include an item, or items, to adequately reflect the purpose and intent herein. 1~ u 1 1 Regular Agenda 13 Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a thoroughfare plan amendment in the area bound by State Highway 6, Rock Prairie Road, and Greens Prairie Road. Case #OG-500039 (KF) • MEMORANDUM To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner Date: March 7, 2006 Re: Rock Prairie Road Area -Thoroughfare Plan Update Rock Prairie Road The Rock Prairie Road corridor currently exists from the west side of Brazos County (near the Brazos River), through the City of College Station, and then south of College Station, finally terminating at State Highway 6 (SH 6) under the name Peach Creek Road. The thoroughfare plan classifies this roadway as follows: • Minor Arterial -Jones-Butler Road to Wellborn Road • Major Arterial - Wellbom Road to SH 6 • Minor Arterial - SH 6 to Greens Prairie Road • Major Collector -Greens Prairie Road to Lick Creek Park • • No Designation -Lick Creek Park to SH 6 Based on sound thoroughfare planning, the function and classification of the roadway should be consistent throughout the corridor unless there are specific circumstances that warrant a change in function. As shown above, the classification of the Rock Prairie Road is increased as it traverses the developed areas of the community and then decreases as it leaves this area. In the case of Rock Prairie Road between SH 6 and Greens Prairie Road, it is expected that this roadway will see significant increases in volume as it carries traffic from future developments south on the southeast portion of the city. Based on the comprehensive plan, about 70 acres on the southeast corner of the SH 6 /Rock Prairie Road intersection is planned to develop as retail regional. This will contribute a tremendous amount of traffic to the corridor as well. The City of College Station -Public Works Department is currently working on plans to widen Rock Prairie Road to the minor arterial section between SH 6 and Greens Prairie Road, as shown on the current thoroughfare plan. Staff believes that this cross-section is sufficient for needs in the short-term, but plans should be made to preserve right-of-way for the future. Since this project will involve the acquisition of right-of-way along each side of the roadway, it makes sense to make this thoroughfare classification change now, so that the fu11120 feet of right-of- way for a major arterial can be acquired. Therefore, staff is recommending that Rock Prairie Road be reclassified as a major arterial between SH 6 and Greens Prairie Road. ~~ ~J '~, • Minor Collectors 'The project to widen Rock Prairie Road will include constructing a raised median and associated median openings. With the majority of the undeveloped property along Rock Prairie Road anticipated to develop as residential, based on the land use plan, minor collectors should be planned to carry this traffic from the neighborhood to the greater thoroughfare system. To insure that these collectors are located to take full advantage of the proposed median openings, staff is recommending that these minor collectors be reflected on the thoroughfare plan as shown. Barron Road The proposed Barron Road alignment east of SH 6 reflects an offset intersection relative to Barron Road on the west side of SH 6. This was shown because staff believed that a preferred aligned intersection with SH 6 was not possible due to a closed landfill on the east side of SH 6. Since that time, the City of College Station has completed the schematic design of the SH 6 / Barron Road interchange. As part of that project, the design team evaluated several alternatives for the Barron Road alignment at SH 6. The preferred alternative involved Barron Road traversing the landfill and intersecting SH 6 in alignment with Barron Road west of SH 6. Although this alternative will cost more than a traditional roadway, cost savings will be realized on the construction of the interchange on SH 6. Based on this information, staff is recommending that the alignment of Barron Road east of SH 6 be modified as shown on the attached map. • • I• ;\ `~ ,` ~ r - ---- ~' `~' ~ ~;~~ ,f: k~ `\ NORTH ~ -t ~/ r .`` 70 _ 4' ~ !//~ ~ ~` fir/ % f' ~ '! O IO ~Rairie Rai' ~` ~`j, ~` ~~l%yl~%,+~~~ i` ~~ ' n ~~/i/~~. ~~ ~~~ ~ i ~~ ~ ~' ~ ` ~~ ,_ ,~ ~ \` '~\ ,rte ~ ~~r, m ,:~ / ~„ ,.~ ~\ '~kqo, .7 r ~ ,~ ;' ~ ! ~ ;:; ~ ~ ~ ~a~ A ~ `* ~~ ~ ii ~~~ °' Legend , , r ~ ~` ..~ ~ ~ Amended Thoroughfares ~~~- : ,~~' ° ~ ~~ ~ •~ ~ o i .~ ~' ~ ~n 4 ~'~®Mirwr Arterial , ~ ~.'3` `~ ~ t ~ ~~ ~ 1 ~ j- H !-~ ~^~= Minor Collector ~ ;' r~ \ -~,~ e ~~ ~ 4 ;'~.'~~`°~ ~ • r 1 Regular Agenda 14 Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 3.15 Administrative Adjustments. Case #05-500023 (JP) ~ ~~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 6, 2006 TO: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Jennifer Reeves, Staff Planner THROUGH: Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services • SUBJECT: UDO Annual Review, Article 3.15, Administrative Adjustments Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 3.15 Administrative Adjustments Item Summary: At the direction of the Planning & Zoning Commission at the January 5, 2006 meeting, the Annual Review of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) has been divided into several smaller amendments for consideration. This item, administrative adjustments, was discussed at the March 16, 2006 Workshop meeting. No changes were recommended at that time. The following background information has been prepared for your review prior to the formal consideration of amendments to Article 3, Section 15 Administrative Adjustments: Currently Article 3, Section 15 gives the Administrator the authority to give an Administrative Adjustment up to 10% from any numerical zoning standard set forth in Article 5 (District Purpose Statements and Supplemental Standards), Article 6 (Use regulations), or Article 7 (General Development Standards). • • C7 The Administrative Adjustment was put into place to legitimize minor deviations from the Ordinance that the Zoning Board of Adjustments deem to be de minimis. The intent was to correct minor errors after the site had been constructed and not provide general relief from the Ordinance. This amendment will permit developers to apply to the Administrator for an Administrative Adjustment only to those requirements set out in Sections 5.2, 5.4 and 5.7 of the UDO. All other requests for a variance to the UDO will be heard by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. • Article 3. Development Review Procedures Section 3. i Administrative Adiustment. I• B. A. Purpose Administrative adjustments are specified deviations from otherwise applicable development standards where development is proposed that would be: 1. Compatible with surrounding land uses; 2. Harmonious with the public interest; and 3. Consistent with the purposes of this UDO. Deleted: 3.15 Deleted: 3.6 Deleted: Administrative 1 Inserted: 3.15 Inserted: Administrative Deleted: Design District Site Plan Review Applicability The Administrator shall have the authority to authorize Administrator adjustments of up to ten percent (10%) from any~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted: numerical zoning dimensional standards set forth in $ection 5.2 standard Residential Dimensional Standards, Section 5.4 Non-Residential Dimensional Deleted: Articles 5, 6, or ~ Standards, and Section 5.7 Design District Dimensional Standards of this UDO. Any adjustment request greater than ten percent (10%) shall be treated as a variance handled by the Zoning Board of Adjustment subject to the requirements of Section 3.16, Variances. C. Application A complete application for an administrative adjustment shall be submitted to the Administrator as set forth in Section 3.1.C, Application Forms and Fees. D. Review and Action by Administrator The Administrator shall review the application and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application based upon the criteria below. A written • decision including affirmative findings on the criteria set forth below shall be sent to the applicant. E. Administrative Adjustment Criteria 1. To approve an application for an administrative adjustment, the Administrator shall make an affirmative finding that the following criteria are met: a. That granting the adjustment will ensure the same general level of land use compatibility as the otherwise applicable standards; b. That granting the adjustment will not materially or adversely affect adjacent land uses or the physical character of uses in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development; and c. That granting the adjustment will be generally consistent with the purposes and intent of this UDO. ,~ u 3.15 Administrative Adjustment 2. In the event that the Administrator finds that the applicant has not met the above criteria, the applicant may request that the application be forwarded to the Zoning Board of Adjustment as a variance request subject to the requirements of Section 3.16, Variances. 3-39 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas r 1 Regular Agenda 15 Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.3, Access Management & Circulation, related to driveways. Case ##05-500023 (JP) I• City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 27, 2006 TO: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Planner THROUGH: Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services • SUBJECT: UDO Annual Review - 7.3 Access Management & Circulation (Driveways) Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.3, Access Management & Circulation, related to driveways. Item Summary: At the direction of the Planning & Zoning Commission at the January 5, 2006 meeting, the Annual Review of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) has been divided into several smaller amendments for consideration. This item, driveways, was discussed at the March 16, 2006 Workshop meeting. No changes were recommended at that time. The changes proposed to Section 7.3.C.7.c-f will align the driveway standards in the UDO with those in the B/CS Design Guidelines, adopted in 2005. Existing graphics in the UDO for this section will be replaced to reflect proposed amendments and will be included in the Site Design Standards. • Section 7.3.C.7 "Geometric Design of Driveway Access" to change acceptable curb return radii for residential from 2.5'-10' to 3'-10', and from 20'-30' to 25'-30' for non- residential; • To identify the Administrator as the person whom may require a larger radii; • To change the range for a residential driveway approach width from 10'-28' to 12'-25'. Attachments: Redlined Copy of Section 7.3.C.7c-f "Geometric Design of Driveway Access" • C [~ Article 7. General Development Standards Section __~ _ r ~: i I~y~~_L u~rC antJ ~ ~~iit3tio~1 c. When the requirements of the previous two tables cannot be met due to lack of frontage and all means to acquire shared-access driveways or cross-access easements have been exhausted, no commercial driveway approach may be located closer to the corner than 75 feet on collector streets, 100 feet on minor arterials, and 120 feet for major arterials. This measurement shall be taken from the intersection of property lines at the corner. When these requirements can not be met due to lack of frontage, the driveway may be located such that the radius will begin at the farthest property line. 6. Shared Access a. A joint private access easement may be required between adjacent lots fronting on arterial and collector streets in order to minimize the total number of access points along those streets and to facilitate traffic flow between lots. The location and dimensions of said easement shall be determined by the Development Engineer. b. A private cross-access easement may be required across any lot fronting on an arterial or collector street in order to minimize the number of access points and facilitate access between and across individual lots. The location and dimension of said easement shall be determined by the Development Engineer. street Channelized Right-Turn Lane R ~ ~ street W m Radius Clearance (j (t«t) (reap 5o zoo m E 75 230 p 100 275 lU 1 drive Deleted: 7.3 ----~--- I~ nserted: 7.3 { Deleted 7 4 Inserted 7.4 ~~~ Deleted: 7.10 i Deleted Traffic Impact Analysis Deleted Traffic Impact Analysis Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis Deleted: Non-Residential Architectural Standards Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis 7. Geometric Design of Driveway Access a. All driveways shall meet the City of College Station's Standard Specifications for Street Construction. b. Curb cuts for driveways shall not be permitted in the curb return of an intersection. c. The curb return radii for driveways intersecting at right angles with the roadway and without a deceleration lane shall be as follows: ~-22 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas • Article 7. General Development Standards Section ~ A _;_ r_lai d~:] fTtEnt,_ia~ t r Ulu:i0~ ( .. _ _ _ I Deleted: 7.3 "~ _-~., ~: _ ,:~~ ~ Inserted: 7.3 --- - ~ -- Deleted: 7.4 _ - 1) Curb return radii for residential (single-family, townhouse, and `• Inserted z.4 _ duplex) driveways shall be between hree feet and en feet 3'-10'~ ~ Deleted: 7.3 as shown in the figure above. Flare type residential driveways ' , . I Deleted: Traffic Impact Analysis must also adhere to these dimensional criteria. ~ Deleted Traffic Impact Analysis 2) Curb return radii for commercial and multi-family driveways shall . vary between,Xwenty-five feet and~hirty feet '25'-30`las shown in ~ Inserted. Traffic Impact Analysis the figure below. When special traffic conditions exist the . ~ ~~ Access Management , ,) ,Pdministrator may require larger curb return radii up to 50 feet. and Circulation =-_~__ -= -=-= s ---~ Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis 3) Curb return radii for driveway types not included in (1) or (2) Deleted: <sp> above shall be determined by the,~dministrator. ~` Formatted: Bullets and Numbering d. The maximum width of residential driveway approach, measured at the Formatted: Tabs: at pt, ust tab + property line, shall not exceed,2,5 feet in width, while the minimum Not at Iz6pt width shall not be less than ~2 feet. ~ , ueleted: two and one-Half e. The maximum width of commercial and multi-family driveway Deleted: Io s-._ approaches for two-way operation as measured at the property line I ~ '~oeleted: below. ~~i :s~ - - shall not exceed 36 feet, except that the jadministrator may issue Deleted: zo . permits for driveway approaches greater than 36 feet in width on major Delet~• zs , streets to handle special traffic conditions. The minimum width of commercial and multi-family driveway approaches for two-way Inserted: zs _~~_~~___- operation shall be not less than 24 feet. Deleted: 3o i f. The combination of two driveways for residential circular drives shall not Deleted: Development Engineer -- ------ exceed Meet. ~ Deleted: <sp> g. The angle of driveway approach shall be approximately 90 degrees for Deleted: Development Engineer ~ two-way drives and between 45 degrees and 90 degrees for one-way ~~~ zB drives. Deleted: Io h. • A minimum driveway throat length shall be required to allow traffic entering the site to be stored on site, avoiding a queue of traffic onto De~ted~ Development Engineer Deletes: zs the adjacent roadway causing delays to the through traffic stream. The driveway throat length shall be defined as the distance from the street to the first point of conflict in the driveway. Minimum driveway throat depths are provided in the figure below. For more intense uses (i.e., retail shopping center) a minimum throat depth of 130 feet will be required. 7-23 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas • mil" City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 27, 2006 TO: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Planner THROUGH: Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services • SUBJECT: UDO Annual Review -Off Street Parking Standards -Surfacing & Curbing Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Sections 7.2.F-H, Off Street Parking Standards, related to surfacing and curbs. Item Summary: At the direction of the Planning & Zoning Commission at the January 5, 2006 meeting, the Annual Review of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) has been divided into several smaller amendments for consideration. This item, surfacng and curbing, was discussed at the March 16, 2006 Workshop meeting. No changes were recommended at that time. Staff has created Site Design Standards that include standard details for commercial and multi- family site development. The Site Design Standards are a compilation of details that meet the standards already set forth in the UDO. Details for the standards listed below will be included in both the UDO and the Site Design Standards. The Site Design Standards will be available to our customers both in hard copy and on-line. • Section 7.2.F "Requirements Apply to All Parking Areas" to reference the City of College Station Site Design Standards. ^ Section 7.2.G."Surfacing" to reference the City of College Station Site Design Standards for requirements for off-street parking area surfaces and to consistently identify the Administrator as the person with the discretion to allow for alternative drive surfaces and to specify surfacing requirements. • Section 7.2.H "Curbing Required" added to include references to the City of College Station Site Design Standards for curbing specifications and to identify when temporary curbing may be appropriate. Attachments: Redlined Copy of Sections 7.2.F-H Off-Street Parking Standards • I• Article 7. General Development Standards Section `~:;, Off-Str_t i'ar!i i ti~[^ ~r,j LOT Building k l INTERIOR PARKING, _, ~._r ..1 .._ ...~ ~.='.'O ----- - -- - - D ~ --i ?~ ~ ~ 4 /. ~. W ~ y ~~;~ ~ PARKING SETBACK Street 2. All end islands must be raised at least six inches and curbed, with the majority of the area of each island planted or treated with enhanced paving. The soil within the planted area shall not be compacted or stabilized and shall be contiguous with the soil at the natural grade. E. Interior Islands 1. All interior islands shall be evenly distributed throughout the interior of the parking area. ~ 2. For every fifteen ~(15linterior parking spaces, 180 square feet of landscaping must be provided somewhere in the interior rows of the parking lot. Interior island areas may be grouped and configured as desired provided that circulation aisles remain clear and the minimum island area is not less than 180 square feet. Interior islands may have sidewalks through them. 3. End island areas that exceed the minimum required may be counted toward the interior parking island requirement. 4. All interior islands must be raised at least six inches and curbed, with the majority of the area of each island planted or treated with enhanced paving. The soil within the planted area shall not be compacted or stabilized and shall be contiguous with the soil at the natural grade. Delerted 7 3 ._. .. _.. ~~ '_~' ~, Deleted: 7.4 Inserted 7.4 f Deleted 7.10 `, ----- Deleted Traffic Impact Analysis _ -:-, Deleted. Traffic Impact Analysis Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis Deleted: Non-Residential Architectural Standards ___ _ '__ Inserted: Traffic impact Analysis F. Requirements Apply to All Parking Areas - -------------------- Every parcel of land hereafter used as a public parking area, excluding overFlow ' Formatted: Indent: LeR_63 pt Ji parking for churches, including commercial parking lots, and parcels used for open-air sales lots shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the requirements in this Section and as described in the City of College Station Site Desian Standards. ~-8 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7, :, OtF-Street Parking Stand ,,d<, _ G. Surfacing • i. General 2. Ali surfacing of off-street parking areas shall be constructed of either asphalt or concrete as described_ in the City of Collene Station Site Design Standards Alternatives to the ~+an ards rnav be approved by the Administrator if it is demons rw+arl that rhP 2iateriais and design are equal or superior to the requirements in thg5tandards. All off-street parking areas shall be graded to drain and maintained so as to dispose of surface water accumulated within the area. Parking spaces shall be so arranged and marked so as to provide for orderly and safe parking of vehicles.Non-Public, Ali-Weather Drive Surfaces _ Temporary or permanent drive surfaces that are required for emergency access or turnaround for emergency vehicles must be constructed to function under all weather conditions. To accommodate a project during construction, phasing, or permanent installation, drive surfaces that do not meet the requirements for permanent pavement surfaces may be allowed at the discretion of the,p~dministrator for the specific_conditions stated below: - - - _ _ _ Deleted: 7.3 _ _ Deleted Traffic Impact Analysis Inserted: 7.3 ~ Deleted: 7.4 inserted: 7.4 Deleted: 7.3 Deleted: Traffic Impact Analysis Deleted: Access Management and Circulation Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Deleted: below Deleted: described in the City of Co/lege Station Standard Specifications for Construction, Part VIII Standard Details. Variances to the standards shall be approved by the Development Engineer. Deleted: ~ _ . Deleted: Development Engineer a. Temporary All-Weather Surface (During Construction) A structure under construction must be accessible by an all-weather drive surface_as specified in the City of College Station Site_pesig, Standards, This temporary all-weather surface must be rewo~ked or _ Deleted: Standard specifications ~. replaced to meet the permanent pavement standard as described in the forConstrudion, Part VIII City of College Station Ste Design Standards prior to issuance of a ~ Standard Details ~__.___._.___..____.._________ Certificate of Occupancy __ b. Semi-Permanent All-Weather Surface (During Phasing) In cases during phasing of a large project, emergency access and • turnarounds often must be added as a temporary measure until additional phases are constructed. These emergency access areas may consist of permanent pavement surface as specified in the City of o ege Station Site Desican Standard. When the additional phase is _ ~~Deleted: Specifications for constructed these areas must be removed or reworked to meet the Construction, Part VIII Standard permanent pavement standards as described in the City_.of College Details 1.----- -- ------- ~ Station Site Desi n Standards. ---. ------- _ __ c. Permanent All-Weather Surface (Permanent) In some development scenarios, an emergency access or turnaround must be constructed to meet emergency access purposes and is not required for public traffic, service vehicles or sanitation vehicles. In these cases, the area required for emergency access only may consist of permanent pavement surface as specified in the City of College Station Site Design Standards. ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted: Standard Specifications _,. for Construction, Part VIII H. Curbing Required Standard Details. l 1 Formatted: Bullets and Numbering - . General The Derimeker of all paved surfaces shall be curbed as described in the City ' ~ Formatted: Body Indent4 of College Station Site Design Standards. Alternatives to the standards _ may be approved by the Administrator if it is demonstrated that the 7-9 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas Article 7. General Development Standards Section. ~ t)rF-Strc:a harNino tandT;~d~ _n~aceriafs and design are equal or su erior_to the reguirerlients in_the • Standards. . 2. TemDOrarv Curbing A temoorary curb may be permitted in lieu of the minimum standard stated ' City of College Station Site Design Standards, at the discretion of the Administrator, when a project is phased in such a wav that a oermanenf monolithic curb may preclude development of future phases or limit access to a recorded private or public access easement adjoining properties Wheel stops shall not be permitted as temporary curbing Temporary curbing must have.the appearance of permanent curbing and shall be temporarily attached to the pavement surfacin_g_below and meet the minimum standards for dowelled in curbs as described in the City of Colleae Station Site Design Standards. I. Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Required In computing the number of parking spaces required, the following rules shall govern: 1. Parking requirements based on square footage shall be based upon the gross floor area, unless otherwise stated. Service areas such as mechanical rooms, restrooms, and closets shall be included in the calculation of "gross floor area" for determining required parking spaces. 2. Where fractional spaces result in computing required parking spaces, the required number of spaces must be increased to the nearest whole number. 3. The parking space requirements for a use not specifically listed shall be the same as those for the most similar to the proposed use, as determined by the Administrator. • 4. Whenever a building or use constructed or established after the effective date of this UDO is changed or enlarged in Floor area, number of employees, number of dwelling units, seating capacity, or otherwise, parking requirements shall be met on the basis of the enlargement or change. Whenever a building or use existing prior to the effective date of this UDO is enlarged, the enlarged building or increased use shall then and thereafter comply with the parking requirements set forth herein. 5. In the case of mixed uses, the parking spaces required shall equal the sum of the requirements of the various uses computed separately. This includes the parking requirements for uses such as private schools, day care centers, soup kitchens, and computer centers located on property used for religious worship. Per Ordinance No. 2753 dated September Z3, 2004 6. Where requirements are established on the basis of the number of seats, such requirements shall be based on the seating capacity as determined by the Building Official. 7. Where amanufacturing/industrial use has more than one working shift of employees, parking shall be provided to accommodate overlap requirements during transition periods. 7-l0 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas Deleted: 7.3 __ Inserted: 7.3 ~: Deleted: 7.4 Inserted 7.4 Deleted: 7.10 ~ Deleted Traffic Impact Analysis Deleted: Traffic Impact Analysis Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis Deleted: Non-Residential ~! Architectural Standards Inserted: Traffic Impact Analysis Formatted: Bullets and Numbering , Fol rmatted: Body Indent 4 J Formatted: Bullets and Numbering • City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM REPORT DATE: March 24, 2006 MEETING ~ TO: FROM: • THROUGH: SUBJECT: SATE: April 6, 2006 Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission Trey Fletcher, Senior Planner Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services UDO Annual Review, Section 7.1 General Provisions Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.1 General Provisions to address building permits / setbacks and porches policy issues. Item Summary: At the direction of the Planning & Zoning Commission at the January 5, 2006 meeting, the Annual Review of the UDO has been divided into several smaller amendments for consideration. The following background information was presented at the March 16th workshop meeting. At that time, the Commission made no recommended changes to the amendment as presented. The amendment is now ready for your review for formal consideration of amendments to Section 7.1 General Provisions at the April 6, 2006 P&Z meeting. • Section 7.1.D.3 "Features Allowed within Required Yards" to clarify that structures that require building permits may be subject to additional regulations and allow porches to extend into front and side street setbacks on a limited basis. Attachments 1. Section 7.1 (Redlined) Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7.1. General Provisions • Article 7. General Development Standards The following general development standards shall apply to all zoning districts, except where expressly stated to apply to, or exclude, specific districts. 7.1 General Provisions A. Health and Environmental Safeguards No machine, process, or procedure shall be employed on any property in the City, in which: 1. Emission of smoke, dust, or noxious, toxic or lethal gases are detectable beyond the perimeter of the property; 2. Materials are stored or accumulated in such a way that they may be carried by rainwater in natural drainage channels beyond the limits of the property, which are noxious, toxic, radioactive, contain oil or grease, wood, cellulose fibers, hair, feathers, or plastic, or have a pH factor greater than ten or less than five; 3. Vibration is discernible beyond the property line; or 4. Noise above the ambient noise level is discernible beyond the property line. B. Minimum Requirements 1. No building plot shall have lower or less stringent standards or dimensions than those prescribed for respective zones in this UDO. 2. No building permit or development approval may be issued for a lot that does not meet the minimum lot area requirements of this UDO except as provided for in Article 9, Nonconformities. 3. In the absence of public water or public sewer, no building permit shall be issued until the lot meets all applicable requirements of this UDO and the Texas Department of Health and Environmental Control. Aseptic system that has been approved by the Brazos County Health Department may be permitted if an exception to sewer service has been granted under Chapter 11, S2CtlOn 2 Of the COLLEGE STATION CODE OF ORDINANCES, a5 amended. 4. Utilities using land or an unoccupied building covering less than 1,000 square feet of site area shall be exempt from minimum lot area standards. C. Visibility at Intersections in all Districts Within a triangle defined by the property lines and a line joining two points located 20 feet back from the intersection of the property lines, nothing shall be erected, placed, planted, or allowed to grow in such a manner as materially to impair vehicle drivers' vision at intersections. In addition, for commercial and multifamily driveways, a visibility triangle defined by the curb lines and a line joining two points located 20 feet back from the intersection of the curb lines shall apply. Fences, walls, and/or hedges may be permitted in visibility triangles provided that such fences, walls, and/or hedges do not impair vision from three feet to six feet above the curb. Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 ~-1 City of College Station, Texas • Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7.1. General Provisions Per Ordinance No. 2753 dated September 23, 2004 • m ~ d o ~ n ~Slt)Ility Tr7angle -~---..- ~ - . -property line- curbline - 20~- street D. Required Yards (Setbacks) i. Purpose & Intent a. Setbacks are measured from the property line; b. On lots with approved rear access, the rear setback shall be measured from the nearest boundary of the access easement or alley; c. No structure that is taller than eight feet in height and that has a roof structure that completely or partially blocks the view to the sky shall be • located within the required setback area unless specifically allowed herein; d. No part of a yard or other open space required in connection with any building, building plot, or use for the purpose of complying with this UDO, shall be included for any other building, building plot, or use as part of a yard or open space; and e. Where an existing block was created by an approved plat prior to July 15, 1970, a new (infill) single-family dwelling unit shall use the adjacent lots to determine the appropriate front yard setback. The new dwelling unit shall be set no closer to the street or farther back from the street than the nearest neighboring units. 2. Reduction for Public Purpose a. When an existing setback is reduced because of a recent or pending conveyance to a federal, state, or local government for a public purpose and the remaining setback is at least 50 percent of the required minimum setback for the district in which it is located, then that remaining setback will be deemed to satisfy the minimum setback standards of this UDO. ~-2 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas • Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7.1. General Provisions b. For the purposes of this subsection, such conveyance shall have • occurred within one year immediately proceeding submittal for site plan approval, or be anticipated to occur within one year of site plan approval. 3. Features Allowed Within Required Yards The following features may be located within a required yard but may be subject to additional regulations applied herein: a. Trees, shrubbery, or other landscape features, excluding gazebos or other similar structures that ~eauire a building permit; b. Fences and walls; c. Driveways; d. Sidewalks; e. Utility lines, wires, and associated structures, such as power poles; f. Mechanical equipment such as air conditioning units, pool pumps, and similar equipment; Deleted: partially cover the view '~ skyward g. Uncovered porches, uncovered steps to building entrances, and uncovered patio decks; h. Covered Dorches that are open on three sides, may extend uD to six feet - Formatted: Bullets and Numbering (b' .including eaves, into any required front or side street setback: i_Openwork fire balconies and fire escapes may extend up to six feet into any required rear setback; • j_Sills, belt courses, cornices, buttresses, chimneys, flues, eaves, and other architectural features may extend up to 18 inches into any required yard; k_Balconies or decks located more than eight feet from the ground may project up to six feet into the required front yard; I_Accessory structures that do not require building permits; m. Bus stops that offer shelter from the elements. Such shelters may be located within a front or side street yard. Shelters may be located within a public right-of-way if a Private Improvement in Public right-of- way permit has been duly issued; and n_Swimming pools and hot tubs without shelter. E. More Than One Principal Structure on a Lot or Parcel i. In any single-family or duplex residential district, no more than one structure housing a permitted principal use may be erected on a single lot or building plot. Per Ordinance No. 2753 dated September 23, 2004 2. In all other districts, more than one structure housing a permitted principal use may be erected on a building plot. Yard and other requirements herein shall apply to the building plot. 7-3 Unified Development Ordinance 9J23/04 City of College Station, Texas • Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7.1. General Provisions F. Fences • Fences of wood, chain-link, or similar material, and less that eight feet in height, and fences of brick, stone, concrete, or similar material, and less than six feet in height, shall not be construed to be structures, nor shall they require a building permit. G. Building Plot 1. Building plot refers to all of the land within an area defined by the Administrator that consists of one or more platted lots for a single development. Such determination shall be made at the platting stage or at the time of site plan. 2. In the event that two or more lots are under single ownership and the existing structure does not meet the required yard setback, both lots shall be construed as the building plot. 3. The Administrator shall determine the building plot using the following criteria a. Contiguous properties that consist of less than two acres and have one or fewer frontages on a street classified as a collector or higher on the current Thoroughfare Plan will be consolidated and defined as one building plot for the purposes of signage; b. Contiguous properties that develop according to a common plan or design for similar or compatible uses, which singularly or in phases, is treated as such for site plan review purposes including signage; or c. Contiguous properties that as determined by the Administrator need to be consolidated for ease of access, reduction of the proliferation of signage along the public right-of-way, or other public health, safety, or general welfare reasons. • H. Height 1. Building Height Building height refers to the vertical distance measured from the finished grade, or the base flood elevation where applicable, and the following points: a. The average height level between the eaves and ridge line of a gable, hop, or gambrel roof; b. The highest point of a mansard roof; or c. The highest point of the coping of a flat roof. 2. Single Family Protection a. With the exception of NG, RDD, and P-MUD districts, no multi-family or non-residential structure shall be located nearer to any property line adjacent to asingle-family use or townhouse development than a horizontal distance (B to C) of twice the vertical distance (height, A to B) of the structure as illustrated in the graphic below. 7-4 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas Il I~ u Article 7. General Development Standards Section 7.2. Off-Street Parking Standards \ \ \ 1:2 slops Building \ Sefbxk h1e ht b. No additional multi-family or non-residential structures shall penetrate an imaginary line, illustrated by the inclined plane in the graphic above, connecting points A and C. c. Calculation of the height limits shall be to the highest point of the structure. Equipment such as satellite dishes and heating and air conditioning units may be installed on top of buildings provided that they are screened from horizontal view and included in the height limitations. • d. Unless otherwise stated in this UDO, the height limitations herein shall not apply to any of the following: 1) Utility structures such as elevated water storage tanks and electrical transmission lines; 2) Architectural elements such as flagpoles, belfries, cupolas, spires, domes, monuments, chimneys, bulkheads, elevators, or chimney Flues; or any other similar structure extending above the roof of any building where such structure does not occupy more than 33 percent of the area of the roof; or 3) Residential radio/television receiving antennas. I. Public Address Systems Public Address Systems shall not be audible to an adjacent residential use. 7.2 Off-Street Parking Standards A. Purpose The purpose of this Section is to establish the guidelines for off-street parking reas consistent with the proposed land use to: 1. Eliminate the occurrence of non-resident on-street parking in adjoining neighborhoods; -Deleted: spaces 2. Avoid the traffic congestion and public safety hazards caused by a failure to provide such parking.~reas; and ~ Deleted: spaces 3. Expedite the movement of traffic on public thoroughfares in a safe manner, thus increasing the carrying capacity of the streets and reducing the amount of land required for streets, thereby lowering the cost to both the property owner and the City. B. Off-Street Parking Spaces Required ~-s Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas C7 1 Regular Agenda 18 Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.8 Solid Waste. Case #05-500023 (TF) • ~J`~ City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 /Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM REPORT DATE: March 24, 2006 MEETING DATE: April 6, 2006 TO: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Trey Fletcher, Senior Planner • THROUGH: Joey Dunn, Director of Planning & Development Services SUBJECT: UDO Annual Review, Section 7.8 Solid Waste Item: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 7.8 Solid Waste. Item Summary: At the direction of the Planning & Zoning Commission at the January 5, 2006 meeting, the Annual Review of the UDO has been divided into several smaller amendments for consideration. The following background information was presented at the March 16th workshop meeting. At that time, the Commission made no recommended changes to the amendment as presented. The amendment is now ready for your review for formal consideration of amendments to Section 7.8 Solid Waste at the April 6, 2006 P&Z meeting. ^ Section 7.8.C "Minimum Requirements" changed to Section 7.8.C "Guidelines" to allow City staff more discretion with the standards for solid waste services, warn property owners that dumpster screening should be located outside of utility easements, clarify that special standards do not apply to small-lot single family but instead apply to townhouses, and to provide guidelines for 300-gallon side loading automated containers. Attachments 1. Section 7.8 (Redlined) • Article 7. General Development Standards Section'' 8. Solid 6Naste 3. Any canopy tree removed or otherwise destroyed by the willful act or negligence of the property owner, tenant, or contractor shall be replaced by a tree of the same or larger caliper. H. Appeals 1. Appeals of the terms of this Section, with the exception of Section G, Maintenance and Replacement, shall be to the Design Review Board (DRB). 2. An appeal shall be made within 30 days of the date of the notification of the decision by filing with the Administrator a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof. The DRB may authorize on appeal alternative buffer standards for a specific property or a waiver to the Buffer Requirements of this Section when such standards or variance will not be contrary to the public interest where, owing to unique and special conditions not normally found in like areas, a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance by the Administrator would result in unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of this Section shall be observed and substantial justice done. 7.8 Solid Waste A. Purpose It is the purpose of this Section to establish the guidelines for the provision of solid waste collection in all developments within the City of College Station where curb service will not take place, in order to: 1. Provide for the safe and efficient collection and removal of waste from commercial and residential developments; and 2. Reduce nuisances associated with waste collection containers. F } Formatted: Bullets and Numbering 1 B. Responsibility The City shall make the final determination as to the appropriate collection system; however, it is the responsibility of the developer to ascertain the appropriateness of the proposed collection system. Staff will endeavor to accommodate applicants to the extent equipment, efficiency, and policy allow. C. guidelines The following shell be~onsidered minimum standards: i. All dumpsters shall be screened. Screening shall be at least as tall as the dumpster(s) and may be achieved through the use of buildings, fences, or walls. Plant materials may be used to supplement required screening. Dumoster screens should be located outside of utility easements Property owners with dumpster screens located within utility easements are hereby warned that thev will be responsible for the replacement of the screens if it becomes necessary to remove them for utility construction and/or maintenance. 2. Multi-family developments shall provide the required pad and screening for one eight-yard dumpster per sixteen dwelling units. ~-ss Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas - - _---- ---__ ----1 Deleted: Minimum Requirements Deleted: In all cases, t Deleted: requirements Deleted: held as - - Formatted: Body Indent 4 Article 7. Generel Development Standards Section 7 :9. Drama e end Stormwater' Management ~ 3. Townhomes not served by approved, accessible alleys, shall provide the xequired_pad_and, screening for one eight-yard dumpster_per sixteen (16) - dwelling units. 4. The interior clearance (inside the screen) dimensions for a single 300-gallon container enclosure shall be ten feet (10') deep by ten feet (10') wide. 5. The interior clearance (inside the screen) dimensions for a single (one eight-yard) dumpster enclosure shall be twelve feet (12') deep by twelve feet (12') wide. 6. The interior clearance (inside the screen) dimensions for a double (two eight-yard) dumpster enclosure shall be twelve feet (12') deep by twenty- fourfeet (24') wide. 7. Bollards and other such devices shall not be set within the minimum width dimensions noted above. 8. All required containers and dumpsters pads shall be constructed of six inches (6") of steel-reinforced concrete. 9. All required containers and dumpsters shall be screened by means of an approved six-foot (6') high opaque device on a minimum of three sides. Depending on visibility to pedestrian and vehicular traffic, a gate may be required for all enclosures exceat 300-oallon side loading automated containers. Gates shall have a minimal width of twelve feet (12~ when open, shall swing 180 deorees from the closed Dosition and shall utilize a positive lockino mechanism while in the open position Three hundred- gallon side loading automated container enclosures shall be oven on the side facing the collection point The open side cannot be facing the pubic right-of-way. Materials may be dictated by the terms of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or the Design Review Board (DRB). 10. The ingress, egress, and approach to all dumpster pads shall conform to the fire lane requirements. 7.9 Drainage and Stormwater Management - This Section is reserved. Any reference to this Section shall apply to Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances, Flood Hazard Protection. 7.10 Non-Residential Architectural Standards A. Applicability The design standards of this Section shall apply to development, redevelopment and facade changes to all non-residential buildings located in any zoning district with the exception of the M-1, M-2, R&D, NG-1, NG-2, and NG-3 districts. All buildings shall be subject to the following standards. This applies to single tenant buildings, multiple tenant buildings, and any grouping of attached or stand alone buildings and associatecispad sites. ........................... ... . Exemptions: Churches Deleted: Single-family developments with a lot width of less than 50', _ __ J Deleted: ft. Inserted: ft. } when open, shall s.~ ing 180 degrees from the dosed position, and shall utilize a positive locking mechanism vahile in the open position. Three hundred-gallon side loading aufornated container enclosures shall be open on the side facing the collection point. The open side cannot be facing Che pubic right-of-avay. •_ _ . - Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Meted: out parcels • - - - Formatted: Body Indent 3, No bullets or numtrering 7-56 Unified Development Ordinance 9/23/04 City of College Station, Texas