Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/19/2004 - Agenda Packet - Planning & Zoning Commission• FILE COPY PLANNING ANA ZONING COMMISSION • August 19, 2004 Workshop Meeting - b:00 P.M. Regular Meeting - 7:00 P.M. r~ u • ~ College Station N Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future • AGENDA Workshop Meeting Pia~nning and Zoning Commission Thursday, August 19, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. Administrative Cpnference Room, City Hail 1101 Texas Avenue College Statioin, Texas i. Discussi+cln of consent and regular agenda items. 2. Consideration and discussion regarding a future ordinance amending the Unified Devefopmen$ Ordinance regardii~ Non-Residential Architectural Standards and Site Requirements. (04-169) 3. Update and discussion regarding a recent amendment to the City's Subdivision Regulations regarding water supply requirements and fire protection.. 4. Discussion of minor and amending plats approved by Staff. • South Wampton Phase 1, Lots 12 and 13 (04-173) 5. Discussion of the 61ue Ribbon Committee report. 6. update and discussion regarding a pending Comprehensive Plan amendment for the Appomattpx thoroughfare extension between the VMtindwood Subdivision and Horse Haven Lane. 7. Planning 8c Zoiiina Commission Calendars: Agenda Planning Calendar as of August.l3, 2004 August 23 Strategic Manning Workshop August 25 Comprehensive Plan public Meeting -Appomattox September 23 Joint meeting with City Council to discuss city-initiated rezonings and connectivity issues. October 13-16 American Planning Association State Conference -Austin • 8. 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 shalt be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. 9. Adjourn Cones tio~ with~ttor ~6ov't Code Section 551A~'i~ : ooeslble action. The Planning and Zoning Commission may seek advice from its attomey regarding a pending and contemplated litigation subject or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will ba in public. If litigation or attorney-client privileged information Issues arise as to the posted subject matter of this Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, an executive session will ba held. This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicapped parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make amangaments call 979.764-3517 or (TDD} 1-800-735-2989. Agendas posted on Internet Website httn:/Iwww.cstx.ggy and Cable Access Channel 19. P&Z Workshop Agenda August 19, 2004 Pageiofi • ~ College Stat/on N Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future AGENDA Regular Meeting Planning and toning Commission Thursday, August 19, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, College Station City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 1. 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 to be routine by the Planning and Zoning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. These items include preliminary and final plats, where stall` has found compliance with all minimum subdivision regulations. All items approved by Consent are approved with any and all staff recommendations. There will nat 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. • 2. Consent Agenda. 2.1 Consideration, discussion and possible action on the minutes: • August 5, 2004 Workshop Minutes ^ August 5, 2004 Regular Minutes 2.2 Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a Preliminary Plat for Stonebrook Subdivision consisting of 95 lots and a reserve tract on 17.327 acres located at the intersection of Old Rock Prairie Road with the new alignment of. Rock Prairie Road. (04-160) 2.3 Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a Final Plat for the Williams Creek Subdivision PHi consisting of 24 lots on 38.7 acres generally located at Greens Prairie Road and Rock Prairie Road East. (04-163) 2.4 Consideration, discussion, and passible action on a Final Plat for Our Saviour's Lutheran Church, Lot 1, Btock 1 consisting of 7.628 acres, located at the northeast corner of State Highway 6 and Woodcreek Drive. (04-175) 2.5 Consideration, discussion, and possible action on ~ Final Piat for E.M. ]ones Farm Place Lot 2 consisting of i lot on 7 acres generally located at Krenek Tap Road and Central Park Lane. (04-178) regular enda. 3. Consideration, discussion and possible action on request(s) for absence from meetings. • 4. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action. P&2 Agenda August 19, 2004 Page 1 of 2 • • • 5. Public hearing, discussion, and possibly action on a Replat for Gateway Phase iR and a Final Plat for the Gateway Phase 3 Lot 1R consisting of 4 lots on 22.7 acres generally located at University Drive East at Forest Drive. (04-155) 6. Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a Rezoning of 12.49 acres, generally located near the southeast intersection of Harvey Mitchell Parkway and the future Dartmouth Street extension, from R-1 Single Family Residential to P-MUD Planned Mixed Use Development with the OV Overlay District. (04-161) 7. Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an Ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Land Use Plan and the Thoroughfare Plan for an area generally described as Pebble Creek Subdivision. (04-138) 8. Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an Ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for a 1,282.09-acre tract located east of SH 6 between the Pebble Creek Subdivision and the College Station City Limits. (04-158) 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. Consultation with Attorney ~tioy't Code Section 551.071 : ooaaible action. The Planning and Zoning Commission may seek advice from its attorney regarding a pending and contemplated litigation subject or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. If litigation or attorney-client privileged information issues arise as to the posted subject matter of this Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, an executive session will be held. This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicapped 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 posted on Internet Website htto:/lwww.cstx.aov and Cable Access Cfiannel 19. P&Z Agenda August 19, 2004 Page2of2 • WORKSHOP AGENDA ITEM N0.2 Amendment to the UD O Non-Residential Architectural Standards and Site Requirements • MEMORANDUM DATE: August 10, 2004 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: ]ane R. Kee, City Planner RE: Proposed Revisions to Section 7. 9, "Non-Residential Architectural Standards", Article 7. "General Development Standards" of the Unified Development Ordinance Currently the UDO requires some architectural design standards for non- residential structures. Screening of mechanical equipment and other unsightly things is required and there are limitations on certain exterior building materials. • There is also facade articulation requirements far structures of 20,000 square feet or greater. Standards that will "raise the bar" for all non-residential developments was an issue that came out of the City Council's strategic planning retreat and follow-up workshop. Staff was directed to prepare these standards -for review. The Office of Economic Development researched several communities in Texas and elsewhere to see the kinds of standards being used. A summary is provided below: 1) Applicability -Applies to all non-residential buildings as well as groups of buildings and out parcels regardless of size • Required Screening -Mechanical equipment and Detention ponds (other items are addressed elsewhere in the UDO) • Building Mass and Design - Fagade articulation required to provide visual interest on the first two stories. • Building Materials -Requires brick; natural stone; textured block; tinted, textured concrete masonry; tilt up concrete only if the exterior surface is textured or covered with brick, stone or material fabricated to simulate brick • or stone on only the first three stories. There are limits on stucco, EFIS, hardboard and siding. • Building Colors -requires earth tones from a color palette created for this use. Accent colors are allowed up to 5%. 2) Additional Standards for 50,~Q00 S.F. plus • Building Mass and Design -More detailed articulation is required. • Building Materials -Requires min. 25% brick or stone (or simulated) • Parking Lots • No more than 50% of the parking may be located in front of the building. DRB may allow a greater amount of parking in front when parking setbacks are increased, streetscape points are doubled and additional screening is provided. • Parking is separated into groups of 120 spaces • Minimum 10 foot parking setback is required • Landscaping points are double with larger (2 inch) caliper trees required. Planting beds adjacent to the front fagade are required. • Pedestrian, Bike Circulation facilities are required 3) Additional Standards for 150,000 S.F. plus • Traffic Impact Analysis is required to determine the impacts on level of service of adjacent streets • A designated public space is required and there are various items that may • be included • A water feature in the retention area is required • Landscaping points are double with larger (2.5 inch) caliper trees required. • • WORKSHOP AGENDA ITEM N0.3 • Amendment Subdivision Regulations Fire Flow and Water Supply Requirements • ~Illemo Tae Development Review Staff M+ome Mark Smith, P.E., Director of Public Works C~ Tom Brymer, City Manager Glenn Brrn~m, Assistant City Manager Harvey CargiN, City Attorney D~ebex 8!12/2004 Rae Fire Flow Ordinance City of College Station Public Works Department On July 22, 2004 City Council approved the "fire flow!" orcinance. The ordinance amends the City's Subdivision Regulations (Chapter 9 of the City Code) such that alt future subdivisions in CoAege Station and its extraterritorial jurtsdidion will have water systems that meet fin3 flaw requirements contained in the BryarVColleg~e Station Unified Design Guide~'r-es and the Btya-vC'.olleg~e Station Unified Tec,Y~rr>+c~l Speciltcation. This is a measure to protect public safety by ensuring that all new developments have adequate water supply and pressure to provide fire protection. The ordinance is effective 10 days alter its passage. This makes the effective date of the oMinance August 1, 2004. That means that all plat applk~tions received alter that date will be subject to these new regulations. This new regulation is not part of the UDO and it only applies to subdivisions. • A copy of the ordinance accompanies this memo. The following is a summary of the amendments. 1. Amendment to SECTION 5: °`VARIANCES" stating that variances to the fire flow provisions will not be allowed. 2. Amendment to SECTION 8: "GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS OF DESIGN", stating that all subdivisions shall be provided with water supply and distribution systems for fire protection and domestic use and that those systems be constructed according to the BryaMCo11e0e Station Unified Design Guidelines and the 8ryarVlCollegre Station Unified Tedl Speafications and ail applicable state and federal requiremerrts. 3. Amendment to SECTION 12: "RURAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS", stating that water for ail rural subdivisions shall be constructed atx;ording to the City Standards inducting fire flow r+equiremerrts as prrnrided by the international Flre Code and the Bryarv(Codege S[ation United Desigr- Grude~nes and the Sryan/Colleg~e Station United Technical SPs and all applicable state and federal requirements.` 4. Amendment to SECTION 12: `RURAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS°, by repealing sub-section 12-Q Fire Protection which provides for alternate methods for providing fire protection. 5. Amendment to SECTION 13: 'SPECIAL CONDITIONS IN AREA OF DCTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION" stating that water for all ETJ subdivisions shall be as provided by the City Standards. The requirements will inducts the fire flow nequir+emerrts as provided by the intemationaf Fire Code and the &yan/~College Station Unified Design Guidelines and the Bryan/Colleg-e Station United Technical Specif~atrons and all applicabfe state and federal requirements." • Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 9, "SUBDIVISIONS", OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, BY AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS AS SET OUT BELOW; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING A PENALTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS PART 1: That Chapter 9, "SUBDIVISIONS", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, be amended as set out in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance for all purposes. PART 2: That if any provisions of any section of this ordinance shall be held to be void or unconstitutional, such holding shall in no way effect the validity of the remaining provisions or sections of this ordinance, which shall remain in full force and effect. PART 3: That any person, firm, or corporation violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not less than Twenty Five Dollars ($25.00) nor more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each day such violation shall continue or be permitted to continue, shall be deemed a separate offense. Said Ordinance, being a penal ordinance, becomes effective ten (10) days after its date of passage by the City Council, as provided by Section 35 of the Charter of the City of College Station. • PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED this day of , 2004, APPROVED: RON SILVIA, Mayor ATTEST: Connie Hooks, City Secretary APPROVED: City Attorney • • ORDINANCE NO. Page 2 EXHIBIT KA" That Chapter 9, "SUEDIVISIONS", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended as follows: By amending SECTION 5: "VARIANCES" by adding a new paragraph 5-C to read as follows. "5-C. Variance from Water Flow Requirements It is specifically intended and hereby provided that the various provisions of Section 5, "Variances", shall not apply to fire flow provisions set out in Paragraphs 8-O, 12-P.4 and 13-D." r~ 2. By amending SECTION 8: "GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND 11!IQVIlVIUM STANDARDS OF DESIGN", by deleting the current paragraph 8-O and adding a new paragraph 8-O to -read as follows: "8-O Water Sunnly All subdivisions shall be provided with water supply and distribution systems for fire protection and domestic use. All water mains, distribution and service lines shall be constructed as provided by the Bryarr/College Station Unified Design Guidelines and the Bryan/College Station Unified Technical Spec cations and all applicable state and federal requirements. Where there is a conflict of standards, the more stringent standard as determined by the City Manager, or his designee, shall apply. The City shall accept for public use only water mains,. distribution and service lines that comply with these standards for construction." 3. By amending SECTION 12: REGULATIONS", by deleting the paragraph 12-P.4 to read as follows: "12-P.4 Rural Water Sup Iylp ier "RURAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION current paragraph 12-P.4 and adding a new Water for all rural subdivisions shall be as provided by the City Standards. The requirements will include the fire flow requirements as provided by the International Fire Code and the Bryan/College Station Un~ed Design Guidelines and the Bryan/College Station Un~ed Technical Specifications and all applicable state and federal requirements." /~.{T....... ...... .... .t A_..e.._ ..\ _1. ...1.u nnM1 _ _..1 C.ur.. _ .IT _.....1 T~... M_.._ A... ... J... ....._ l~~. .... n J. _ • ORDINANCE NO. Page 3 4. By amending SECTION 12: "RURAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS", by repealing sub-section 12-Q Fire Protection. 5. By amending SECTION 13: "SPECIAL CONDITIONS IN AREA OF EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION" by deleting the current paragraph 13- D and by adding a new paragraph 13-D to read as follows: "13-D. Water Suvnly Water for all ETJ subdivisions shall be as provided by the City Standards. The requirements will include the fire flow requirements as provided by the International Fire Code and the Bryan/College Station Un~ed Design Guidelines and the Bryan/College Station Unified Technical Specifications and all applicable state and federal requirements." • • /1.111....... ...~_ .... J f1_~1.._ _I _I. ...1_u A/IM! _ ...I A_u:.. _ ..IT....._I T.... f?1 .... A... ... J... .... ~_ 111..... A J. . • CONSENT AGENDA ITEM N0.2.1 Minutes August 5, 2004 Workshop Meeting August 5, 2004 Regulax Meeting • • ~ College Station N Embracing the Past Exploring the Future MINUTES Workshop Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday, August ~, 2004, at 6:30 p.m. Administrative Conference Room, City Hall i 101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Shafer, Fedora, Hooton, Nichols, and White. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Davis and Reynolds. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Happ. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, Transportation Planner Fogle, Senior Planner Fletcher, Staff Plahners Prochazka and Boyer, Planning Intern Brown, Development Manager Ruiz, Economic Development Director Foutz, Graduate Civil Engineers Thompson and Cotter, Assistant City Attorney Robinson, and Staff Assistant Hazlett. Chairman Shafer called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. • i. Discussion of consent and regular agenda items. Agenda items were discussed. Transportation Planner Fogte gave a brief overview of citizen concerns regarding the amendment to the Thoroughfare Plan element of the Comprehensive Pian that will be considered during the regular meeting. 2. biscussion and possible action of future projects planned by the Texas Department of Transportation that affect State Highway 6 and inviting the Commission to attend the City Council Workshop Meeting being held on August 9, 2004 at 2:00 p.m. for more information on this #opic. Transportation Planner Fogle displayed a schematic of TxDOT's future road conversions, changes, and projects. He speculates about 3 years for completion. 3. Qiscussion of minor and amending plats approved by Staff. Pebble Creek Phase 9-B Development Manager Ruiz explained that the interior lot lines were relocated. 4. Discussion of the Biue Ribbon Committee report. Commissioner White reported that the interview process is complete and that the committee is in the process of preparing a draft report. He stated that the report will be given to both City Council and the City Manager. • 5. biscussion and possible action regarding the Commission's attendance of the annual Texas APA Conference, October 13-16, 2004 in Austin, Texas. August 5, 2004 P&C Minutes Workshop Page i of 2 r ~ ~__J Senior Planner Fletcher distributed a brochure to the Commissioners regarding the upcoming conference. All were encouraged to attend, particularly the newest commissioners. He announced the September 15"' deadline to register. 6. 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 speafic 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. None were mentioned. 7. Adjourn. Commissioner White motioned to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Fedora. The meeting adjourned at 7 p.m. by a vote of 5-0. FOR: Shafer, Fedora, Hooton, Nichols, and White. AGAINST: None. ABSENT: Davis and Reynolds. Approved: • Scott Shafer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Attest: Susan Hazlett, Staff Assistant Development Services C, August 5, 2004 P&Z Minutes Workshop Page2of2 • ~ College Stat/an Ernbraci»g the Past, Exploring the Future • MINUTES Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday, August ~, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, College Station City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue Collette Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: COMMtSSIOI~ERS ABSENT: CITY COUNCIL. MEMBERS PRESENT: CITY STAFF PRESENT: Shafer, Fedora, Hooton, Nichols, and White. Davis and Reynolds. John Happ. Economic Development Director Foutz, City Planner Kee, Development Manger Ruiz, Assistant City Attorney Robinson, Senior Planner Fletcher, Transportation Planner (ogle, Graduate Civil Engineers Cotter and Thompson, Staff Planners Prochazka and Boyer, Planning Intern Brown, Action Center Representative Kelley, and Staff Assistant Hazlett. Chairnnan Shafer called the meetin0 to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. Heir Citizen: No one spoke. 2. Consent Agenda. Commissioner White motioned to approve the consent agenda items. Commissioner Nichols seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. FOR: Shafer, White, and Fedora. AGAINST: Hooton and Nichols. ABSENT: Davis and Reynolds. 2.1 Approved by consent the minutes: ^ July 15, 2004 Workshop Minutes • July 15, 2004 Regular Minutes • July 20, 2004 Special Meeting Minutes • 3. Consideration, discussion and possible action on request(s) for absence from meetings. Commissioner Nichols motioned to approve the absence requests. Commissioner Fedora seconded the motion, which carried 5-0. P&Z Minutes August 5, 2004 Page 1 of 5 4. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action. • None. 5. Consideration, discussion, and possible ,action on a Variance Request to section 8.0.1 of the Subdivision Regulations; and consideration, discussion, and possible action on ~ Preliminary Plat for the Griffin-Atlas Subdivision consisting of 1 lot on 1.667 acres, generally located along the west side of the State Highway 6 Feeder Road approximately 130 feet south of the intersection of Greens Prairie Road and State Highway 6. (04-149) Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson presented the Staff Report, first stating that approval of the Preliminary Plat requires prior approval of the variance request. Mr. Thompson also stated that in order to provide fire flow capacity to the site, an additional waterline would have to be constructed. He reported that the applicant is platting to prepare the property for sale, which is currently developed with a metal structure that was erected in 1974. Additionally, the subject property shares a driveway with the adjacent property. Mr. Thompson stated that as the property develops the water will be extended. In closing, Mr. Thompson stated that the applicant has complied with the requirements of the preliminary plat and that Staff recommends approval of the request for a variance for fire flows and approval of the Preliminary Piat contingent on approval of the variance request. A brief discussion regarding fire department issues followed. The purchaser, Dan Griffin, 5003 Crystal Downs Court, requested a favorable decision of the Commission. He is moving his business to College Station and will • use the building as it exists but eventually will remodel it and bring it into compliance with the code. Chuck Ellison, 2902 Camille Drive spoke on behalf of the purchaser, Mr. Griffin. He pointed out that the subject property has been in existence long before it was taken into the City limits. He added that the property will be brought into compliance with the City's Ordinances over time. After consideration of Section 5, "Variances," of the Subdivision Regulations, the Commission's findings are as follows: Section -A.i: 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; Section 5-A.2: That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant; Section 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 Se ion 5-A.4: That the granting of this 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. Commissioner White motioned to approve the variance request because undue hardships will result from requiring strict compliance of the water-line ordinance. • Commissioner Nichols seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. FOR: Shafer, Fedora, Hooton, Nichols, and White. AGAINST: None. P&Z Minutes August 5, 2004 Page 2 of 5 ABSENT: Davis and Reynolds. Commissioner Nichols motioned to approve the Preliminary Plat, which was seconded by Commissioner White. The motion carried 5-0. FOR: Shafer, Fedora, Hooton, Nichols, and White. AGAINST: None. ABSENT: Davis and Reynolds. 6. Public herring, di&cussion, and possible action on an ordinance amending the thoroughfare element of the City of College Station's Comprehensive plan for the area bound 4y the Windwood Subdivision on the north, the Raintree Subdivision on the south, State Highway 6 on the west, and Carter Creek on the east. (04-165) Transportation Planner Fogie presented the staff report. Mr. Fogie gave a brief history of the subject area, provided a visual, and explained the proposal. He explained the details of a traffic study conducted by staff in order to identify potential impacts of the extension of Appomattox Drive. The minimal increase in traffic is justified because it provides a secondary access to the Windwood Subdivision as well as the newly developing residential area. Other benefits were pointed out. Mr. Fogie also reported on the various meetings with the residents and other alternatives to providing secondary access to the Windwood Subdivision. The residents are more concerned about cut-through traffic and the connection to a development that is not consistent with the style of Windwood. Staff recommends that Appomattox Drive remain on the plan as is currently shown, to connect Switch Station to Horse Haven. The alternatives spelled out in the East Bypass Plan were briefly pointed out. Joe Gattis, project engineer residing at 413 Walton, spoke in opposition to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He explained that the applicant is planning to develop the eastern portion of the Lone Star Subdivision as a single-family residential development. In order to maximize the development potential, the applicant is proposing to remove the extension of Appomattox Drive from Switch Station Road to Horse Haven Lane from the Thoroughfare Plan. He displayed the plat to help explain the connection and show the 60 lots that are planned in the development. Chairman Shafer opened the public hearing. The following spoke in opposition to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment • Ron Griffin, 6421 Windwood, President, Windwood Neighborhood Association. He expressed three concerns: (i) Exposure to substantial traffic, (2) Conversion of rental property, (3) Egress. • Diane Hurtado, 6407 Windwood Drive, Access & Egress Committee Chair, Windwood Neighborhood Association. • Wilford Gardner, 6403 Windwood Drive, Treasure, Windwood Neighborhood Association. • Joseph Byrme, 2608 Wingate, Vice President, Windwood Neighborhood Association. P&Z Minutes August 5, 2004 Page 3 of 5 A brief discussion regarding the need for two-way traffic on Switch Station Road ensued. Commissioner Fedora clarilted that the Windwood Neighbofiood Association supports the applicant in removing Appomattox Drive off the Thoroughfare Plen. Chairman Shafer closed the public hearing. Wilford Gardner and the remaining members of the association applauded the Development Services Staff for their negotiation and communication efforts during this process. Commissioners discussed the logistics of the city utilities department's usage of Switch Station Road. Mr. Fogie stated that Switch Station Road could not be a one- way road because the intersection would have to be built in a way to preclude wrong way traffic from entering it. A brief discussion regarding when the Windwood Subdivision was platted followed. Chairman Shafer closed the public hearing. Mr. Fogle pointed out the Commission's options. Commissioner Fedora motioned to remove Appomattox from the Thoroughfare Plan. Commissioner White seconded the motion. Commissioner Nichols expressed concern regarding access, mentioning bicycle and walking trails. He stated that this is part of a larger connectivity issue and by removing Appomattox frpm the thoroughfare plan at this time, the city would lose . some leverage in seeing future plats coming forth. He would like to see the connectivity as well as two access points. He was in favor of leaving Appomattox on the Thoroughfare Ptan as it is but encouraged further disqussions with the staff and the three entities involved in order to create an alternative plan. He added that he did not want to see Horse Haven become isolated. Chairman Shafer agreed with Commissioner Nichol's remarks and with the comments of the association members. He stated that the removal of Appomattox from the Thoroughfare Plan was a reasonable request as well as the issues surrounding Switch Station Road, which would provide connectivity and an additional egress. He also agreed that ail involved parties should communicate further regarding an alternative plan. Commissioner White echoed the need for further discussion between all involved parties. Commissioner Hooton also agreed. Her primary concern was a safety issue and the need for an additional access point. Chairman Shafer called the question. The motion to remove Appomattox Drive from the Thoroughfare Plan failed by a vote of 3-2. FOR: Shafer and Fedora. AGAINST: White, Hooton and Nichols. ABSENT; Davis and Reynolds. Commissioner White motioned for the Commission to recommend that all impacted parties and city staff meet to arrive at a desired conclusion to Irhe issues. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Nichols. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. FOR: Shafer, White, Hooton, Nichols, and Fedora. AGAINST: None. ABSENT: Davis and Reynolds. • Commissioner Nichols further assured the citizens of the Commission's concerns regarding the connectivity issues and would like to see them addressed. P&Z Minutes August 5, 2004 Page 4 of 5 7. 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. Commissioner Nichols requested a workshop meeting to discuss strategic priority items for the Planning and Zoning Commission this year. 8. Adfourn. Commissioner Nichols motioned to adjourn, which was seconded by Commissioner White. The motion carried 5-0. FOR: Shafer, Fedora, Hooton, Nichols, and White. AGAINST: None. ABSENT: Davis and Reynolds. Approved • Scott Shafer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Attest: Susan Haalett, Staff Assistant Development Services • P&Z Minutes August 5, 2004 Page 5 of 5 • CONSENT AGENDA ITEM N0.2.2 Preliminary Plat Stonebrook subdivision C, Q tiJ Ali $$ • 0 Q 4 Q ~ ~ r b ,~ i w ~ '' ~i ~ N diY ~~ op O " ~ I ~ ~ ~ y C O, NCII STONEBROOK O ~i~.~iq~}~~!:,.y~!i!i:,.,4i1 y ! •~iii '~iAA i..My.+p ~:, N k¢. i'i'~•p"!i idl I i '~f i!~'!~tl 9~} ~i$Wi. !rt!~ 1~!i. q _ ^~ :ilk::. i a ~5.i 4:i ! i h. •:i !~~` i i ii~.,:~'r}:°i.~i. 'n,7 u N ~ u y~~y~ ry'!£ "i $!"3' i~'~~r! ~, 1 yC~•: ~ ~!,`:~!E~. y'N'd a~~i~,, ~ ~..J ~ ~' a h f- :y~l A8a1 t.4' ",i1~,,i u.~Mi~ i ~i~'~ ~ , iN?~,i~ :~ !N~~.S~i'~{i , uor a4 V ii ~~!1 !d~~E~'~ `}r!,~ i ! a~r~. i~~ !J!•~a! ~~~ , {~k i ~! ! ~( ~ ": `1i,~!~?!s;' svi 44~~~~~1'~ i~! `h ~i,aI 5r~~~ ,!,li~!. ,..' ,j4~y~ !~~E ~ W 1.l~ 3Y C !I'!A{~ 14{~~i~(fiiiii !~ '~~ I i i~~ ,i {~,,,i ihi. ! iii P i Lilt y~ `~ = i~i1~I~!!£5 4~3iNy~ Si:i~i!i'.i~ ~k'n' ItiXi. I~i•i yk 2 ~ •u~i ~~~~ Ni ~i {~ 3: i! ~I UAt a t~ _ ~ 5 :3 d• ! !I,' ~{ i f . a i~: = a :ii!1,~,.:i .~i ili.r.`., i! !~, iyi . „! !ss:!!!,~~i~q i4!p y !!i~~';i!!~,!33 (y 6D1 ~ // h Ei:iSi:yi^~1 j al,'" 'xyy~ 1~l~i.i7! ~15p li~:n3P ~,•! ~~' ifl ! !it7 1117 ~ "i:"F4 ;ry711 !yy ~yryy i~{ Po 7 i'!ii 3i~i! i"4i ~!~i ' #'~! f ~• " ,!, ~{, i • kA17 b !~ Lp 5~~~~'N!MAeR ~ ~ i*'~;hr~$ ilii':d,~'1.=.1!~Y}Kri: li 'dI ! ~ [n"dpi!'Pkl~ ID7 ~ a ~ !! !6 i ~ ~ i i!2.lI.: .u J I, ~i''~~ff y,ii. ~} ~°~~! ~}7 i ! 1 O I !Gi ! i !9 3 i i i2i':iit~ I~N~M•S". 'i~yG~i~f i _ ! ^ ~t II,~:51I~ ELI ! •~ ~ ~~li~~.. !y~ii: ;!~r'~ E iu 4y:h 5 i'Y i ~ 9t ~• 'O N p ::r!'N" ! ~ `il I! i tis;5 ~ ui: •i!w'°cc ~ ~ ~' ~ • lci• ~ 'Y .r4£:i ! ~ ,~`p'A~{' {ta ~ ~~~i 4.?!.9 Pi'!r ~f~ i ,~ !. ~ g ! :~!5 lai a(~i ! ~,~'}~.vy3¢ ~3i~iy>„l~a• ''''f O i i ~ ! !, ~i~ ~A~ i!! i !a.7:!,1 2 ~ o i,i•' , i.:. !7' : ~~~~'~ 4!:~lL>,n.i i' ly i3 ~ i y" f~ rl !k°.({ iiE'•~•y.,~i!li ,~ iIf! !~ `iiq j,i~!4~i¢~F r!~ } N O_ ~~ ':!! 7'i !ifi ii~~yy~ ~~ii!9'•!ii~~~;~ i' i'i^'i7.' !lii. o O 4',rir;E iN!B':,i i ~i~ai ~;%;''yy! i ~'~;P~ y ii,~ y! O i:~~§e;¢ iii>ia!~:•!jt~}~,rr ~:j! '~}~i 1~yr,':~, : ilk w N .iii¢'z:!Piii•aiy?i5ih ~;i.,y ~..!?;:,. i`'`ii: ~ib:.> !. ,: i:f !3~ !;i•i5?~ N'iP: 41 = ';!i~:"•~~I:'I,NI~:'~I~Ii3sS:;i!~Fiii!! 0. ~ iyi~ii~i!i:":,Ixuili:i(c'~:..".A .i.!P. yid !'.E!"rt!iit i{i~iNi~~;~i(;!y i :~ 'iiiir3ili'i°i.~~:jii~!i ~!ii ~!iJa}~'U'!ii' 5 ~ O ...~x.:ii+•. ~.. n O U ~_ r ~ ~o, N I1~ ~ q~ ~ ~ Y ~ OHO Q 4 b Q o ~~ ~ ~- "' A N b Y ^ ' o G ~ e °i O fJro p ~ .r "' a ~ 90 f~y1 ~~•^~ ~" ~ d~ W J N h _ ~~ ~ ' H~ ~ ~ ^OU ~ W ~ J -~"' do ~ a ° ~ ~~~dJ 0 O V ~°~, U J J S~ m ~o _ o • ~ oW z ~ N-~ ~ r Off' LONG6IIRE DR. "'d sow w wue~a dd, J ~ ~' ~~ "~ } ~ ^ ~ d ~~ II~ a II 9 _~ /~ W O Y. W Z •O v/ Q~ _Q N m~ ~W OW ~~ ~'~ ~ ~cc m L ~ VO ow STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Carol Cotter Email: ccotter@cstx.gov Date: August 10, 2004 Item: Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a Preliminary Plat for Stonebrook Subdivision consisting of 95 lots and a reserve tract on 17.327 acres located at the intersection of Old Rock Prairie Road with the new alignment of Rock Prairie Road. Applicant: Joe Gattis of Gattis Engineering, Agent for Darrel Munsey, 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 an R-3 residential townhouse subdivision consisting of 95 lots and a reserve tract on 17.327 acres. The subdivision will have access from Old Rock Prairie Road and a proposed section of Lakeway Drive to the south of Rock Prairie Road. This Preliminary Plat is in compliance with zoning and subdivision regulations. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The Land Use Plan shows this area to be retail • regional; however, the current zoning of the properly is R-4 multi-family residential. The property owner desires to develop the property as R-3 townhouse residential, which is a permitted use in R-4 districts. The subdivision will take access from Old Rock Prairie Road and a proposed section of Lakeway Drive to the south of the new alignment of Rock Prairie Road. Lakeway Drive is designated a major collector on the Thoroughfare Plan, and Rock Prairie Road is designated a minor arterial. Old Rock Prairie Road is no longer a through street and terminates as a locked access to the well service road, approximately 100 feet northeast of the proposed entrance to the subdivision. The majority of the right-of-way for the proposed section of Lakeway Drive will be dedicated with the final plat. In order to align the proposed Lake way Drive with the Stonebrook, additional ROW will be acquired from the adjacent property. The road will include bike lanes in conformance with the Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan. Item Background: The property was annexed into the City in 1983 as A-O Agricultural Open and was rezoned to C-2 in 1986. The property was again rezoned to R-5 Medium Density Apartment in 1994, and was in compliance with the Land Use Plan at that time. The adoption of the UDO combined the R-5 and R-4 districts into R-4, the current zoning of the property. Budgetary & Financial Summary: The applicant will be requesting oversized participation for the construction of Lakeway Drive. • Related Advisory Board Recommendations: The Parks Board approved parkland dedication as fee-in-lieu of land on July 20, 2004. Supporting Materials: 1. Location Map 2. Application 3. Aerial 4. Infrastructure and Facilities 5. Copy of Preliminary Plat • INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES Water required for plat: Each lot is required to have public water service, as shown on the plat. Water service will be extended from an existing 18-inch water line along Rock Prairie Road and looped to an existing 8-inch line along Old Rock Prairie Road. Depending on the location of the end of the existing 18-inch line, the developer may have to extend the 18-inch line across Lakeway Drive to the northern corner of the property. Water Service: Water to be provided to each structure, as required. Sewer required for plat: Each lot is required to have public sewer service, as shown on the plat. Sewer extension will come off an existing 8-inch main located on the Rock Prairie Baptist Church property to the east. Sewer Service: Sewer to be provided to each structure, as required. Street(s) required for plat: All streets shown on plat are required for this subdivision. Streets/Access: Rock Prairie is a minor arterial and Lakeway Drive is a major collector. Residential access is precluded on collector streets and larger, where applicable. Off-site Easements required for plat: An off-site easement for the sewer line will be required. Drainage: Detention wilt be provided for development as shown on plat. Flood Plain: None. Oversize request: The Applicant will be requesting over-sized participation for the construction of Lakeway Drive. Impact Fees: None. Parkland Dedication Fees: Fee-in-lieu of land was approved by the Parks Board on July 20, 2004. i ., ~~ - !. fOR O I U E ONL PdZ CASE NO.: ~' DATE SUBMITTED: PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION ~'' ~ A The following items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for P & Z Commission MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Films Fee of $400.00. ~ nce Request to Subdivision Regulations ~ $100 (if applicable) plication completed in full. Tpirteen (13) folded copies of plat. (A revised mylar original must be submitted after staff review.) ne (1) copy of the approved Master Plan if applicable. A Dopy of the attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not. Rezoning Application if zone change is proposed. Parkland Dedication requirement approved by the Parks $ Recreation Boani, please provide proof Date of Pr~eapplication NAME OF SUBOMSION fr, INfiORMATiON (Primary Contact for the Project): Name Phone Number _~'~ ^~ Jr7J~-' ~© ZZ Fax Number ,,,,~~= ~ $ - b/ S~O street Address $~4~ 1~/~E~140a ~iQ, cry State __~~,_ Zip Code ? E-Mail Address ~ PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION Eta owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple owners): Name . 7~A~~eKE~ ~ntS~1/ e.~• ~'R~I~tate ~, ~ Street Address ~. (~ ~ ~E~S_l~.f' State _~,Y,_„_ Zip Code ~~$~ Phone Number ~ ~~ $~t7 - ¢r1n'~S ARCHITECT Name. Street Address _,,,~`~ %,~!~/~ ~,~i(, State ~,.,_ Zip Code ._ ~_l ~~~ • Phone Number `~'7 Jam. cf ~~ c~~2 Z 6/13103 E-Mail Address a-'` Fax Number ~7~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~'~ ~ ,L~ city 3Q E-Mail Address ~~ ~ ~4 Fax Number _--_Z!o '' ~/s Ca/" 1 of4 " ~~ ~ 1 Total Acres Of Subdivision ~ ~ ~ R~C~-W Acreage 1 •~~ Z' Total # Of Lots ~~ Number Of Lots By Zoning District ~ / ~ ~a / I •Ave Acrea Of Each Residential Lot B Zonin District: ~//~///~/~/`(M/~ 9e Y 9 V r V~1r.ii~ ~~. 1 ~.~.~., / 1 Fkwdplain Acreage ~„_, Parkland dedication by acreage or fee? ~Q ¢- Astatement addre ing any differences between the Preliminary Plat and approved Master Plan (if applicable) _ Requested variances to subdivtslon regulations 8 reason for same Wry Requested oversize partiGpation ~ Parkand Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat: ACREAGE: #'of Acres to be dedicated # of acres in detention OR # of acres in floodplain # of acres in greenways FEE IN LIEU OF LAND: ~ //^^ ~~ # of Single-Family Dwelling Units X $556 = $ ~V ~,.. 2(date) Approved by Parks 8~ Recreation Board The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto re true and correct. The undersigned hereby requests approval by the City of College Station the above identified plat and attests that ~ respective owners have been identified on this a pl" n. ' r ~.~ Q DI g ature an Titre Date 6113/03 2 of 4 • • CtI-N~ENT AGENDA ITEM NO.2.3 Final Plat Williams Creek • MEMORANDUM August 11, 2004 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Spencer Thompson Email: shompson@cstx.gov SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT for WILLIAMS CREEK SUBDIVISION PH 1 (FP) Item: Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a Final Plat for the Williams Creek Subdivision PH 1 consisting of 24 lots on 38.7 acres generally located at Greens Prairie Road and Rock Prairie Road East. (04-00500163) Applicant: Joe & Janet Johnson Land and Investments, L.P. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval as submitted. Item Summary: This item is for consideration of a Final Plat for Williams Creek. The subject property is zoned AO-R and comes under Section 12 of the Subdivision Regulations. The plat meets the requirements of Section 12 with allowances for the variances granted by the Commission at the 6/17/04 meeting for consideration of the Preliminary Plat. The variances granted include the platting of half the ROW for Rock Prairie Road, street grades not to exceed 8% instead of 6%, maximum block length to be allowed as shown on approved Preliminary Plat, PUE minimum width reduced from 20-ft to 15-ft, Sanitary Sewer Master Plan to be provided as plan view only, waiving the requirement for the profile view, and utilities required for subdivision to not be dedicated to the City of College Station where applicable (electric/ water). The City Council approved the sewer master plan on 8/9/04. Wellborn SUD will supply the Subdivision with domestic water and fire flow. BTU will supply the majority of lots with electric service except as noted on the plat. Sewer will be by OSSF. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: Land Use Plan: Single-family residential, low density. Thoroughfare Plan: Greens Prairie Road is a major arterial. Rock Prairie Road from GPR is a major collector. Parkland Dedication: Fee in lieu of land as recommended by the Parks Board. Open Space Dedication: None. Budgetary & Financial Summary: None • Attachments: 1. Area map 2. Application 3. Aerial 4. Copy of Plat on wall of Council Chambers ~ ~/~~ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY P8Z CASE NO.: /~ y" ''~ CQ3, DATE SUBMITTED: V FINAL PLAT APPLICATION (Check one) ^ Minor ^ Amending [~ Final ^ Vacating ^ Replat (5300.00) ($300.00) ($400.00) ($400.00) ($600.00)* 'Includes public hearing fee The following items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for P&Z Commission consideration. MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Filing Fee (see above) NOTE: Multiple Sheets - $55.00 per additional sheet 2 EXi R~ SIk~~T'S= ~llo If~ Variance Request to Subdivision Regulations -- $100 (if applicable) / Development Permit Application Fee of $200.00 (if applidable). ~/ Infrastructure Inspection Fee of $600.00 (applicable if any public infrastructure is being constructed) ~ Application completed in full. I~ 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.) -~ 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 I.S.D. ,~ A copy of the attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not. 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). ~41~~h~a _ P~„~ RMA,~ /vl~~l ate of Preapplication Conference: NAME OF SUBDIVISION ~1' . . SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (Lot & Block) ~~ ~ ~Ir-e.2.Vt~~6t.tr1~ KCxto ~A15~' ~~n~Pp ti ~~-1~a r t F ~j C~tn~'etr ~ ~~ APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFiORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project): Name ~~0~ Q~nr~.. tainP~'~o~ly~ Landaav~-d .Zr,veS-~n~sT( ~ Street Address ~~0~ -~ YYIYY~Q rCia-r ~Y City ~y~~~P_~Gc~/1 State Q Zip Code ~~~_~.- E-Mail Address/. Phone Number __ I_ %~ZS~(pZS~ ZIZ~ Fax Number (~3ZS ~O~- 3~7 Z PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name ~e d ir1r~ ~Q ~- ~DY1Y1~Y1_ O~VI~ ~ y'PE.,~~sn~ L t~ Street Address ~_~~j C,py//y''ti~~rGLR~ ~1re,~~r- City Ce`~i~Y1~o~.y~ State Zip Code ~~~3T E-Mail Address Phone Number __ 3Z5~(pZS ~ Z(Z..~ Fax Number ~325~ ~oZS ~ 7Z. ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: Name • Street Address State Zi Code ~ 1~~ Phone Number ~~~ '~(~--~~a',~ City ~'~~ ~ ~ E-Mail Address Fax Number ~~'~~ 1 ]~4- - ~~ 6/13/03 I ..I' Is there a temporary blanket easement on this property? If so, please provide the Volume N ~ and Page # - Acreage -Total Property '~. (off a Total # Of Lots _~ R-O-W Acreage ~ .12 ~c Existing Use: _ 1/~~- Proposed Use: 1('IACQ..~ Cnor,t ~~ y~~ ~~ lumber Of Lots By Zoning District ~~} / ~- ~ / "7' T- / Average Ac~rea~ge~Of E~atclh Residential Lot By Zoning District: Floodplain Acreage ~. Z~ dlG, A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and approved Master Plan and/or Preliminary Plat (if applicable): Y1ov~~ Requested~Variances 1To SLUbdivision Regulations & Reason For Same: ~~101X~(,I~ ci0~-r0 r-r~ tAl (-(~- r~f`~ VI IAA 1 ~/1 A - w~.J' A T Oversize Participation: _l~l'1~ Total Linear Footage of Proposed Public: ~~ Streets "' Sidewalks '- Sanitary Sewer Lines Water Lines X35 , Channels Storm Sewers (CK{~ter~S ""' 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 = $ ~~~- ~_'Z-AO~1~- (date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Board NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FILING. The applicant has prepared this application and certi!!es that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true, correct, and complete. The undersigned hereby requests approval by the City of Col/ege Station of the above-identified t7nal plat and attests that this request does not amend any covenants or restrictions associated with this plat. 7 .- 2 - ~ Sig to and Title Cam' Date 6/13/03 ~~i C7 CONSENT AGENDA ITEM No. 2.4 Final Plat Our Sa~rior's Lutheran Church • MEMORANDUM August 9, 2004 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Carol Cotter Email: ccotter@cstx.gov SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT for OUR SAVIOUR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH Item: Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a Final Plat for Our Saviour's Luthern Church, Lot 1, Block 1 consisting of 7.628 acres, located at the northeast corner of State Highway 6 and Woodcreek Drive. (04-00500175) Applicant: The Arkitex Studio for Our Saviour's Lutheran Church, Owner • Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat as submitted. Item Summary: This item is for consideration of a Final Plat of Our Saviour's Lutheran Church consisting of 1 lot located off State Highway 6 and Woodcreek Drive. This Final Plat meets zoning and subdivision requirements and is in compliance with the Preliminary Plat. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The current zoning of the property is C-1, General Commercial which is in compliance with the Land Use Plan. The property owner desires to develop the property as Our Saviour's Lutheran Church, which is a permitted use in C-1 districts. Buffering requirements will be addressed at the time of Site Plan. The property will take access from Woodcreek Drive which is designated a minor collector on the Thoroughfare Plan. The property also fronts on the northbound frontage road of State Highway 6, which the Thoroughfare Plan designates as a Freeway and Expressway. No access will be granted to the property from State Highway 6. Attachments: 1. Area map 2. Application • 3. Aerial 4. Copy of Plat on wall of Council Chambers • ~p~3v FINAL PLAT APPLICATION ~~~ (Check one) ^ Amending ®Final ^ Vacating ^ Replat I$aoo.oo~ ts4oo.o0~ ~saoo.oo> tasoo.oo~- `Includes public hearing fee The following items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for P8Z Commission consideration. MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: ® Final plat review and filing fee (see above) NOTE: Multiple Sheets ~ $55.00 per additional sheet N/ Variance Request to Subdivision Regulations ~ $100 (if applicable) Development permit fee of $200.00 (if applicable). ,~ Infrastructure inspection fee of $600.00 (applicable if any public infrastructure is being constructed) ® Thirteen (13) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after staff review.) ® 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 I.S.D. A copy of the attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not. Two (2} copies of public infrastructure plans associated with this plat (if applicable). N/A Parkland Dedication requirement approved by the Parks & Recreation Board, please provide proof of ~ME OF SUBDIVI S ON Our Sawour's Lutheran Church SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (Lot 8~ Block) Lot 1. Block 1 3~~ 's~lo APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project}: Name The Arkitex Studio Inc.. Eva-Read Warden AIA E-Mail evaCct)arkitex.com Street Address 511 Universifir Drive East Suite 201 City College Station State TX Zip Code 77840 Phone Number 979-260-2635 Fax Number 979-846-8224 CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: (All owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet, if necessary) Name Our Saviour's Lutheran Church. John Blasienz E-Mail Street Address 315 Tauber Street City College Station State Texas Zip Code 77840 Phone Number 979-846-5011 Fax Number 979-690-6029 ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: Name McClure & Browne Inc., Michael R. McClure P E E-Mail mikemCa~tca.net Street Address 1008 Woodcreek Drive Suite 103 I~ty College Station State Texas Zip Code 77845 Phone Number 979-693-3838 Fax Number 979-693-2554 S. Acreage Total Property 7.628 Total # Of Lots 1 R-O-W Acxeage -0- isting Use: Vacant Proposed Use: Church tuber Of Lots By Zoning District 1 / C-1 / / Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District: G1 / 7.628 acres / / Floodplain Acreage -a A Statement Addressing Any Differences Between The Final Plat And Approved Master Development Plan And/Or Preliminary Plat (If Applicable): None Requested Variances To Subdivision Regulations & Reason For Same: None Requested Oversize Participation: None Total Linear Footage of Proposed Public: ~ ~ Streets ~~' Sidewalks N/(~ Sanitary Sewer Lines ~ ~ Water Lines Channels ~ Storm Sewers ~ fq' Bike Lanes /Paths Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat: ACREAGE: ~ l # 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 = $ # of Multi-Family Dwelling Units X $452 = $ (date) Approved by Parks ~ Recreation Board NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FILING. The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto arcs true, correct and complete. The undersigned hereby requests approval by the City of Co//ege Station of the above-identified final plat and attests that this request does not amend any covenants or restrictions associated with this plat. ~C'e~, tune and itle srr~ C/vi[. e'•Js~~~C. 7 Z3/o ~ Date • CtJl~SENT AGENDA ITEM N'U. 2.5 Final Plat E. M. Jones r-~ U • MEMORANDUM August 11, 2004 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Spencer Thompson Email: sthompson@cstx.gov SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT for E&M JONES FARM PLACE -LOT 2 (FP) Item: Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a Final Plat for E&M Jones Farm Place Lot 2 consisting of 1 lot on 7 acres generally located at Krenek tap Road and Central Park Lane. (04-00500178) Applicant: Veronica Morgan, Agent for Owner. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat with the • condition that Staff Review Comments #2 be addressed on the plat. Item Summary: This item is for consideration of a Final Plat for E&M Jones Farm Place Lot 2. The platting of this lot requires the extension of Central Park Lane to the southeast property boundary, as shown on the plat. The City expects the remaining portion of this street to be completed in the next 18-24 months. Lot 1 is currently developed as an attractive townhome project which looks out over Central Park. The remaining property is planned for similar townhomes, as well, with a gated entrance off Central Park Lane. The property is currently zoned R-4 with an overlay. The recently adopted Krenek Tap Corridor Overly District regulates design standards. The standards are implemented with Site Plan review. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: Land Use Plan: Residential-Attached Thoroughfare Plan: Krenek Tap and Central Park Lane are both minor collectors with bile lanes. Parkland Dedication: Fee in lieu has been approved by Parks Board. Open Space Dedication: None Special Area Plans: The subject property is in the vicinity of the planned City Center project. • Budgetary & Financial Summary: OP has been requested. • Attachments: 1. Area map 2. Application 3. Aerial 4. Staff Review Comments #2 5. Copy of Plat on wall of Council Chambers • • • STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS N0.2 Project: E&M JONES FARM PLACE (FP) - 04-00500178 • ENGINEERING 1. Since PUEs for Site Plat infrastructure are not shown on plat, provide dedication by separate instrument. 2. All infrastructure and required easements to be per BCS Unified Design Guidelines. 3. In order to abandon the easement as shown, the property owner must submit proper application and documentation for consideration by City Council. 4. Central Park Lane is shown as a minor collector with bike lanes. Please adjust construction plans to reflect this roadway section. 5. Provide sufficient easement for the re-routed 12-in sewer main to conduct maintenance operations between buildings. 6. Additional comments regarding construction documents to be returned separately. Reviewed by: Spencer Thompson Date: August 11, 2004 • (Check one) ^ Minor (x300.00) FOR OFFI E SE ON ~\ P8Z CASE NO.: .~ DATE SUBMITTED• 1 ~f~ ~~ FINAL PLAT APPLICATION ^ Amending ® Final ^ Vacating ^ Re lat p (5300.00) (5400.00) (5400.00) (5600.00)* *Includes public hearins~ fee The following items must be submtted by an established filins~ deadline date fer pB.Z Cnmmi~Qinn ~.,..e~ae~,•:.,., MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: X Filing Fee (see above) NOTE: Multiple Sheets - $55.00 per additional sheet N/A Variance Request to Subdivision Regulations ~ $100 (if applicable) X Development Permit Application Fee of $200.00 (if applicable). X Infrastructure Inspection Fee of $600.00 (applicable if any public infrastructure is being constructed) X Application completed in full. N/A Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (if applicable). X Thirteen (13) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after staff review.) X One (1) copy of the approved Preliminary Plat and/or one (1) Master Plan (if applicable). X Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station I.S.D. X A copy of the attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not. X Two (2) copies of public infrastructure plans associated with this plat (if applicable). N/A Parkland Dedication requirement approved by the Parks & Recreation Board, please provide proof of aDDroval (if applicable)_ of Preapplication Conference: Onaoina Phases NAME OF SUBDIVISION Waterwood Condominmums SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (Lot 8~ Block) Lot 2. Block 1 E8~M Jones Place APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project): Name Veronica J.B. Moraan P.E -Manaaina Partner Street Address 511 University Dr. E.. Ste. 204 City College Station State TX Zip Code 77840 E-Mail Address vCa~mitchellandmorgan com Phone Number (979) 260-6963 Fax Number (979) 260-3564 PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name Jim Stewart Street Address 4200 Woodland Park Court State TX Zip Code 76013 Phone Number (817) 994-4663 ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: E-Mail Address City Arlington Fax Number (817) 429-8664 Name Veronica J.B. Moraan. P.E. -Manaaina Partner Street Address 511 University Dr. E. Ste 204 City Colleae Station ~tate TX Zip Code 77840 E-Mail Address v mitchellandm r • yan cem Phone Number (979) 260-6963 Is there a temporary blanket easement on this property? If so, please provide the Volume Fax Number (979) 260-3564 and Page # 6/13/03 1 of 5 Acreage ~ Total Property 13.72 Existing Use: Vacant Total # Of Lots 1 R-O-W Acreage .70ac tuber Of lots By Zoning District 1 / R-4 rage Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District: R-4 / 7 AC / / / Floodplain Acreage 0 A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and approved Master Plan and/or Preliminary Plat (if applicable): NONE Requested Variances To Subdivision Regulations 8 Reason For Same: NONE Requested Oversize Participation: See attached letter Total Linear Footage of Proposed Public: 510' Streets 76' Sidewalks Sanitary Sewer Lines 520' Water Lines x Channels 75' Storm Sewers 1020' Bike Lanes /Paths Parkland ~dication due prior to filing the Final Plat: ACREAGE: # of acres be dedicated + $ development fee # of acres in fl plain # of -acres in dete tion ~/~,1,r # of acres in green s OR FEE IN LIEU OF LAND: # of Single-Family Dwellii (date) Approved Uril~~ X $556 = $ ;,arks & Recreation Board NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FILING. The applicant has prepared this application and cert~es that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached her~sto are true, correct, and complete. The undersigned hereby requests approval by the City of College Station of the above-ident~ed final ~l t and attests that. this raquest does not amend any covenants or restrictions associated with this plat. L ~'._ Signature and ' • 6113/03 Proposed Use: Condominiums vll/ Date 2 of 5 • AGENDA ITEl1~ N0.3 Absence Requests • AGENDA ITEM No. 5 Replat and Final Plat Gateway, Phase 1 R Gateway, Phase 3, Lot 1 R • MEMORANDUM August 12, 2004 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Spencer Thompson Email: sthompson@cstx.gov SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT -GATEWAY PH 1-3 (FP) Item: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a Replat for Gateway Phase 1 R and a Final Plat for the Gateway Phase 3 Lot 1 R consisting of 4 lots on 22.7 acres generally located at University Drive East at Forest Drive. (04-00500155) Applicant: Veronica Morgan, Agent for Owners Staff Recommendations: Stiff recommends approval of the Final Plat as submitted. • Item Summary: This item is a public hearing due to the replat aspect of the case regarding Lot 1 R. Lot 1 R is being further divided into Lot 1AR, Lot 8 and Lot 12. Lot 8 is currently Gateway Station containing Chicos, Talbots, JoS A Bank, and Kirklands. The other lots are undeveloped at this time. These properties take access from University Drive at the signalized intersection across from Forest Drive, the right-in/ right-out next to Wing And More and through the greater shopping center area. Phase 3 and future Phase 4 include an access from University to the oil well site to the rear, actually located in Bryan adjacent to the VWVTP. Phase 2, 3 and 4 also include Zone AE floodplain and floodway, as shown on the plat. . Lots in Phase 1 and Phase 3 are zoned C-1 with an Overlay. There were several requirements placed on the Gateway during the rezoning. One was that Phase 3 is required to provide access to the adjacent lot to the west, University Park II Block Y. A note to this effect is included on the plat. The exact layout and location of the cross access easement can be addressed at the Site Plan. This cross access requirement is in compliance with the UDO. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: Land Use Plan: Much of the area is shown as greenway. Outside the greenway is shown as Regional Retail. Thoroughfare Plan: University is a major arterial. • Parkland Dedication: Not applicable to commercial properties. Open Space Dedication: None Special Area Plans: This area was included in the University Dr corridor study. Attachments: 1. Area map 2. Application 3. Aerial 4. Copy of Plat on wall of Council chambers ~J ~~ MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Filing Fee (see above) NOTE: Multiple Sheets - $55.00 per additional sheet (previously submitted) N/A Variance Request to Subdivision Regulations ~ $100 (if applicable) N/A Development Permit Application Fee of $200.00 (if applicable). N/A Infrastructure Inspection Fee of $600.00 (applicable if any public infrastructure is being constructed) X Application completed in full. N/A Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (if applicable). X Thirteen (13) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after staff review.) One (1) copy of the approved Preliminary Plat and/or one (1) Master Plan (if applicable).(previously submitted) X Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station I.S.D. N/A A copy of the attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not. N/A Two (2) copies of public infrastructure plans associated with this plat (if applidable). N/A Parkland Dedication requirement approved by the Parks & Recreation Board, please provide proof of --------~ ~~t - --~ - -.. . 'Date of Preapplication Conference: NAME OF SUBDIVISION Gateway Station Phase i. III SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (Lot & Block) Lot 1AR & Lot 8, Block 1 - Ph 1 Lot 1 R Block 1 - Ph. 3 APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project): Name _Veronica J.B. Morgan. P.E. -Mitchell & Morgan LLP Street Address _ 511 University Dr. E.. Ste. 204 City College Station State TX Zip Code 77840 E-Mail Address vC~mitchellandmorgan com Phone Number _.(979) 260-6963 Fax Number (979) 260-3564 PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name DELMAR Baronhead Ltd. Street Address 15900 Dooley Road City Addison State TX Zip Code 75001 Phone Number (972) 233-3333 ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: E-Mail Address Fax Number (972) 233-1501 Name Veronica J.B. Morgan. P.E. - Mitchell 8~ Morgan LLP Street Address 511 University Dr. E.. Ste. 204 City College Station State TX Zip Code 77840 E-Mail Address v(a~mitchellandmorgan.com .Phone Number (979)260-6963 Fax Number (979)260-6963 6/13/03 1 of 5 Is there a temporary blanket easement on this property? If so, please provide the Volume N/A and Page # N/A Acreage -- Total Property 34.97 Total # Of Lots 4 R-O-W Acreage 0 isting Use: Vacant Proposed Use: RetaiUCommerciai tuber Of Lots By Zoning District 3 / C-1 N/A / N/A N/A / N/A Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District: N/A / N/A N/A / N/A N/A / N/A N/A / N/A Fioodplain Acreage A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and approved Master Plan and/or Preliminary Plat (if applicable): N/A Requested Variances To Subdivision Regulations & Reason For Same: N/A Requested Oversize Participation: N/A Total Linear Footage of Proposed Public: Streets Sidewalks N/A Sanitary Sewer Lines N/A Water Lines N/A Channels N/A Storm Sewers N/A Bike Lanes /Paths Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat: ACREAGE: N/A # of acres to be dedicated + $N/A development fee N/A # of acres in floodplain N/A # of acres in detention N/A # of acres in greenways OR FEE IN LIEU OF LAND: N/A # of Single-Family Dwelling Units X $556 = $ N/A N/A (date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Board NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FILING. The applicant has prepan;d this application and certifies 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 fhe above-idenf~ed final p~af and attests that this request does not amend any covenants or restrictions associated with this plat. l (/lY Signature and Ti Date • 6/13103 2 of 5 • AGENDA ITEM N0.6 Rezoning Kenny Cotten's r~ . STAFF REPORT Project Manager: Jennifer Prochazka Date: August 12, 2004 Email: jprochazka~cstx.gov Item: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a rezoning of 12.49 acres, generally located near the southeast intersection of Harvey Mitchell Parkway and the future Dartmouth Street extension, from R-1 Single Family Residential to P-MUD Planned Mixed Use Development with the OV Overlay District. Applicant: Kenny Cotten, agent for Mr.Clint Bertrand, property owner Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the P-MUD zoning. ' Item Summary: The applicant is requesting rezoning in order to develop the property with a mix of uses, including a potential hotel, specialty retail shops, a pavilion, pedestrian paths, and townhomes. P-MUD zoning requires that both the residential. component and non-residential component makes up at least 20 percent of the overall land uses within the development. Compliance with this requirement will be determined at the time of Concept Plan approval. Approximately 4.5 acres at the south end of the proposed rezonin area is within g the 100-year floodplain. This floodplain is shown as a priority 6 Greenway in the Greenways Master Plan. The Greenways Program supports approval of the P- MUD, with the 100-yr floodplain reserved as designated greenway on the Concept Plan. This area should serve as an undeveloped suburban greenway, for such functions as providing flood control, recreation, transportation, and serving economic and aesthetic purposes, as stated in the Greenways Master Plan. A Concept Plan is required to be approved by the Design Review Board prior to development of this property. The Parks & Recreation Board, the Greenways Program Manager, and Development Services staff will review the Concept Plan and make a recommendation to the Design Review Board. Because of its proximity to the proposed City Center project, staff is recommending that the property also be rezoned to apply the OV Overlay for additional restrictions on color, signage, and setbacks. The purpose of the OV Overlay district is to enhance the image of key entry points to the City by maintaining a sense of openness and continuity. It should be pointed out that with a recommendation for approval of applying the OV Overlay District, the Commission has made a determination that the subject property is located along • a gateway or major corridor to the City. R:WTLTRIPZLTRIPRODI P220041P0009830. DOC Created on 7/27/2004 7:38 AM • Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The Land Use Plan designates this property as Planned Development and Floodplains/Streams. Planned Development is shown on the plan where larger areas of land may develop with a mix, or collection, of uses. The Planned Development category emphasizes the need to consolidate properties and master plan the area to ensure appropriate placement of different uses. • Harvey Mitchell Parkway is a major arterial and Dartmouth is designated as a minor arterial on the Thoroughfare Plan. The property to the northwest was recently rezoned for the development of the Kenny Cotten's restaurant. Item Background: Portions of the subject property were annexed in 1967, 1969, and 1971, and were zoned R-1 as an interim designation that was assigned upon annexation. The property has never been platted. In 1992, the 2818 Extension Study was adopted in anticipation of the extension of FM 2818 from Texas Avenue to the East Bypass. This study recommended a mixture of uses in the proposed rezoning area, primarily residential with office, institutional, and a small amount of retail. The subject property was requested to be rezoned to C-1 as a part of a larger rezoning in 1993. Because of public opposition to the proposed location of a big-box retailer, and because of the support for the 2818 Extension Study, the applicant eventually withdrew the rezoning. The Land Use Plan was updated to reflect "Mixed Use" in the subject area in 1997 with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. A request for rezoning to C- 1 of just under 35 acres (that included this property) in 2002 was recommended for denial by the Commission because of opposition from area residents, inappropriate siting of a big-box retailer, and non- compliance with the mixed-use land use designation on the property. The applicant withdrew his application prior to the City Council meeting to explore his alternatives. In 2003 the Land Use Plan was updated with the Mixed Use Study to show this area as Planned Development. Commission Action Options: The on the question of rezoning, which The Commission options are: 1. Recommend approval; 2. Recommend denial; 3. Table indefinitely; or, 4. Defer action to a specified date. Commission acts as a recommending body will be ultimately decided by City Council. • Supporting Materials: R:WTLTRIPZLTRIPROD1PZ20041P0009830. DOC Created on 7/27/2004 7.•38 AM . 1. Location Map 2. Application 3. Aerial 4. Infrastructure and Facilities • R: WTLTRI PZLTRI PROD I PZ20041 P0009830. DOC Created on 7/77/2004 7:38 AM ~~ ~_J INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES Water: The site has access to an existing 24-in water main across Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. This line size should be sufficient to meet domestic and fire flow capacity for development under the requested zoning. Sewer: There is an existing 18-in sewer main along the southeast property line. Depending on actual sewer flow line, building location and site grading, the existing sewer should serve the site adequately. Streets: The Thoroughfare Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan, classifies Harvey Mitchell Parkway as a Minor Arterial. The Thoroughfare Plan also shows Dartmouth to be extended across the western corner of the subject property. The City Subdivision Regulations require a properly to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan as a condition of platting. In this case, Dartmouth will need to be addressed at the time of platting. Oversize Participation (OP) may be available. • Off-site Easements: At this time it does not appear the site requires off- site easements. Drainage: Drainage is generally southeast across the property toward Bee Creek Tributary A. Flood Plain: The southeast portion of the property is within FEMA designated 100-year floodplain. Oversize request: OP may be requested for the construction of Dartmouth. . Impact Fees: No impact fees established for this area NOTIFICATION: Legal Notice Publication(s): The Eagle: 8-3-04 and 8-24-04 Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 8-19-04 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: 9-9-04 Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200': 11 Response Received: None as of date of staff report C7 R: WTLTRI PZLTRI PROD1 PZ20041 P0009830. DOC Created on 7/77/7004 7:38 AM FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CASE NO. C) - .~~ ' i ~ , ¢ DATE 8UBMITTED - ''i, ` Q ~NING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONING) APPLICATION ~P-Mtn I~ .. _~~ .MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS If a petition for rezoning is denied by the City Council, another application for rezoning shall not be filed within a period of 180 days from the date of denial, except with permission of the Planning & Zoning Commission or City until. The following items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for consideration: pplication completed in full. 500.00 application fee Two (2) copies of a fully dimensioned map on 24"x36" paper showing: a. Land affected; b. Legal description of area of proposed change; c. Present zoning; d. Zoning classification of all abutting land; and e. Ail public and private rights-of--way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land. Written legal description of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is applicable). The Rezoning Supporting Information sheet completed in full. A CAD (dxf/dwg) or GIS (shp) digital file may be required for more complex rezoning reauests_ Date of Required Preapplication Conference: N/A APPLICANT'S INFORMATION: Name Kenny Cotten's L.L.C. (Kenneth Cotten) • Street Address 5541 Bear Lane Suite 111 City Co us Christi State TX Zip Code 78405 E-Mail Address KennethCcacravevrealestate tom Phone.Number (361) 816-5222 Fax Number _ (361) 289-5442 PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name Clint A. Bertrand Street Address 2338 Harvey Mitchell Parkway S City College Station State Texas Zip Code 77845 E-Mail Address Phone Number _(979) 693-1051 Fax Number This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated 7/17/1972 and recorded in Volume 30__ 5 ___, Page 853 of the Brazos County Deed Records. General Location of Property: Southwest side of_Harvev Mitchell Parkway midway beiween Texas 8 Rudder Fnr Address of Property: N/A Legal Description: Morgan Rector League Abstract 46 Acreage -Total Property: Existing Zoning: R-1 (Residential) Proposed Zoning: ~~~t Use o>: Prop~rty:_ Undovolonod posed Use of Property: Mixed Use e~t~oo Page 1 of 2 REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1.) List the changed or changing conditions in the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary. ~ the future extension of Dartmouth throuflh a portion of this property it is not likely to develop as single family residential. 2.) Indicate whether or not this zone change is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. If it is not, explain why the Plan is incorrect. _Yes. the zone change is in compliance with the elan List any other reasons to support this zone change. This property is located along the southwest side of Harvey Mitchell Paricwav and will also be impacted by the proposed extension of Dartmouth a minor arterial As such the land uses that are most appropriate ` are oft'ice. med/hioh density residential and some scattered commercial The P MUD request will support these uses. The applicant has prepared this application and supporting information and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true and correct. IF APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, APPLICATION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A POWER OF ATTORNEY STATEMENT FROM THE OWNER. 7 /~ zoos Signature of owner (o agent) or applicant Date • a~s~ Page 2 of 2 • AGENDA ITEM N0.7 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Pebble Creek Development Company • • • • Staff Report Date of Meeting: Project Manager: Email: August 19, 2p04 Trey Fletcher, AICP tf I e~~hgrC~ cstxsgQv_ Ytem: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an Ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Land Use Plan and the Thoroughfare Plan, for an area generally described as Pebble Creek Subdivision. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends amending the Land Use Plan designations for the four parcels as requested (see attached Proposed Land Use Plan map). Staff also recommends approval of the request to amend the Thoroughfare Plan for the Spearman Drive realignment; however, staff does not support the request to amend Congressional Drive. Congressional Drive should remain on the Plan as is. i) Applicant: Davis Young, Pebble Creek Development Co.Wµ~~~~ ~ ~~~ 3) Applicant Request A) hand Use Piart -The applicant is requesting that the Land Use Pian designations for the subject properties be amended to support future zoning requests and deveippment. Proposed Existing Existing Acres Use Parce/ 1 Regional Retail Regional Retail / Vacant 45 Office Parse/ 2 .Planned S~ Residential Low Vacant 19.4 Development pensity / Institutional Parcel 3 Planned SF Residential Low Vacant 8.1 Development Density Parce/ 4 Regional Retail SF Residential Vacant /Oil 29 Medium Density well pad site B) thoroughfare Plan -The applicant is requesting to amend the Thoroughfare Plan in the vicinity of Pebble Creek as follows: i) Spearman Drive -realign to intersect with Greens Prairie Road instead of Pebble Creek Parkway. _1 _ f1d_1 ~R • ii) Congressional Drive -remove future minor collector sectipn of Congressional Drive from the plan between Lakeway Drive and St. Andrews Driv¢. C) Each request, while part of a singular application, may be considered individually. C~ r~ u 3) Property Background Each of the parcels being considered for land use plan amendments was annexed in 1983. The existing zoning varies by tract. Pebble Creek is generally located to the east of 5H 6 and south of Greens Prairie Road. Annex®d Zoning Year Zoning Surrounding Established Land Use s Par•Ce! l 1983 Primarily C-1; as 1984, 1990, Public ROW on well as A-P & M-1 1992 all sides; near Pebble Creek Elements Parcel 2 1983 R-4 and C-1 1990 Single-family residential and public ROW Parce/3 1983 R-4 1990 Single-family residential, ROW and Lick Creek Parcel 4 1983 A-O Upon annexation Planned single- family residential medium density develo ment Access to the Pebble Creek development is primarily provided via Pebble Creek Parkway, with secondary access provided in the vicinity of Pebble Creek Elementary via Parkview Drive and Lakeway Drive. Two additional access points are shown on the Thoroughfare Plan: • Pebble Creek Parkway to the south toward Peach Creek Road • Congressional Drive to the west to the future Lakeway Drive extension. -~- fld_1 Qf~ • 4) Staff Analysis In general, the following concepts have been reviewed for the land use plan amendments requests associated with each parcel: A) The Unified Development 4rdinanC® states that the Land Use Plan "shall be amended only based upon changed or changing conditions ~n a particular area or in the City." Significant conditions continue to change in this area, including improvements to infrastructure and other capital improvements, additional residential subdivisions, annexation of the Greens Prairie Road corridor easterly to SW 30, and the construction of Fire Station #S. The Pebble Creek subdivision continues to expand in accordance with its master plan, while. Stone Forest, Woodland Hills, Spring Meadows, and most recently, Williams Creek have emerged since the last Comprehensive Plan update in 1997. The Greens Prairie /Rock Prairie Triangle Small Area Plan did not consider areas south of Greens Prairie Road. Parcels 2 & 3 are currently zoned a combination of R-4, Multi-family and C-i, General Commercial while the Land Use Plan shows Institutional and Single-family Low Density. B) The proposed amendment should be consistent with the goals, • objectives, policies and overall vision of the Comprehensive Plan. Each of the requested land use amendments is consistent with the text of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has identified many of these on the application. C) The subject parcels are suitable for the proposed land use designation based upon access, availability of utilities, consistency with existing and planned uses, environmental constraints and. compatibility with neighborhoods. Access - Parcels i & 4, proposed for Regional Retail, are situated at the intersections of arterial facilities along Greens Prairie Road. Each of the adjacent corners to Parcels i & 4 are already designated for Regional Retail uses. Recently, the Arrington Road Comprehensive Plan Amendment addressed the anticipated warrants for Regional Retail designations on the west side of SH 6, south of Greens Prairie Road. Utilities -All utilities are available in the area and has been addressed in a report prepared by a consultant to College Station Utilities. A detailed assessment of these requirements is attached. • The requested land use designations are consistent with existing and planned uses in the area. While few retail / service -~_ fld-1 Qft • establishments exist in the area, this is largely because such uses tend to follow residential development. Staff has noted a significant increase in this type of development pressure throughout southern portions of College Station since the establishment of residential development south of Rock Prairie Road. "Planned Development" has been requested for Parcels 2 & 3. The land use plan designation was created as a result of the "Mixed Use Study" adopted by the City of College Station fast year. in this study, the utilization of the Mixed Use land use plan designation was assessed. The study concluded that although a mixed use development should continue to be promoted, such development is more likely to occur as a mix bf uses distributed laterally across a site. Staff recommends that a combination of C-3, Light Commercial and A-P, Administrative-Professional or PDD, Planned Development would be appropriate to implement this land use plan designation. Environmental constraints - Staff is not aware of any environmental constraints that may be associated with Parcels 1-~. The Regional Retail proposed for Parcel 4 surrounds an active oil well pad site. Compatibility with existing neighborhoods -Land use goal #3 states that College Station should continue to protect, preserve and • enhance existing and future neighborhoods. Uses proposed for Parcels 1-4, based on their respective sites and situations and proposed land use designations, are anticipated to be of little impact tb adjacent or nearby residential developments. Significant topography differences exist on Parcels 2 & 3 that should minimize adjacency issues. D) The proposed amendment will not create pressure to change the land use designation. of other properties, unless the change is in the long-term interests of the community. This amendment should alleviate most pressures for future changes to the land- Use and Thoroughfare plans in the area; however, there is always the possibility that future requests may be made or deemed necessary. Earlier this year, the Land Use Plan was amended on request of the City to more accurately reflect certain conditions, such as applying institutional and Park to the Pebble Creek Elementary site and Pebble Creek Park, respectively. • -d- old-1 ~R • In general, the following concepts have been review®d for the thorou~rht~re plan amendment requests associated with each corridor: A) Spearman Drive -This future Minor Collector section is shown on the Thoroughfare Plan to connect the end of Spearman Drive to Pebble Creek Parkway along the rear portion of Parcel 2. The request is to realign the future section to intersect with Greens Prairie Road, opposite Fire Station #5 and the associated median opening. B) Congressional Drive -This future Minor Collector section is shown on the Thoroughfare Plan connecting the Pebble Creek subdivision to Lakeway Drive. The request is to remove this section from the plan. C) Opportunities and constraints are recognized with both thoroughfare requests. i) Spearman Drive -The Spearman extension realignment will result in an additional point of ingress/egress-for the Pebble Creek subdivision directly to Greens Prairie Road. Although a raised median i5 under construction with the widening of the facility to 4 lanes, it is the intent of the realignment to utilize the median • opening opposite the new fire station. The realignment will also reduce trips along Pebble Creek Parkway and more adequately provide access to and from any proposed development on Parcel 2. Staff is concerned about the number and distribution of access points along Greens Prairie Road, but the proposed location as proposed is In compliance with the City's access management policies and spacing requirements for collector roadways. ii) Congressional Drive -The proposed alternative by the applicant is not viable. Significant congestion has developed in the area due to limited access options at the present time. Failure to implement additional connections to/from Pebble Creek via Congressional Drive will likely exacerbate this condition. -The request to remove this future minor collector will result in fewer planned ingress/egress points for the Pebble Creek subdivision as a whole. Implementation of the Minor Collector as identified on the thoroughfare plan will, in time, provide significant relief for congestion that occurs in the vicinity of Pebble Creek Elementary ahd at the intersection of Greens Prairie Road and SH 6. Significant benefit should also be derived from improvements to the SH 6 corridor as a result of TxDOT plans and the extension of l.akeway Drive to the south connecting to an unnamed planned minor arterial. In conjunction with TxDOT's plans to convert the 2-way frontage to 1-way, freeway entry and exit ramps will be • redistributed and a new grade separation with turnarounds is planned at Nantucket Drive. Further, City Public Works staff have • been contacted this summer to conduct a traffic calming study in vicinity of Pebble Creek Elementary on Parkview and Lakeway drives. Implementation of the thoroughfare plan as is (inclusive of plans by TxDOT), the widening of Greens Prairie Road, and changed patterns that should result from CSISD's action to rezone the elementary and other schools should improve the congested conditions without additional expenditures by the City to address this issue. 5) Staff Recommendations Staff recommends amending the Land Use Plan designations far the four panrels as requested (see attached Proposed Land Use Plan map). Staff also recommends approval of the request to amend the Thoroughfare Plan for the Spearman Drive realignment; however, staff does not support the request to amend Congressional Drive. Congressional Drive should remain on the Plan a5 is. u • -~+- fld_1'2R fz .. ^~ ~ ~ ~rarutPortatiort ~n.Sinearin9 ,~na~~~ Joseph O. Blaschke, D. Eng., P.E., President 1008 Woodcreek Orlve, College Station, Texas 77845 979/693-5800 Fax: 979/693-5870 a-mail: tea 1®tca.net April 1, 2004 <.a f ~._; ~~~ ~~ r, ~r, ~. Mr. Davis M. Young Pebble Creek Development Company 4500 Pebble Creek Parkway a "` College Station, Texas 77845 Rl/: Spearman Drive Extension Dear Mr. Young: As you know, Spearman Drive is a minor collector within Pebble Creek Subdivision, extending westward and northward from its eastern termination at Pebble Creek Parkway to its northern termination south of Greens Prairie. Road, at the south corner of Parcel 2, as. shown in 1~igure 1. Eventually, Spearman Drive will be extended northward into Parcel 2. Logically, this extension should intersect with Greens Prairie Road to provide additional accessibility into the Pebble Creek Subdivision. It is my understanding that Parcel 2 has not been developed at this time, and the ultimate development that will take place within Parce12 has not been determined. Currently, Pebble Creek ~'arkway, a major collector street, intersects Greens Prairie Road along the east side of Parcel 2. l~entually, Pebble Creek Parkway will be extended north of Greens Prairie Road. West of Parcel 2-~s a partially developed acreage that will not have a roadway extended through its south end due 4 existing development of the Pebble Creek Subdivision. An existing intersection of a roadway within this development intersects Greens Prairie Road about 2100 feet west of Pebble Creek Parkway. On the west side of the partially developed acreage is the intersection of Lakeway Drive anti Greens Prairie Road. The intersections of Green Prairies Road with Pebble Creek Parkway and 'Lakeway Drive are about 3800 feet apart: It is my understanding that a widening project for Greens Prairie Road is currently under construction. When completed, Greens Prairie Road, a major arterial, will be afour-lane roadway divided by a raised median. Typically, divided arterials are designed with a minimum number of median openings. Ideally, median openings should be restricted to about one every quarter of a mile. However, often median openings are separated by distances less than a quarter of a mile. A .minimum separation of about 1,000 feet is considered adequate. If Spearman Drive is extended northward into Parcel 2 and intersects Greens Prairie Road, the question that must be addressed is where should this intersection be located? Considering that the, existing intersections on Greens Prairie Road east and west of Parce12 are located about 2,100 ':feet apart, the logical location for the Spearman Drive intersection should be near the center of the Specializing In: Traffic Engineering Roadway Design Accident Analysis • -- -.... Mr. Davis M. Young Aprll 1, 2004 Page 2 two existing intersections, a distance of about 11000 to 1,100 feet from Pebble Creek Parkway. A fire station will be constructed on the north side of Greens Prairie Road "across the street" from the Parcel2 site. A median opening will be located to accommodate~access to and egress from the fire station at a point about 1,07(1.feet from the centerline of Pebbld Creek Parkway. This median opening is located within, tho desired:1,000 tQ 1,100 separation from Pebble Creek Parkway. Hence, it would be advantageous to locate the intersection of Spearman Drive and Greens Prairie Road at the. proposed median opening to the fire station, The recommended interSaction of Spearman Drive and Greens prairie Road is illustrated in a Conceptual Plan for Parcel 2, shown in Figure 2. Parcel 2 may be developed in a different manner; however, the location of the Spearman Drive extension should be consistent with any development. Locating the Spearman Drive intersection at the proposed median opening will be advantageous to the public. The intersection will make Pebble Creek Subdivision more accessible to Greens prairie Road for its residents and expedite emergency response to the Subdivision as well. The Spearman Drive intersection .is located a sui~icient distance &orn the pebble Creek Parkway intersection so that traffic operations at the two adjacent intersections will not be interfering with one anothex. Tn addition, if the Spean~an brive extension is not located at the proposed median opening but at some distance east or west of tine median opening, the Spearman Drive intersection will not have a median opening because it would be located too close to the proposed fire station's median opening. ~ Such conditions would encourage a high number of U-turning vehicles at the f re station's median opening. Locating Spearman Drive opposite the proposed median opening will minimize the U-turning volumes. In summary, the best location for terminating the Spearman Drive extension to Greens prairie .Road is at the proposed median opening for the fire station, This intersection location is consistent with desired spacings between intersections, is consistent with desired spacings for median openings on major arterial streets, maximizes accessibility, and minimizes the number of U-turning vehicles. Please contact me if you have any questions. ~AvAv~~~~ tfully submitted, ~~ •• EPN O BLABCHK~~: J eph .Blaschke, D.Eng., P.E. •~•••+.•••••••~ President 422'00 , : a JDB/sb Enclosures • Miigb~ MEMORANDUM TO: Dale Schepers, P.E., City of College Station Ed Savage, City of College Station Trey Fletcher, City of College Station FROM: Thomas Haster, P.E., Freese and Nichols, Inc. Jessica L. Brown, P.E., Freese and Nichols, Inc. SUBJECT: Draft Water System Analysis Report of Animate Habitat, Ltd. and Pebble Creek Developments DATE: August 11, 2004 This memorandum report presents the results of a study of water distribution system improvements needed for the existing Pebble Creek development and the proposed Animate Habitat, Ltd. development. Pebble Creek is approximately 1300 acres, and Animate Habitat, Ltd. is • approximately 1100 acres. Pebble Creek is expected to build out within seven years, and Animate Habitat, Ltd. is expected to buildout within fifteen to eighteen years. Freese and Nichols, Inc. (FNI) projected populations and water demands for the buildout of both developments with input from the City and used the City's InfoWater model to determine improvements needed to meet the buildout water demands. 1. EXISTING WATER SYSTEM This area is currently supplied from the southwest by a 24"/18" line from the Greens Prairie Tank Elevated Tank. System improvements currently under design which were considered completed for this study were the 18"Barron Road water line, a portion of the 24"line along FM 2154, and the 18" water line along Rock Prairie Road. The 24" line in FM 2154 will be extended in the future along the future State Highway 40. The Rock Prairie water line will provide an 18" loop and improve supply to the area from the northwest once it is completed. These ongoing system improvements are shown as red dashed lines on Figure 1. 2. POPULATIONS & WATER DEMANDS The City provided FNI with the proposed land use plans for both developments, existing platted lots for the Pebble Creek development, proposed plats for the Pebble Creek development, proposed land use densities, phasing plans of both developments, and development standards from the B/CS Unified Design Cruidelines Manual. The proposed land uses are shown on Figure 1; however, recent and proposed revisions in isolated areas are not reflected on the map. • Freese and Nichols, Inc. • Engineers • Environmental Scientists • Architects 4055 International Plaza • Suite 200 • Fort Worth, Texas 76109-4895 (817) 735-7300 • Metro (81 T) 429-1900 • Fax (817) 735-7491 • Draft Water System Analysis Report of Animate Habitat, Ltd. and Pebble Creek Developments August 11, 2004 Page 2 of 8 • • FNI developed populations and water demand projections for the following four demand conditions: • Average Day Demands, • Maximum Day Demands, • Peak Hour Demands and • Maximum Day Demands under Fire Flow Conditions. The assumptions used for developing the projected populations and water demands are summarized in Table 1. For the Pebble Creek development, the proposed number of units for a majority of the development has previously been determined; therefore, the actual number of units was used for projecting population. In areas where the number of units was unknown, the number of units was calculated based on the proposed land use densities. Table 1 Land Use & Demand Assumptions for Pro osed,Pebble Creek and Animate Habitak Ltd. Develo menu Low Densi Residential 2 units/acre Medium Densi Residential 4.5 units/acre Hi Densi Residential 9 units/acre Residential Attached 15 units/acre Residential Peo le er Unit 2.67 Commercial Peo le er Acre 30 Industrial Peo le er Acre 15 Avera a Da to Peak Hour Peakin Factor 4 Avera a Da to Maximum Da Peakin Factor 2.25 Residential Avera a Da Demand 165 cd Commercial Retail Avera a Da Demand 30 cd Commercial Office Avera e Da Demand 60 cd Industrial Avera e Da Demand 60 cd Residential Fire Flow 1000 m Commercial & Industrial Fire Flow 2500 m The projected average day per capita demands shown in Table 1 for residential, commercial and industrial land uses were developed using historical water use records from the 2003 Southside Water Study performed by FNI. A higher per capita water use was used than the Development Guidelines because historical water usage for existing residences in Pebble Creek showed to be higher than 100 gpcd. Peaking factors and people per acre were obtained from the Development Guidelines. Freese and Nichols, Inc. • Engineers • Environmental Scientists • Architects 4055 International Plaza • Suite 200 • Fort Worth, Texas 76109-4895 (817) 735-7300 • Metro (817) 429-1900 • Fax (817) 735-7491 Draft Water System Analysis Report of Animate Habitat, Ltd. and Pebble Creek Developments • August 11, 2004 Page 3 of 8 2.1 Existing Population & Water Demands The existing estimated residential population for Pebble Creek is 2,814 and is shown in Table 2. Approximately 13.76 commercial acres are developed, and approximately 51.9 industrial acres are developed. The population was estimated based on the total number of existing residential lots that were developed as of July 2004. Animate Habitat, Ltd. is expected to begin development in late 2004 or early 2005. The resulting average day demand is 0.53 MGD. The maximum day demand is 1.19 MGD, and the peak hour demand is 2.12 MGD. 2.2 Projected 2011 (Interim) Population & Water Demands The interim phase analyzed was for the buildout of the Pebble Creek development and partial development of the Animate Habitat, Ltd. development. The Animate Habitat, Ltd. development is expected to develop from west to east. The projected 2011 populations and water demands are shown in Table 3. The residential population for Pebble Creek was developed from a blend of land use by acreage and the number of units currently built. The projected residential populations for Animate Habitat, Ltd. are a product of the number of acres, theunits/per acre and residential people per unit for each land use category. The buildout residential population for Pebble Creek is 5,541, and the projected 2011 residential population for Animate Habitat, Ltd. is 5,351. The total residential population for both developments is 10,892. The resulting average day demand is 2.27 MGD. The maximum day demand is 6.11 MGD, and the peak hour demand is 9.08 MGD. • 2.3 Projected Buildout Population & Water Demands The second phase analyzed was for the buildout of both developments. The projected buildout populations and water demands are shown in Table 4. The buildout residential population for Animate Habitat, Ltd. is 14,126. The total buildout residential population for both developments is 19,667. The resulting average day demand is 3.73 MGD. The maximum day demand is 8.40 MGD, and the peak hour demand is 14.92 MGD. 3. WATER SYSTEM ANALYSIS The water distribution system was analyzed for the two phases: interim and buildout. The proposed development average day, maximum day and peak hour demands were added to the current water system model for each phase. The recently constructed improvements and near term improvements were also added to the model. Because of the lower elevations in the developments, pressures were not a controlling factor in determining future improvements. Additional transmission capacity will be needed to supply both interim and buildout water demands and projected fire flows. The model results are summarized in Tables 5, 6 and 7 for existing, 2011 and buildout demand conditions. The proposed system improvements are shown on Figure 2 by phase. • Freese and Nichols, Inc. • Engineers • Environmental Scientists • Architects 4055 International Plaza • Suite 200 • Fort Worth, Texas 76109-4695 (817) 735-7300 • Metro (817) 429-1900 • Fax (817) 735-7491 • Draft Water System Analysis Report of Animate Habitat, Ltd. and Pebble Creek Developments August 11, 2004 Page 4 of 8 3.1 Interim (2011) Improvements The improvements needed to support interim development, or the buildout of Pebble Creek and seven year development of Animate Habitat, are all on-site water system improvements. These improvements are shown as red dashed lines on Figure 2. The following improvements are recommended to serve 2011 demands: • A 12" line along Hwy. 6 from Greens Prairie Road to the existing 12" line to support future retail development in Pebble Creek. • A 16" water line loop along Rock Prairie Road from Greens Prairie Road and along the south property line of Pebble Creek to an extension of the existing 12" line in Pebble Creek Parkway. It is anticipated that this line will be extended further east on Rock Prairie Road for future development outside the scope of this study. • A 12" water line extension along a future road in the far east portion of Pebble Creek. • An extension of the 12" line along Pebble Creek Parkway as a 12" water line to the south property line of Pebble Creek and as a 16" to the future major thoroughfare in Animate Habitat, Ltd. • A proposed 16" line south along Pebble Creek Parkway and west along a future thoroughfare to the 18" line in the Animate Habitat, Ltd. development. • • An extension of the existing 18" water line in Lakeway Drive to the proposed 16" line in Animate Habitat, Ltd. • A 12" line connecting the existing 8" line along Hwy. 6 and the proposed 16" loop in the Animate Habitat, Ltd. development. 3.2 Buildout Improvements The improvements to support buildout water demands in both developments include both on-site and off-site system improvements. These improvements are shown as dashed green lines on Figure 2. Additional off-site improvements will also be needed to improve the operation of the Greens Prairie Tank. The improvements needed for buildout demands include: • A 12" loop along future major thoroughfares in the Animate Habitat, Ltd. development that will supply the eastern portion of the development. (on-site) • A 24" line along FM 2154 from the existing 30" at Rock Prairie Road to the existing 12" in Graham Road and along future SH 40 from FM 2154 to the existing 24" line. (off-site) • Freese and Nichols, Inc. • Engineers • Environmental Sdentists • Architects 4055 International Plaza • Sufte 200 • Fort Worth, Texas 76109-4895 (817) 735-7300 • Metro (817) 429-1900 • Fax (817) 735-7491 Draft Water System Analysis Report of Animate Habitat, Ltd. and Pebble Creek Developments • August 11, 2004 Page 5 of 8 4. RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed phasing and sizing of water system improvements are shown on Figure 2. The proposed 18" line along Lakeway Drive and the proposed 16" line along Rock Prairie Road were also sized to allow for future water system expansion to the south and east. At least one off-site system improvement, the 24" line in FM 2154 and future SH 40, will be needed to serve buildout demands. Additional off-site system improvements will be needed to improve the operation of the Greens Prairie Elevated Tank and provide additional transmission capacity to this area. It is recommended that additional off-site improvements be evaluated as a part of the Water Master Plan to ensure that the improvements will be adequately sized for future development in the existing City limits and future service area in the ETJ. • C~ Freese and Nichols, Inc. • Engineers • Environmental Saentists • Architects 4055 International Plaza • Suite 200 • Fort Worth, Texas 76109-4895 (817) 735-7300 • Metro (817) 429-1900 • Fax (817) 735-7491 r~ u a a~ A N a "~db x O O a~i ~r .~ >, ~n °o N N ri 00 4-a 0 ~- ~ w fsda b bA 0 w 0 Lam' ... Uyy /"` i.i O N ~ ~ ."~ ~ N ~ ~, c A ~~ ~ ~ ~ a U O U ~ as ~a '~ ~s W ~ b a .~ x 0 0 ' o 0 0 O ~ v ~-+ ~--~ .~ N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i. CO ~ x ...+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O A ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 O ao A o ~~C7 'Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. '~ ~ o o Q a .. y c7 •~ ~ O a> ~ a o ~ A ~ C ~ _ cv ~ d ~ a0+ O a ~ x ~' c ~" ~ ° 'Y '~ `n ° a ~ a b b ~ -- d , ~' . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ¢ 0 ~ 'b ° ~ w .~ •~ .~ ~ ~ o ~ , ~~ ~ b b o ~ ~ 'ky '~ e V] C/1 W W W /~ V p rV b a x ~~ d 0 0 0 ' o o g o O .~ .r N N N N W ~ ~ O ~ O O O O N N '~ }' + C C O O C ~ O ~- O ~ ax ~ N ~ O N O t~ N O N ' N e-1 ~ O O + O .r O O O .~ C ~ C O C O C 0 O O O y ~ ~ O O O O O ~ A o 0 0 0 0 0 .0. 0 0 ~ ~ ~ dA ~ ~ M 00 er R ` O M O M O~ ?~ p O O I~ M ~ M 00 H ~ ~ p" N tt .~ 00 N .-~ !f. t~ h H N N A O O l~ M ~--~ p" N ~ .-~ 00 D N N ~O 00 O R O ~ l~ N h ~ O Q~ O a 'S7 p O O O O M O ' O~ ~ ~'+ y '~' N [~ =d u ~ a~ ~ c e ~ a w o o o o o~oo ~o 0 0 o o o o o~o ~ o~ o; ~~ ~~ ~ o 0 o c o ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ a d a o .~ O ++ ~ ~ O ~ A ~ C ~ ~ , ~ A A ~ ~ O 3 ~ $ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ x ~ o ~ b ~ ~ ~ `~ ~' ° a , , ~~ fn 'in .~ O ~ cd 'O Cp ~ Q~i Qi Qi °° O ,O --~ ' w a ~ ~ A~~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ o ~Q '~ ~' , ~ F ~ V~ ~ Q wM. ^~ in ~n ~ a a G V S a a ~° d a • d 1~ ~s x RS b W O v b ~. a d A ~ ~ N '~ a ~ .° ~3 N ~ N ~ A U a~i ~ M ~ ~ w a ~" .d "7 O ~ ~ b ~ ~,; I H .r b W ~ N ~ ~ A ~ ~ w o ~ aQi" o ~' 'e ,~~ a `~ a b N v ° ° o ~i • ~, cv A, ~~ ~ o 0 ~ N N Ada L~ y b~A 0 w O U 0 o ° Q o ° $ g ~ 3 ~ ~ p ~--~ 0 ~--~ ?5 ~--~ !~ , N N N GTr ~y ~ ~~ O '-+ M O O O O ~ ax ~ O~ ~ N 00 O 00 N O ~ Q O ~ ~ r' C O T C ~ . ~ O O Q ~ p ~ a~ o~ ao 0o O oo ~-+ .~ O ~ N 00 O O O O ~ Q O O ~ O 0 0 0 A~ ~ o ~ ~ v o ~ n 77 N ~-+ ~--~ V) N N 0 0 a N N ~ 00 O~ .-~ r ~ n M O~ ~-+ t+~ DO 00 ti ~ r+ ~ L L O tl' ~ d 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ N ~ N .p ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ A q o v1 ~ A ' ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ x ~ o 'd C _° _° v' a : of ~ •,_, ~ •„ C C a a b b b ~ ob ~ a; '" ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~~ b ' w ¢ c~ ~ b ° w ,~ o y ~ ~ y d. q .~O ~. '~ i+ ._.. '~! b H O ~ ~ v~ V] C/) H Qi w I ai Q~i ~. V ~p7 H -~ i~ ,~ b a x 0 S 8 ~ ~ ~ g 8 N N W N W O ~ M ~O N O M ~ 0~0 -00 ~~ ~ M O M 0 0 0 0 . 0 C ax ~ v1 v1 ao ~ h h o0 \C ~n O ~ N t~ O M ~--~ t~ O~ IA A ,'; n 0 °N O~ O O ' ~ C O . ~ v1 O O~ t~ 00 O N O~ ~O N DO 0 0 0 _ ~ r-I N N N N ~ g o 0 0 o d o 0 0 0 0 Q ~ d H ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ O O N r O 0 ' ~ ~ ~ O M th ~ ~ C p d h O~ ' D D F CL et Vs .~ N . tM c+i M N N M p O O ~ Oa M ~ ~' ~--~ •--~ ~ h v. ~ c` M~1' .Ny ~ O p .. ~ Q .-~ .~ ~ C ~ y O O~ ~--~ M V1 ~O ~,' y 'C ~ ~ N cri u a ~ Q a o ~ a b O ~ M l`~ l~ l~ v1 0a v1 1n d l~ I~ 00 N ' lam O M WI O O ~+ ~ y ~O 00 ~G N eY ~ N rl 'rl V'1 ~ O~ M "" 00 H N N Q~ ~ $ ~ .~ ~ ~ . d ~ ~ p A `~ c ~ A ~ A ~ o h 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ x ~ 'o ~v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a, ° . ~ p o . a a ~ a o ~, .. °3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x x x o o.~-- W '~ •~ •~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ v w . w w w a ~.~ b '~' ~ ~ a: .4: ,~ ~ _ ~ .v C ~ ~ 7 v p ~ in in ~4 aau; U .~ '~ V .a a • a O N A N app cd "~Gb a a~i .~ W 0 O rs: .... ~, ri °o N ~ ~--i 00 4r 0 00 a~ Adw b 8 a 0 a A b .~ ~y~ "V U d ~a ~ ~ r.+ C~ ~ H ° H a A 3 H D a 0 a b V a~ ~O a 0 N O N O O w O U w ~ o° o° °o v°, vii ~ ,F", ~ .- ~ .~ .-~ N N N w ~ --i . O ~ ~ ~ ~D ~-+ .~ Q~ O O O O ax ~ ,~ V'1 V1 h 1n 00 h ~ t/l N r~ (~ N N N ~--~ N N N O A ~ M ~ N O O N O O O O ri C C vi c o 0 ~ ~ a M N O ~ M O O O :O ~ bD ~+ O C tV O C C O O ~ ~ A ~ ~ O N T ~ M O M ~C N O oo + -i ~ '-+ N l ~ ~ ~ N 00 N N O -~ N ~--~ et N N ~ . .~ O a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ N ' ~ ~ r n O~ 0 ~ ~ ~"' u ' d °° p` o o d a ~ ~ . ~ ~ a> ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ ~ d A ~ '~ y A .Q p 7 a ~ ~ ~ ~ a a d b b b ~ ~ ~ ayi a~'i 'caj ~ ~ ~~ ~ • LYi ~i , ~ W ~ ¢ Rr ~ ~-' . ~ _ ld . . ~ ~+ g .~ R 'v W ~ w w ~c ~ a ~ ~ ~ `~ ' c0 'C °~' °~' a~ a, ;b a 0 88 ~ ~ ; ~ , ~ ~ h ' ^ C C/1 C/1 LYi Q:i ~ ~. U ~ b 1~ ~s y t~ ~I.~d e~ d' o g o '' o00 0 3 S b °°~ a ~ o N N ~p W N N N O A M ~D N O M ~ ,. O~0 `Q~Q; ~' ~ ~ M O M 0 0 0 0 0 0: ax ~ vi v~ oo ~ v, v~ oo '' ~ h c ~ c -. ~ .a V7 O~ 00 N ~O N 00 ~O N N O l~ O Oc 0 0 0 ~ N N ~ pp A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d ~ A ~ ~ t~ t~ [~ ti M N ~D ~D ~O 00 ~D o0 eh M ~O M l~ r O N l~ ~ en O M h O~ ~p ~p E,,, a ~ N ^' N M M M y N .~"' . v'i N p O N 00 M M a M St w ~ ~ ~ M ~ N `° O ~ . .+ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ' ~ M ~ ~ H d O~ D .-~ et ~O O M h ~D ~ ~ ~ ~ N M ad ~ o ~ a 'b O et M [~ n n~ O, h M O ~ ~ 00 N n O M .~ O O ~"' y ~ 00 \C N ~ ^' v1 H v'i V'i ~d ~ D ' O '~ ~' ~ A `~ o ~ d A 33 `~ ~ h Q _ o w O ~ ~ cd ~ ~ O w a ~ .~, ~ .~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ b b b ~: ~ ~ d a~'i ayi a~'i ~ ie a ~ ~i ~i ~ p G 'a7 G~7 , ~ ~ , ~ ~ 'v d ~ w w w ~ b~° 5 r: 9 °~ 9 ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ b . v~ . rn . v~ a ~ aaw V ~ a ~.., ~1 ~I a Table 5 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Water Demands Tank Avg Day/ Avg Day/ Fill Time P.erik Hour Peak Hour Drain Time Tank Vol. Tank Rei'illin Tank RefilGn Avg Day hliflow Current at Pk Hr Location MG (MGD Status hr * MGD , Status hr Greens Prairie Tank 2.00 9.54 Filling 3.35 -2.98- I)raitting 10.75 Park Place Tank 3.00 5.60 Fillin 8.57 -5.75 Drainin 8.35 Inflow Pressure Inflow Pressure. DELIVERY SOURCE MGD si MGD si Dowlin Road P.S. 26.13 88 26.38 87 Maximum System Pressure 123 11`8 Minimum S stem Pressure 63 61 * Drain Time @ Peak Hour is based on 2/3 of the tank volume * Fill Time @ Average Day is based on 2/3 of the tank volume. Avera a Da Peak Hour TOTAL SYSTEM DEMAND 10.98 MGD 35:12 MGD R_ CVCtP.m nneratinn Tank AvgDay/ Avg Day/ Fill-Time .Peak Hour Pesk Hour Drain Time Tank Vol. Tank Refillin Tank Refillin AvgDay Inflow Current at Pk Hr Location MG MGD Status hr * MGD Stt~tus hr Greens Prairie Tank 2.00 6.22 Filling 5.15 -3.74. Draining 8.55 Park Place Tank 3.00 7.72 Fillin 6.22 -5.20 Draintn 9.24 Inflow Pressure Inflow Pressure DELIVERY SOURCE MGD si) h GD si Dowlin Road P.S. 24.93 93 26.17 ;'88 Maximum System Pressure 124 1I8 Minimum S stem Pressure 65 61 C. System Operation w ith 24" line to existing Greens Prairie 24" lJ Table 6 • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IONS (BUILDOUT FOR PEBBLE CREEK & 7 YEAR CONDITIONS FOR ANIMATE HABITAT, LTD.) A. Water Demands Avera e Da Peak Hour TOTAL SYSTEM DEMAND 12.6 MGD 41.0 MGD B. System Operation Tank Avg Day/ AvgDay/ Fill Time Peak hour Peak Hour Drain Time Tank Vol. Tank Refillin Tank Refillin Avg Day Inflow .Current at Pk Hr Location MG MGD Status hr * MGl) Status hr Greens Prairie Tank 2.00 3.82 Filling 5.50 -7.$7 Draining 4.07 Park Place Tank 3.00 6.89 Fillip 6.96 -5:.47 Drainn 8.78 Inflow Pressure Inflow Pressure DELIVERY SOURCE (MGD si) MGD psi Dowlin Road P.S. 25.30 91 27.60 82 Maximum System Pressure 124 1'0$ Minimum S stem Pressure 64 54 C. System Operation with 24" line to existing Greens Prairie 24" Tank Avg Day/ Avg Day/ Fill Time Peak Hour Peak Hour Drain Time Tank Vol. Tank Refillin Tank Refillin Avg Day'. Inflow Current at Pk Hr Location MG (MGD).. Status (hr)* MGD Status 6r Greens Prairie Tank 2.00 8.73 Filling 3:66 -7.23 Draining 4.43 Park Place Tank 3.00 5.00 Fillin 9.59 -5.94 Drainin 8.09 inflow Pressure Iniow Pressure DELIVERY SOURCE MGD si GD si Dowlin Road P.S. 26.40 $7 27.80 $1 Maximum System Pressure 123 ld2 Minimum S stem Pressure 63 54 * Drain Time @ Peak Hour is based on 2/3 of the tank volume * Fill Time @ Average Day is based on 2/3 of the tank volume. • Table 7 • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM BUILDOUT CONDITIONS FOR PEBBLE CREEK & ANIMATE HABITAT, LTD. A. Water Demands Avera a )a Peak Hour. TOTAL SYSTEM DEMAND 14.1 IvIGD 46.8 MGD B. System Operation Tank Avg Day/ Avg Day/ Fill Time peak Hour peak hour Drain Time Tank Vol. Tank Reflllin Tank 12efillin Avg Day Inflow Current at Pk Hr Location MG MGD Status hr * MGl) Status , hr Greens Prairie Tank 2.00 7.39 Filling 4.33.: -12.15 Draining 2.63 Park Place Tank 3.00 4;92 Fillin 9.76 -6.69 brainin 7.18 Inflow Pressure Inflow Pressure DELIVERY SOURCE MGD si MGD i Dowlin Road P.S. 26.40 87 28.00 '80 Maximum System Pressure 122 105 Minimum S stem Pressure 63 53 * Drain Time @ Peak Hour is based on 2/3 of the tank volume * Fill Time @ Average Day is based on 2/3 of the tank volume. • u ~~ ~.ULIU,I. ti1.111(.)N FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case No.~_I DateSubmilted V''l~rJ1~~ 3`~ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION (Check all applicable) X Land Use Amendment X Thoroughfare Amendment X alignment /location ^ classification The following items must be submitted by the established deadline dates for consideration: ~ $850 application and review fee 1~1 Two (2) copies of a fully dimensioned map on 24" X 36" paper showing: a. Land affected; b. Present zoning of property and zoning classification of all abutting properties; c. Current land use plan classification and proposed land use plan changes; d. Current land use classification of all abutting property; e. Current and proposed thoroughfare alignments General location and address of property; ~ Total acres of property; and All applicable Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request form(s) completed in full. following information must be completed before an application is accepted for review. APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: (if different from owner, a complete affidavit shall be required) Name: Pebble Creek Develoament Co. -Davis Young Street Address: 4500 Pebble Creek Parkway City: College Station State: Texas Zip Code: 77845-8942 E-mail: Davis YCc~uebblecreek.ora Phone Number: 979-690-0996 Fax Number: Please consider Pebble Creek Development's request for action on 6 separate items. PLANNER'S INFORMATION: Name Jessica Jimmerson -Planning and Land Use Solutions Street Address 3211 Westwood Main City Brvan State TX Zip Code 77807 all Address iiCcDDlusDlannina.com (Please email staff comments etc 1 ne Number 224-4340 Fax Number 775-5107 6/13/03 Page 1 of 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM Parcel 1 - LUP Amendment he following is required if an amendment to the Land Use Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the nested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Land Use Plan designation: Retail Regional. Office Requested Land Use Plan designation: Retail Regional _~„ Explain the reason for this Land Use Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change in the land use plan designation: Explain why the requested land use designation is more appropriate than the existing designation. This area is ideallYsituated for commercial retail development intended to serve a broad spectrum of the copulation. Since the Land Use Plan designation for this tract was last reviewed several changes have occurred in the area. Primarily. all three of the other comers of this major intersection have been reassessed considering thethe kx~tion of HWY 40 and the City's new business park among other things. Updating the Land Use Plan designation of this tract should be considered a housekeepingitem, not a significant change to the Plan. How does the requested land use designation further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? Reassessment of the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for these-areas is needed to adjust the original vision to current conditions. The following goals and objectives stated in the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan support this action. -Land Use Goals and Objec~ves al #1 -College Station should continue to provide and locate adequate amounts of appropriately zoned land for all necessary types of land uses in an efficient, convenient, harmonious, and ecologically sound manner. • Objective 1.2 -College Station should promote the use of vacant land in the existing sewershed area where City infrastructure and services are readily available in order to avoid costs to the City of providing extended services. • Objective 1.4 -College Station should idenfify the most appropriate land use for all undeveloped parcels within its City limits and its ETJ and use its development powers (including zoning and capital improvement programs) to guide the locations of desired development. • Objective 1.5 -College Station should maintain its Comprehensive Plan through periodic updates as changes occur in growth rates or major development policies. Goal #2 -College Station should continue to provide for the orderly development. of existing and future land uses. • Objective 2.2 -College Station should develop standards that promote a reduction of land use intensity as development approaches established and future residential areas. • Objective 2.3 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development in areas between neighborhoods, such as neighborhood retail. Goal #10 -College Station should monitor growth over the next 20 years to assure that the comprehensive Plan is kept current. • Objective 10.1 -College Station should review and update of the Comprehensive Plan as warranted based upon changes in population growth, A & M enrollment policies and economic development. 2.Q6 -Economic Development Goals and ObJecthres Goal #1 -College Station should continue to encourage divers cation of the local economy. • Objective 1.1 -College Station should continue to encourage industrial, commercial, and residential development to serve residents' needs, which is in harmony with the environment and surrounding development patterns. applicant has prepansd this application and cert~es that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true co ~ 5- a--7 e u re Ti 'j)ac,.ri s o U.noJ ~ ~ d e~ri~- Date 6/13/03 Page 2 of 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM Parcel 2 - LUP Amendment he following is required if an amendment to the Land Use Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the ested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Land Use Plan designation: Institutional. Low Density Sinale Family Requested Land Use Plan designation: Neiahbofiood Retail Explain the reason for this Land Use Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change in the land use plan designation: Explain why the requested land use designation is more appropriate than the existing designation. How does the requested land use designation further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? Reassessment of the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for these areas is needed to adjust the original vision to the current conditions. The followina aoals and objectives stated in the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan support ~s coon. 2.03 -Land Use Goals and Objectives #1 -College Station should continue to provide and locate adequate amounts of appropriately zoned land II necessary types of land uses in an efficient, convenient, hanmonlous, and ecologically sound manner. • Objective 1.2 -College Station should promote the use of vacant land in the existing sewershed area where City infrastructure and services are readily available in order to avoid costs to the City of providing extended services. • Objective 1.4 -College Station should identify the most appropriate land use for all undeveloped parcels within its City limits and its ETJ and use its development powers (including zoning and capital improvement programs) to guide the locations of desired development. • Objective 1.5 -College Station should maintain its Comprehensive Plan through periodic updates as changes occur in growth rates or major development policies. Goal #2 -College Station should continue to provide for the orderly development of existing and future land uses. • Objective 2.2 -College Station should develop standards that promote a reduction of land use intensity as development approaches established and future residential areas. • Objective 2.3 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development in areas between neighborhoods, such as neighborhood retail. Goal #3 -College Station should continue to protect, preserve and enhance existing and future neighborhoods. • Objective 3.1 -College Station should continue to protect the integrity of residential areas by minimizing intrusive and incompatible land uses and densities. • Objective 3.2 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development, such as small-scale neighborhood retail, adjacent to residential neighborhoods with appropriate buffering. 2.06 - Lcoinomlc Development Doak and Objectives Goal #1 -College Station should continue to encourage diversification of the local economy. • Objective 1.1 -College Station should continue to encourage industrial, commercial, and residential development to serve residents' needs, which is in harmony with the environment and surrounding development patterns. applicant has prepan3d this application and cert~es that the facts stated herBin and exhibits attached hereto are true rrect. gna Title Date 6/13/03 Page 3 of 7 ~acanon aa~acern zo a major ar[enai is also low At this time adjacent residential development is undersprved by both regional and neiahbofiood commercial services. This parcel is an appropriate location for future neighbofiood retail fC~2viS,ah ~-u COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM U~ ~~"~' ~ ~~ ~, Parcel 2 - LUP Amendment ~Q e . $ -12 '0 ~ ~~ ~e following is required if an amendment to the Land Use Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of theQ ~ ~' uested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Land Use Plan designation: Institutional. Low Density Single Family Requested Land Use Plan designation: Planned Development with some Neighborhood Retail uses. Explain the reason for this Land Use Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change in the land use plan designation: Explain why the requested land use designation is more appropriate than the existing designation. r'ntL, Developed for office or neighbofiood commercial use. this area would serve as a low impact transitional use between the existing residential development and the maior arterial. Greens Prairie Rd. Changes in the area include the connection of HWY 40 to Greens Prairie Rd.. the location of the City's new business park. and the small area plan update for the property to the north. With the plan for the new fire station being across Greens Prairie the likelihood of another institutional type use being proposed for this tract is unlikely and the marketability of Low Density Single Family in this location adjacent to a maior arterial is also low. At this time. adjacent residential development is underserved by both regional and neighbofiood commercial services. This parcel is an appropriate location for future office uses and well planned neighborhood retail type uses. How does the requested land use designation further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? Reassessment of the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for these areas is needed to adjust the original vision to the current conditions. The following goals and objectives stated in the Cit~of College Station Comprehensive Plan support this action. Land Use Goals and Objectives 1 #1 -College Station should continue to provide and locate adequate amounts of appropriately zoned land for all necessary types of land uses in an efficient, convenient, harmonious, and ecologically sound manner. • Objective 1.2 -College Station should promote the use of vacant land in the existing sewershed area where City infrastructure and services are readily available in order to avoid costs to the City of providing extended services. • Objective 1.4 -College Station should identify the most appropriate land use for all undeveloped parcels within its City limits and its ETJ and use its development powers (including zoning and capital improvement programs) to guide the locations of desired development. • Objective 1.5 -College Station should maintain its Comprehensive Plan through periodic updates as changes occur in growth rates or major development policies. Goal #2 -College Station should continue to provide for the orderly development of existing and future land uses. • Objective 2.2 -College Station should develop standards that promote a reduction of land use intensity as development approaches established and future residential areas. • Objective 2.3 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development in areas between neighborhoods, such as neighborhood retail. Goal #3 -College Station should continue to protect, preserve and enhance existing and future neighborhoods. • Objective 3.1 -College Station should continue to protect the integrity of residential areas by minimizing intrusive and incompatible land uses and densities. • Objective 3.2 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development, such as small-scale neighborhood retail, adjacent to residential neighborhoods with appropriate buffering. 2.06 -Economic Development Goals and Objectives Goal #1 -College Station should continue to encourage diversification of the local economy. • Objective 1.1 -College Station should continue to encourage industrial, commercial, and residential development to serve residents' needs, which is in harmony with the environment and surrounding development patterns. .applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true and con'ect. Signature and Title Date 6/13/03 Page 3 of 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM Parcel 3 - LUP Amendment following is required if an amendment to the Land Use Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the uested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Land Use Plan designation: Low Density Single Family Requested Land Use Plan designation: Retail Neighborhood Explain the reason for this Land Use Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change in the land use plan designation: Explain why the requested land use designation is more appropriate than the existing designation. Although smaller at lust over 8 acres, this tract is situated similarly to Parcel 2. Developed for ofFce or neighborhood commercial use this area would be a transitional use between the major arterial. Greens Prairie Rd.. and the existing residential areas. How does the requested land use designation further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? Reassessment of the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for these areas is needed to adjust the original vision to the c~ nt conditions The followinq,goals and objectives stated in the Citv of College Station Comprehensive Plan support is ction. 2.08 -Land Use Goats and Objectives #1-College Station should continue to provide and locate adequate amounts of appropriately zoned land II necessary types of land uses in an efficient, convenient, harmonious, and ecologically sound manner. • Objective 1.2 -College Station should promote the use of vacant land in the existing sewershed area where City infrastructure and services are readily available in order to avoid costs to the City of providing extended services. • Objective 1.4 -College Station should identify the most appropriate land use for all undeveloped parcels within its City limits and its ETJ and use its development powers (including zoning and capital improvement programs) to guide the locations of desired development. • Objective 1.5 -College Station should maintain its Comprehensive Plan through periodic updates as changes occur in growth rates or major development policies. Goal #2 -College Station should continue to provide for the orderly development of existing and future land uses. • Objective 2.2 -College Station should develop standards that promote a reduction of land use intensity as development approaches established and future residential areas. • Objective 2.3 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development in areas between neighborhoods, such as neighbofiood retail. Goal #3 -College Station should continue to protect, preserve and enhance existing and future neighborhoods. • Objective 3.1 -College Station should continue to protect the integrity of residential areas by minimizing intrusive and incompatible land uses and densities. • Objective 3.2 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development, such as small-scale neighborhood retail, adjacent to residential neighborhoods with appropriate buffering. 2.06 -Economic Development Goals and Objectives Goal #1 -College Station should continue to encourage diversification of the local economy. • Objective 1.1 -College Station should continue to encourage industrial, commercial, and residential development to serve residents' needs, which is in harmony with the environment and surrounding development patterns. .applicant has prepared this application and cert~es fhaf the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto ar+e true correc Jc- - c~~ - D~~ Sig a re a e Date 6!13/03 Page 4 of 7 r-wvr ~u~ ~i~ o r"5 ~ ~~ 1 1~f'~ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMLIVDMENT REQUEST FORM Parcel 3 - LUP Amendment (QQc . ~ -12,- fl 4 uti~a r~ ~ ~ I ~~. following is required if an amendment to the Land Use Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent ofthe -~ uested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Land Use Plan designation: Low Density Single Family Requested Land Use Plan designation: Planned Development with some Neighborhood Retail uses. Explain the reason for this Land Use Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change in the land use plan designation: Explain why the requested land use designation is more appropriate than the existing designation. Although smaller at just over 8 acres, this tract is situated similarly to Parcel 2. Developed for office or neighborhood commercial use this area would be a transitional use between the major arterial. Greens Prairie Rd.. and the existing residential areas. How does the requested land use designation further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? Reassessment of the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for these areas is needed to adjust the original vision to the current conditions. The following goals and objectives stated in the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan support this action. 3 -Land Use Goals and Objectives I #1 -College Station should continue to provide and locate adequate amounts of appropriately zoned land all necessary types of land uses in an efficient, convenient, harmonious, and ecologically sound manner. • Objective 1.2 -College Station should promote the use of vacant land in the existing sewershed area where City infrastructure and services are readily available in order to avoid costs to the City of providing extended services. • Objective 1.4 -College Station should identify the most appropriate land use for all undeveloped parcels within its City limits and its ETJ and use its development powers (including zoning and capital improvement programs) to guide the locations of desired development. • Objective 1.5 -College Station should maintain its Comprehensive Plan through periodic updates as changes occur in growth rates or major development policies. Goal #2 -College Station should continue to provide for the orderly development of existing and future land uses. • Objective 2.2 -College Station should develop standards that promote a reduction of land use intensity as development approaches established and future residential areas. • Objective 2.3 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development in areas between neighborhoods, such as neighborhood retail. Goal #3 -College Station should continue to protect, preserve and enhance existing and future neighborhoods. • Objective 3.1 -College Station should continue to protect the integrity of residential areas by minimizing intrusive and incompatible land uses and densities. • Objective 3.2 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development, such as small-scale neighborhood retail, adjacent to residential neighborhoods with appropriate buffering. 2.06 -Economic Development Goals and Objectives Goal #1 -College Station should continue to encourage diversification of the local economy. • Objective 1.1 -College Station should continue to encourage industrial, commercial, and residential development to serve residents' needs, which is in harmony with the environment and surrounding development patterns. applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true correct. Signature and Title Date 6/13/03 Page 4 of 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM Parcel 4 - LUP Amendment The following is required if an amendment to the Land Use Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the ~uested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Land Use Plan designation: Medium Density Sin41e Family Requested Land Use Pian designation: Regional Retail F~lain the reason for this Land Use Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change in the land use plan designation: F~cplain why the requested land use designation is more appropriate than the existing designation. lit seems incongruous that the other three comers of this intersecction of a maior and. minor arterial. Greens Prairie and How does the requested land use designation further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? Reassessment of the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for these areas is needed to adjust the original vision to the current conditions The following goals and objectives stated in the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan support ctr n. ZA3 -Land Use Goals and ObJectives I #1 -College Station should continue to provide and locate adequate amounts of appropriately zoned land II necessary types of land uses in an efficient, convenient, harmonious, and ecologically sound manner. • Objective 1.2 -College Station should promote the use of vacant land in the existing sewershed area where City infrastructure and services are readily available in order to avoid costs to the City of providing extended services. • Objective 1.4 -College Station should identify the most appropriate land use for all undeveloped parcels within its City limits and its ETJ and use its development powers (including zoning and capital improvement programs) to guide the locations of desired development. • Objective 1.5 -College Station should maintain its Comprehensive Plan through periodic updates as changes occur in growth rates or major development policies. Goal #2 -College Station should continue to provide for the orderly development of existing and future land uses. • Objective 2.2 -College Station should develop standards that promote a reduction of land use intensity as development approaches established and future residential areas. • Objective 2.3 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development in areas between neighborhoods, such as neighborhood retail. Goal #3 -College Station should continue to protect, preserve and enhance existing and future neighborhoods. • Objective 3.1 -College Station should continue to protect the integrity of residential areas by minimizing intrusive and incompatible land uses and densities. • Objective 3.2 -College Station should encourage compatible in-fill development, such as small-scale neighborhood retail, adjacent to residential neighbofioods with appropriate buffering. 2.06 -Economic Development Goals and Objectivea Goal #1 -College Station should continue to encourage diversification of the local economy. • Objective 1.1 -College Station should continue to encourage industrial, commercial, and residential development to serve residents' needs, which is in harmony with the environment and surrounding development patterns. The applicant has prepared this application and cert~es that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true correct. S' tore a i 5-~~~a~~ Date 6/13/03 Page 5 of 7 rravrna the appropnate r_ana use Nian aesianation with allow for development of this tract as market forces dictate COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM Parcel 2 - T-faPe Amendment following is required if an amendment to the Thoroughfare Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the ested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Thoroughfare Plan alignment and classification: Spearman Dr. a minor collector connection to Pebble Creek Parkway Requested Thoroughfare Plan alignment and classification: Spearman Dr. still as a minor collector instead connectina to Greens Prairie Rd Explain the reason for this Thoroughfare Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change to the alignment and/or classification as shown on the existing thoroughfare plan. Explain why the requested thoroughfare plan change is more appropriate than the existing plan. Explain differences in the traffic impacts between the existing thoroughfare plan and the requested change to the thoroughfare plan. Please see attached letter from TEA. Transportation Enoineerina Analysts How does the requested thoroughfare amendment further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? i a i n. Transportation duals and Objectives I #1 -College Station should balance the development of all modes of transportation to assure the fast, convenient, efficient and safe movement of people and goods to, from, and within the community while continuing to protect the integrity of neighborhoods. • Objective 1.7 -College Station should continue to provide for the routing of goods and services delivery vehicles to assure minimal adverse impacts on residential neighbofioods. Goal #Z -College Station should continue to ensure the development, maintenance and operation of a safe, efficient and effective transportation system to serve the City. • Objective 2.1 -College Station should continue to develop and maintain a transportation planning process, which addresses long range needs and emphasizes short and mid-range problem-solving. Goal #3 -College Station should continue to ensure a balanced relationship between land use development and the transportation system. • Objective 3.1 -College Station should maintain administrative procedures and responsibilities for the preparation, review and approval of transportation plans which are directly related to proposed land use development plans. • Objective 3.2 -College Station should continue to maintain a Master Thoroughfare Plan, which is coordinated with the land use development considerations represented in the Comprehensive plan which permits the following: a. Right-of--way dedications as specified by the Master Thoroughfare Plan. b. Right-of-way acquisition necessary to improve intersection capacity and thoroughfare continuity. c. Intersection designs and stnret alignments to meet existing and projected traffic demand. • Objective 3.3 -College Station should continue to enforce street design criteria for all new developments. • Objective 3.6 -College Station should continue to promote its functional classification system to provide for the graduation of traffic flow from the movement function to the access function. • Objective 3.7 -College Station should continue to promote a program of access management to minimize vehicular conflicts on collector and arterial streets. ~pplicant has prepared this application and cert~es that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true ~-~~-may ' atu nd Date 6/13/03 Page 6 of 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM Parcel 5 - T-fare Amendment The following is required if an amendment to the Thoroughfare Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the nested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets ff necessary. Trent Thoroughfare Plan alignment and classification: A planned minor collector extension of Congressional to connect St Andrews to Lakew,gy Requested Thoroughfare Plan alignment and classification: Remove the Congressional extension and replace it with a minor collector to the south directly connecting Pebble Creek Parkway to Lakewav Dr. Explain the reason for this Thoroughfare Plan amendment: Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change to the alignment and/or classification as shown on the existing thoroughfare plan. Explain why the requested thoroughfare plan change is more appropriate than the existing plan Explain differences in the traffic impacts between the existing thoroughfare plan and the requested change to the thoroughfare plan. A similar letter from TEA is forthcoming; How does the requested thoroughfare amendment further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? Reassessment of the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan for these areas is needed to adjust the original vision to the current cond~Uons The following goals and objectives stated in the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan support coon. ?~07 - Transpartation Goals and ObJsctives #1 -College Station should balance the development of atl modes of transportation to assure the fast, enlent, efficient and safe movement of people and goods to, from, and within the community while continuing to protect the Integrity of neighborhoods. • Objective 1.7 -College Station should continue to provide for the routing of goods and services delivery vehicles to assure minimal adverse impacts on residential neighbofioods. Goal #2 -College Station should continue to ensure the development, maintenance and operation of a safe, efficient and effective transportation system to serve the City. • Objective 2.1 -College Station should continue to develop and maintain a transportation planning process, which addresses long range needs and emphasizes short and mid-range problem-solving. Goal #3 -College Station should continue to ensure a balanced relationship between land use development and the transportation system. • Objective 3.1 -College Station should maintain administrative procedures and responsibilities for the preparation, review and approval of transportation plans which are directly related to proposed land use development plans. • Objective 3.2 -College Station should continue to maintain a Master Thoroughfare Plan which is coordinated with the land use development considerations represented in the Comprehensive plan which permits the following: a. Right-of-way dedications as specified by the Master Thoroughfare Plan. b. Right-of--way acquisition necessary to improve intersection capacity and thoroughfare continuity. c. Intersection designs and street alignments to meet existing and projected traffic demand. • Objective 3.3 -College Station should continue to enforce street design criteria for all new developments. • Objective 3.6 -College Station should continue to promote its functional classification system to provide for the graduation of traffic flow from the movement function to the access function. • Objective 3.7 -College Station should continue to promote a program of access management to minimize vehicular conflicts on collector and arterial streets. applicant has prepared this application and cert~es that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true ~~yy t. S-a~ -b~ g ature a itl Date 6/13/03 Page 7 of 7 • M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ • ~..~ C U ~ ~ c ~ c ~ a~ ~ ~ • o c ~ ~ ~ a D ~ ~ > a) _ 'cn N C L U ._ ~ ~ .n ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~- U M N r' O ~ +-~ C U ~ ~.., c -a c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q o ~ ~ a i a D ~ ~c > N _ "cn ~ C L U ~ a~ ~ .~ ~- .a ~ ~ o ~a U ~~ t~ W .~ M ~ ~ V ~ ' ~ (~ ~ O • • +-+ C U ~ ~~ c c ~ ~ ~ ~ o Q c a~i ~ D ~ ~c >_ a~ 'v~ N ~ L U~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a o U M ~ ~ N ~ V O ~ ~ N U ~ • a~i Q ~ ~ a o ~ a~ a > ~ a~ ~ ~ 'cn ~ ~ N ~ U L a a~ ~~o ~U a • .~ M ~ ~ V ' ~ ~' t~ O -~--~ C N U ~ ~ c ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ a. o ~, a~ ~ ~ c L U .~ a~ ~ ~ Q- a o ~ U AGENDA STEM N0.8 Comprehensive Plan Amenment Animate Habitat, Ltd. ~J I i I i I i~ I I I I i I I I ~~ .` '~. ~, J ' ~ i ~~ ~~5~ 5~ic! ~~ ,< Gr CI Z ~"' W ~. ~ a~ O W UQ a~ N c~ U 0 H m Q w z Q X N H O ~ ~ ~ ~ W a~i a ,~? w o~ ~' D U ~I/ • C~ • Staff Report Date of Meeting: Project Manager: Email: August 19, 2004 Trey Fletcher, AICP ~etcher(c~~c.gov item: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an Ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Land Use Plan and Thoroughfare Plan fora 1,282.09-acre tract located east of SH 6 between the Pebble Creek subdivision and the College Station City Limits. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (inclusive of the land use and thoroughfare plan amendments) as requested, with three exceptions: o The 17.18-acre tract proposed for Regional Retail should remain Industrial/R&D; and, ^ The Major Collector 'spine' should be classified as a Minor Arterial with a 90' ROW and raised median. o The initial entrance road to the development is proposed as a Minor Collector, staff recommends that this thoroughfare should be classified as a Major Collector as it will also facilitate turning movements and additional capacity is warranted through the proposed Regional Retail areas near the freeway. i) Applicant: Paul Clarke, G.P. /Animate Habitat, Ltd. ~ w.. ~~~ ~ ~~~ 2) Applicant Request a) Land Use Plan: The applicant is requesting to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan element as indicated on the attached maps. The tables below indicated potential residential build-outs under the existing land use plan designations and the proposed land use designations. The resulting values are generally greater that what the developer anticipates constructing overall, but is representative of the potential associated with each of the proposed land use plan classifications. The developer is anticipating approximately 130p - 1500 dwelling units overall. _1- fld-1 ~A • • • Exiistl Condition Low Low (0.33) 143 2.9 41.3 Density Medium (1.1667) 432.0 504 2.9 1,462 Hi h 2 864 2.9 2 5Q6 Rural Hi h 0.33 619.5 204 2.9 693 Low 1,008 TOTAL Medium 2,055 High 3,098 Pro Condition .~ Medium Low (3) 2,529 2.9 7,333 Density Medium (4.5) 842.85 3,793 2.9 10,999 Hi h 8 5 057 2.9 14666 High Low (7) 650 2.9 1,885 Density Medium (8) 92•~ 743 2.9 2,154 Hi h 9 836 2.9 2 424 Low (10) 441 2.9 1,280 Attached Medium (15) 44.14 862 2.9 1,920 Hi h 20 983 2.9 2580 low 10,498 TOTAL Medium 15,074 Hi h 19,649 b) Thoroughfare Plan: The applicant is requesting to amend the Thoroughfare Plan element as indicated below and reflected on the attached maps. ROW Chan es Pray osed Pebble Creek Parkwa 70 Terminate at unnamed minor arterial Lakeway Drive 70 Conform to localized conditions and terminate at unnamed minor arterial Unnamed Minor Arterial 90 New, to align with grade separation at Nantucket Drive to Lakewa Drive 70 New, serve as `spine' of development, Unnamed Major Collector* generally connecting the ~H 6 area to throu h ultimates to Peach Creek Road Unnamed Mayor Collector ~ New, from SH 6 frontage road to unnamed minor arterial Unnamed Minor Arterial 90 Deleted throu h TWS ro 60 New, to serve as initial access to Unnamed Minor Collector development and become secondary upon completion of planned grade se aration at Nantucket Drive -~- Ild_1 ~A • 3) Property Background The request involves two large tracts comprising total of approximately 1282 acres in support of a "master-planned community." The tracts were annexed in 1996. Both staff and the applicant have been actively engaged in analyzing this comprehensive plan amendment through a number of meetings initiated by a Pre-Application Conference {PAC} on April 12, 2004. City staff from various departments that would have an interest in the outcome of this process have been involved in such meetings, lnternaily and with the applicant. the departments involved include Development Services, Public Works, Utilities, Parks and Recreation, and the City Manager's Office. A meeting has been scheduled with the Nantucket Preservation Association for Thursday, August 12th to solicit input. The results of which will be disseminated to the Commission. a) Zoning -Both parcels are zoned A-0, Agricultural-Open, which was established upon annexation. b) Existing Land Use -Generally undeveloped, a number of active oil • wells exist throughout. c) Access -The development currently has frontage along the SH 6 frontage road. d) Utilities -Alt utilities will have to be extended to the development. • -';- fld-1 r,R . Staff Analysis In general, the following concepts have been reviewed for each parcel: e) The Unified Development Ordinance states that the Land Use Plan "shall be amended only based upon changed or changing conditions in a particular area or iri the City." Areas south of Alum Creek, both in the City and in the ETJ sustain land use plan designations of Single-family Residential Low Density and Rural, as they have since the development of the Comprehensive Plan in 1997. This is generally due to the lack of utility infrastructure to support development. New development and consequently population growth continues to occur in south College Station and this proposed development is a reflection of this trend. f) The proposed amendment should be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and overall vision of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment is in general cor`npliance and consistent with the Comprehensive Pian. Thoroughfare connectivity is shown in three directions and the most intense land uses are situated near the SH 6 with • good access. The development also shows Retail Neighborhood opportunities in a centralized portion of the development that should serve the surrounding community reducing trip lengths. g) The subject parcels are suitable for the proposed land use designation based upon access, availability of utilities, consistency with existing and planned used, environmental constraints and compatibility with neighborhoods. Access will be significantly enhanced by this development and through TxDOT projects planned within the SH 6 corridor. The primary thoroughfare for this development is shown to connect to a planned grade separation at Nantucket Drive. According to TxDOT, this project will be constructed in a series of phases and the referenced grade separation should be operational by 2008. Connectivity will also occur through the extension Lakeway Drive and Pebble Creek Parkway from the north. The main thoroughfare of the development is planned to connect to Peach Creek Road to the east as well. The 17.18-acre tract located north of Alum Creek is presently shown as Industrial/R&D; the applicant has requested to show this as Regional Retail. Generally, staff does not support this designation due to the fact that the tract is "cut off" from the Regional Retail areas located to the south by Alum Creek, the larger area surrounding the tract is also designated for • Industrial/R&D, and the proposed retail area does not satisfy the access and visibility objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. -d- nd_~ KA • The availability of utilities has been addressed in a report prepared by a consultant to Cotiege Station Utilities. Water is available in the area but must be extended to serve this development. Wastewater collection lines will also have to be extended for treatment at the Lick Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant located to the north of the tract. A detailed assessment of these requirements is attached. The consistency with existing and planned uses in the area is significant. Many recent developments in southern College Station have been seeking to incorporate increased amounts of open and green space for both recreation and conservation purposes. The development does wrap around the north side of the Texas World Speedway. According to their website, 34 events are scheduled to run between August 14, 2004 and February 27, 2005. Steps should be taken by the developer to ensure that the proximity of the racing facility is not detrimental to the sustainability of the Animate Habitat development. • • -~+- fld-1 ~,R • Staff has became familiar with a number of state or Federal environmental constraints that may impact these parcels. Alum Creek is a major feature of this area. The creek merges with Lick Creek in the Lick Creek Park area north of the development. Numerous discussions have occurred with the City of College Station, the Brazos Valley Solid Waste Management Agency (BVSMA) and other conservation organizations to address the development of a greenway corridor along Alum Creek, provision of mitigation sites for off-site development by BVSMA, and conservation of ecological sensitive areas distributed throughout the development. Notwithstanding regulatory controls, the parcels are heavily wooded with numerous creeks and significant topographical features compared to most of the urbanized areas in College Station. Care should be taken to conserve these features to the greatest extend practicable. h) the proposed amendment will not create pressure to change the land use designation of other properties, unless the change is in the long-term interests of the community. Due to the lack of significant development pressure to the south and east of the pebble Creek area, inclusive of territory inside the City and 81'7 and the scale of this. development future land use and thoroughfare piarlning are anticipated to address the regional context of these changes. 4) Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (inclusive of the land use and thoroughfare plan amendments) as requested, with three exceptions: o The 17.18-acre tract proposed for Regional Retail should remain Industrial/R&D~ and, p -The Major Collector `spine' should be classified as a Minor Arterial with a 90' ROW and raised median. o The initial entrance road to the development is proposed as a Minor Collector, staff recommends that this thoroughfare should be classified as a Major Collector as it will also facilitate turning movements and additional capacity is warranted through the proposed Regional Retail areas near the freeway. t -~- (1d_1 ~fi • u FO OFFICE USE ONLY Case No. Date Submitted "~ ~~~ i ' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION (Check all applicable) X Land Use Amendment X Thoroughfare Amendment X Alignment /location Classification The following items must be submitted by the established deadline dates for consideration: X $850 application and review fee X Two (2) copies of a fully dimensioned map on 24" X 36" paper showing: a. Land affected; b. Present zoning of property and zoning classification of all abutting properties; c. Current land use plan classification and proposed land use plan changes; d. Current land use classification of all abutting property; e. Current and proposed thoroughfare alignments X General location and address of property; X Total acres of property; and X All applicable Comprehensive Plan Amendment Regtaest form(s) completed in full. The fiolfowing information must be completed before an application is accepted for review. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name: Paul J. Clarke, G.P. Animate Habitat, Ltd. Street Address: 3608 East 29th Streef, Suite 100 City: Bryan State: .Texas E-mail: pjclarke@clailcewyndham.com Zip Code: 77802 Phone Number: (979)846-4384 Fax Number: (979) 846-1461 PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name: Paul J. Clarke, G.P. Animate Habitat, Ltd. Street Address: 3608 East 29th Street, Suite 100 City: Bryan State: Texas • Phone Number: (979) 846-4384 E-mail: pjclarke@clarkewyndham.com Zip Code: 77802 Fax Number: (979) 846-1461 6/13/03 Page 3 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM The following is required if an amendment to the Land Use Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the requested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Land Use Plan designation: Varies - Single Family (Medium Density) Institutional Park.__ Floodalain/Streams. Industrial R&D and Rura! (Based on information provided in the College Station Development Guide (1/2004), Fig 16 Paae 30) Requested Land Use Plan designation: Sinale Family-Medium Density (835 14 AC) Single Family-High Density (92.86 AC) Single Family-Attached (44 14 AC) Retail Regional (100 46 AC). Retail-Ne~ghbofiood (9.61 AC) Floodalain/Streams (154 67 AC) and Park (145 AC) See attached clan for deta~/s. Explain the reason for this Land Use Plan amendment: Reauestina amendment to Land Use Plan in order to facilitate the development of amaster-planned community on the subiect tract Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change in the land use plan designation: Plans _to develop amaster-planned community reauire the chances in the Land Use Plan in • order to construct and/or slat ~marovements to the land while maintaining consistency with the Unified Development Ordnance and the Comprehensive Plan for the City of College Station and the developer's economic and other cntena How does the requested land use designation further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? The subiect tract is in the current oath of development exloansion in the southern portion of College Station General and lighf commercial uses will ..i ~ ~ r ~ private and public preensaace corridors as referenced in the current College Station Development Guide for this area The reauested land uses are overall in compliance with ex~st~ng cond~t~ons and future growth regulations sought Explain why the requested land use designation is more appropriate than the existing designation. The redesipnation of this tract will provide residential and commercial development expansion aotent~als for the C~tv of College Station The proposed greensaace corridors will further enhance the Comprehenswe Plan's coals of environmentally sensitive pedestrian trail systems and wildlife habitat preservation The commercial areas reauested on Highway 6 and other arterial locations are a more aaproanate use than single family The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true and correct. Si not g ure and ~ ~3 ° /U ~~ Date 6/13/03 Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM • The following is required if an amendment to the Thoroughfare Plan is requested. Based on the nature and extent of the requested amendment, additional studies may be required. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Current Thoroughfare Plan alignment and classification: Varies. see attached plan for details Requested Thoroughfare Plan alignment and classification: Varies. see attached plan for details. Explain the reason for this Thoroughfare Plan amendment: Based on the master development plan for the subject tract this proposed amendment is viewed as providing a more efficient pattern of c-rculat~on between the subject tract and adioinina current and future development wh-le ma-nta-n-ng land use -nteanty of non-zoned ETJ properties abutting the development Further, the developer will build the proposed thoroughfares and will not build those on the city's current plan. Identify what conditions have changed to warrant a change to the alignment and/or classification as shown on the existing thoroughfare plan. Most of the changes to the Thorouahfare Plan alignments have been in response to environmental concerns of impacting federal jurisdictional stream crossings and -mpacts to the endangered Navasota Ladies' Tress. • How does the requested thoroughfare amendment further the goals and objectives of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan? The proposed realignment allows for the circulation of traffic and Qedestrians to from and through the subject tract and adjacent properties as implied by the C-tv -n the current al~anments. Classifications have not been altered just the locations in wh-ch they align. Furthermore the developer actually building the proposed thoroughfares will further the goals and objectives of the Citv Explain why the requested thoroughfare plan change is more appropriate than the existing plan. The proposed amendments are a more appropriate response to the concerns surrounding the env-ronmentally sensitive junsd~cbonal waterways and known habitat areas for endangered species. Add-t~onally, the existing thoroughfare plan would allow/require non zoned ETJ areas to have adverse jmpacts on the gateways to the development Explain differences in the trafi•ic impacts. The proposed amendments do not appear to provide any additional or different impacts to trafhc arculation within the area The true differences occur -n the al-gnments rather than fhe street capacities to cane traff-c between the existina thoroughfare clan and the requested change to the thoroughfare plan The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true and correct. G. G~~o/oy Signature and Date 6/13/03 Page 5 of 5 C7 ., .. • n 0 •~ VI .~ . C D N CD 0 .~ D ~.y. ~... !"'1~ f"'F` r rn ~~ r~ • n 0 c~ _. c~ CD CD 0 .p 00 D c~ ~- _. r ~. O N