The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/04/2011 - Agenda Packet - Planning & Zoning Commission Ð´¿²²·²¹ ú Æ±²·²¹ Ý±³³··±² ß«¹«¬ ìô îðïï Î»¹«´¿® Ó»»¬·²¹ éæðð ÐÓ Ý·¬§ Ø¿´´ Ý±«²½·´ Ý¸¿³¾»® ïïðï Ì»¨¿ ßª»²«»ô Ý±´´»¹» Í¬¿¬·±²ô Ì»¨¿ AGENDA PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RM EGULAREETING T,A04,2011,7:00PM HURSDAYUGUST AT CHCC ITY ALL OUNCIL HAMBERS 1101TA EXASVENUE CS,T OLLEGE TATIONEXAS 1.Call meeting to order. Hear Citizens. 2. 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 3, Consent Agenda, are considered routine by the Planning & Zoning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. These items include preliminary plans and final plats, where staff has found compliance with all minimum subdivision regulations. All items approved by Consent are approved with any and all staff recommendations. There will not be separate discussion of these items. If any Commissioner desires to discuss an item on the Consent Agenda it will be moved to the Regular Agenda for further consideration. Consent Agenda 3.. 3.1Consideration, discussion, and possible action on Absence Requests from meetings. Hugh Stearns ~ August 4, 2011 Mike Ashfield ~ August 4, 2011 3.2Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. July 7, 2011 P&Z Workshop & Regular Regular Agenda 4.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the review and status of items (JS) within the 2011 P&Z Plan of Work (see attached). 5.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update on the following items: A rezoning request for 6.283 acres located at 3514, 3520 and 3526 Longmire Drive, and more generally located east of the College Station Medical Center, from C-1 General Commercial and C-2 Commercial-Industrial to PDD Planned Development District. The Commission heard this item on 16 June and voted 4-0 to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on 14 July and voted 7- 0 to approve the rezoning request. Adoption of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The Commission heard this item on 16 June and voted 4-0 to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on 14 July and voted 6-1 to approve the adoption of the plan. 6.Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a rezoning for 7.364 acres located at 2862 North Graham Road, and more generally located west of the intersection of Old Wellborn Road and North Graham Road, from A-O Agricultural Case # 11-00500087 (MKH) (Note: Final Open to PDD Planned Development District. action on this item is scheduled for the August 11, 2011 City Council Meeting – subjectto change) 7.Presentation, possible action, and discussion for consideration of a recommendation to City Council of a Semi-Annual Report on Impact Fees 92-01, 97-01, 97-02B, 99-01, 03- (AG) 02, and an annual Attorney General Compliance Certification Letter. 8.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming Meetings. August 11, 2011 ~ City Council Meeting ~ City Council Chambers August 18, 2011 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ City Council Chambers 9.Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Design Review Board, Council Transportation Committee, Joint Parks/Planning & Zoning Subcommittee, Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee, Neighborhood Plan Stakeholder Resource Team, Biocorridor Committee, Medical Corridor Committee, and Mayor’s Development Forum. 10.Discussion and possible action on future agenda items – A Planning & 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. 11.Adjourn. Consultation with Attorney {Gov't Code Section 551.071} ; possible 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 orvote 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. Notice is hereby given that a Regular Meeting of the College Station Planning & Zoning Commission, College Station, Texas will be held on the Thursday, August 04, 2011 at 7:00 PM at the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda. Posted this the _____ day of July, at _______ CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By _____________________________ Sherry Mashburn, City Secretary By _____________________________ David Neeley, City Manager I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City’s website, www.cstx.gov . The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said Notice and Agenda were posted on July___, 2011, at _______ and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours proceeding the scheduled time of said meeting. This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and time: ______________________ by _________________________. Dated this _____ day of_____________, 2011. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By_____________________________ Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of_______________, 2011. Notary Public- Brazos County, Texas My commission expires: This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.gov. Planning and Zoning Commission meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channel 19. Page 1of 1 Deborah Grace-Rosier - RE: August 4th P&Z Meeting From: "Hugh Stearns" <hugh@stearnsdesignbuild.com> To: "'Deborah Grace-Rosier'" <DGRACE@cstx.gov> Date: 7/25/2011 8:28 AM Subject: RE: August 4th P&Z Meeting Ü»¾±®¿¸ô ×©·´´¸¿ª»¬±³·¬¸·³»»¬·²¹¿×©·´´¾»±«¬±º¬±©²ò Ì¸¿²µô Ø«¹¸ From: Deborah Grace-Rosier [mailto:DGRACE@cstx.gov] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 7:59 AM To: Mike Ashfield; Craig Hall; Jodi Warner; Bo Miles; Hugh Stearns; Scott Shafer Cc: Christina Court Subject: August 4th P&Z Meeting Please let me know if you can attend this meeting. Thank you~ ¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿ Staff Assistant City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77840 979-764-3570 Main 979-764-3784 Desk 979-764-3496 Fax dgrace@cstx.gov www.cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University ® file://C:\Documents and Settings\dgrace\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4E2D2910City o...7/25/2011 (7/25/2011) Deborah Grace-Rosier - Re: August 4th P&Z MeetingPage 1 From: <ashfieldmj@gmail.com> To:"Deborah Grace-Rosier" <DGRACE@cstx.gov> CC:"Bob Cowell" <bcowell@cstx.gov> Date: 7/25/2011 8:49 AM Subject: Re: August 4th P&Z Meeting Our daughter returns from South Africa after a 6 week mission trip so it would be better for me to be at the airport when she arrives; hence, I won't be there unless flight schedules are affected. Thanks Mike ------Original Message------ From: Deborah Grace-Rosier To: MJA To: Craig Hall To: Jodi Warner To: Bo Miles To: Hugh Stearns To: Scott Shafer Cc: Christina Court Sent: Jul 25, 2011 7:59 AM Subject: August 4th P&Z Meeting Please let me know if you can attend this meeting. Thank you~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Deborah Grace-Rosier Staff Assistant City of College Station Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77840 979-764-3570 Main 979-764-3784 Desk 979-764-3496 Fax dgrace@cstx.gov www.cstx.gov <http://www.cstx.gov/> City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University ® Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Workshop Meeting July 7, 2011, 6:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Jodi Warner, Craig Hall, Bo Miles, Mike Ashfield and Hugh Stearns COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Chairman Scott Shafer CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Katy Marie Lyles CITY STAFF PRESENT: Bob Cowell, Lance Simms, Joe Guerra, Jennifer Prochazka, Alan Gibbs, Lauren Hovde, Matt Robinson, Morgan Hester, MaryAnn Powell, and Christina Court. 1.Call the meeting to order. Commissioner Ashfield called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. 2.Discussion of consent and regular agenda items. Commissioner Stearns asked about the situation concerning street construction between The Barracks II Subdivision and the College Station School District. Director Cowell discussed that Deacon and Towers Parkway will be located on school property. He explained that the developer of The Barracks II and the school district have an agreement to construct the roads. 3.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a recommendation to City Council on Capital Improvement Program projects. Donald Harmon, Assistant Director of Capital Improvements, gave a presentation regarding the Capital Improvement Program projects. Commissioner Stearns moved to approve the CIP Projects as presented. Commissioner Miles seconded the motion; motion was approved (5-0). 4.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the status of items within the 2011 P&Z Plan of Work. There was no discussion. July 7, 2011 P&Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 3 5.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update on the following item(s): A rezoning request for 108.88 acres located at 3100 Haupt Road, and more generally east of Holleman Drive South and north of the Williamsgate and Barracks subdivisions, from A-O Agricultural Open to PDD Planned Development District. The Commission heard this item on 19 May and voted 5-0 to recommend approval with conditions. The City Council heard this item on 9 June and voted 6-0 to approve the rezoning request without the wake board/ski park. Adoption of the Eastgate Neighborhood Plan. The Commission heard this item on 16 June and voted 4-0 to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on 23 June and voted 7-0 to approve the plan. An amendment to Section 9.2, Non-Conforming Uses, and Section 9.4, Non- Conforming Lots, of the Unified Development Ordinance for properties located within the recently annexed area. The Commission heard this item on 16 June and voted 4-0 to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on 23 June and voted 7-0 to approve the amendment. Adoption of the Wastewater Master Plan. The Commission heard this item on 2 June and voted 6-0 to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on 23 June and voted 7-0 to approve the plan. There was no discussion. 6.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming Meetings. July 14, 2011 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Regular 7:00 p.m. July 21, 2011 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 6:00 p.m. and Regular 7:00 p.m. July 28, 2011 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Regular 7:00 p.m. There was no discussion. 7.Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Design Review Board, Council Transportation Committee, Joint Parks/Planning & Zoning Subcommittee, Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee, Neighborhood Plan Stakeholder Resource Team, Bio-Corridor Committee, Medical Corridor Committee, and Mayor’s Development Forum. There was no discussion. July 7, 2011 P&Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 3 8.Discussion and possible action on future agenda items – A Planning & 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. There was no discussion. 9.Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Approved: Attest: ________________________________ _____________________________________ Mike Ashfield, Acting Chairman Christina Court, Staff Assistant Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Services July 7, 2011 P&Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 3 MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting July 7, 2011, 7:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers College Station, Texas COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Craig Hall, Jodi Warner, Bo Miles, Mike Ashfield and Hugh Stearns COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Chairman Scott Shafer CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Katy-Marie Lyles CITY STAFF PRESENT: Bob Cowell, Lance Simms, Jason Schubert, Joe Guerra, Molly Hitchcock, David Schmitz, Jennifer Prochazka, Alan Gibbs, Venessa Garza, Lauren Hovde, Matt Robinson, Josh Norton, Mary Ann Powell, and Christina Court 1.Call meeting to order. Commissioner Ashfield called the meeting to order at 7:09p.m. 2.Hear Citizens. No one spoke Consent Agenda 3.. 3.1Consideration, discussion, and possible action on Absence Requests from meetings. Scott Shafer ~ July 7, 2011 Craig Hall ~ July 21, 2011 3.2Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. June 2, 2011 ~ Workshop June 2, 2011 ~ Regular June 16, 2011 ~ Workshop June 16, 2011 ~ Regular 3.3Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Harvey Mitchell Commercial Addition, consisting of two lots on 6.21 acres located at 1250 Harvey Mitchell Parkway South, generally located next to the Knightsgate Subdivision. June 16, 2011 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 3 3.4Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for University Heights Subdivision Phase 1, consisting of 82 residential lots on 18.38 acres located at 3150 Holleman Drive South, generally located next to Las Palomas Subdivision. Commissioner Stearns requested to remove item 3.4. Commissioner Warner motioned to approve Consent Agenda Items with the removal of item 3.4. Commissioner Stearns seconded the motion, motion passed (5-0). Regular Agenda 4.Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action. There was general discussion regarding item 3.4. Commission Stearns moved to approve the Final Plat. Commissioner Warner seconded the motion, motioned was approved (5-0). 5.Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Preliminary Plan for the Barracks II Subdivision, consisting of 431 lots on 108.91 acres located at 3100 Haupt Road, and more generally east of Holleman Drive South and north of the Williamsgate and Barracks Case #11-00500088 (MR) subdivisions. Senior Planner Robinson gave a presentation on the Preliminary Plan. Kent Laza, 13858 Apricot Glen, College Station, spoke regarding the detention pond depth for the Barracks II Subdivision. Heath Phillips, 2440 Stone Castle, College Station, gave the Commission the opportunity to ask questions regarding the Preliminary Plan. Commissioner Stearns moved to approve the Preliminary Plan as presented. Commissioner Miles seconded the motion, motion was approved (5-0). 6.Discussion and possible action on future agenda items – A Planning & 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 Stearns requested a future agenda item regarding fracking and its effect on groundwater. June 16, 2011 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 3 7.Adjourn. Commissioner Stearns motioned to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 7:29 p.m. Approved: Attest: ___________________________________ ____________________________________ Mike Ashfield, Acting Chairman Christina Court, Staff Assistant Planning and Zoning Commission Planning and Development Services June 16, 2011 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 3 ÐúÆÐ´¿²±ºÉ±®µ×¬»³Ý±³°´»¬»¼·²îðïï Ý±³°®»¸»²·ª»Ð´¿²Î»´¿¬»¼ É¿¬»©¿¬»®Ó¿¬»®Ð´¿² Û¿¬¹¿¬»Ò»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼Ð´¿² Ð¿®µ¿²¼Î»½®»¿¬·±²Ó¿¬»®Ð´¿² ×³°¿½¬Ú»»ß¼ª·±®§Ý±³³·¬¬»» ×³°¿½¬Ú»»Í»³·ß²²«¿´Î»°±®¬ Ý·¬§É¿¬»®ñÉ¿¬»©¿¬»®×³°¿½¬Ú»»Î»°±®¬¿²¼°±´·½§®»½±³³»²¼¿¬·±² ×²º±®³¿¬·±²¿´¿²¼Ì®¿·²·²¹×¬»³ îðïðÛ¨·¬·²¹Ý±²¼·¬·±²Î»°±®¬ Ý¿®¬»®Ý®»»µ¿²¼Þ«®¬±²Ý®»»µ®»°±®¬ Ý±³³··±²³»»¬·²¹°®±¬±½±´¿²¼»¬¸·½ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬±º²»©¦±²·²¹¼·¬®·½¬ ËÐÞÛßÌÇ±«¬¸Ø»¿´¬¸Ô»¿¼»®¸·°¿»³»²¬ Ò±²Ð´¿²±ºÉ±®µ×¬»³ñÑ®¼·²¿²½»ß³»²¼³»²¬·²îðïï Ó±¾·´»Ú±±¼Ê»²¼±® Ó·½®±×²¼«¬®·¿´Ë» Ý±®®·¼±®Ñª»®´¿§øÑÊ÷Í·¹² Ò±²®»·¼»²¬·¿´ß½½»±®§Í¬®«½¬«®» Í·¹²Ê··¾·´·¬§Í¬¿²¼¿®¼ Ý¿³°«¿²¼É¿§º·²¼·²¹Í·¹² Ò±²®»·¼»²¬·¿´Þ«·´¼·²¹Ð´±¬ø²±¬¿¼±°¬»¼÷ Ò±²½±²º±®³·²¹´±¬·²²»©´§¿²²»¨»¼¿®»¿ REZONING REQUEST FOR 2862 North Graham Road 11-00500087 REQUEST: A-O Agricultural-Open to PDD Planned Development District SCALE: 7.364 Acres LOCATION: 2862 North Graham Road APPLICANTS: Mary Cole Ventures, LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Matthew Hilgemeier, Staff Planner mhilgemeier@cstx.gov RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and accompanying concept plan. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 1 of 13 August 4, 2011 Planning & Zoning Commission Page 2 of 13 August 4, 2011 Planning & Zoning Commission Page 3 of 13 August 4, 2011 NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Commission Hearing Date: August 4, 2011 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: August 11, 2011 The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing: None Property owner notices mailed: 16 Contacts in support: None at the time of writing this staff report. Contacts in opposition: None at the time of writing this staff report. Inquiry contacts: None at the time of writing this staff report. ADJACENT LAND USES Direction Comprehensive Zoning Land Use Plan NortheastSuburbanA-O Agricultural- A-O Commercial (former Heirloom Gardens CommercialOpen and C-2 CommercialNursery) and IndustrialCommercial strip center Southeast 2-lane Minor A-O Agricultural- North Graham Road and Collector on OpenAgricultural farmland Thoroughfare Plan and Business Park Northwest SuburbanC-2 Commercial Undeveloped/Agricultural Commercial and Industrial and A-O farmland Business Park Agricultural-Open Southwest Business Park A-O Agricultural- Residential Open DEVELOPMENT HISTORY Annexation: 2002 Zoning: A-O Agricultural Open since annexation Final Plat: N/A Site development: Vacant REVIEW CRITERIA 1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map designates the subject property as Business Park. The Business Park land use designation is generally for areas that include office, Planning & Zoning Commission Page 4 of 13 August 4, 2011 research, or industrial uses planned and developed as a unified project that have good access to arterial roadways. Uses proposed with this PDD include those allowed under the Research and Development (R&D) zoning district such as office, light industrial, and testing/research laboratory facilities. Additionally, planned uses proposed as part of this PDD rezoning consist of limited self-storage, large vehicle storage, wholesale services, and office/ warehousing facilities. Standard uses allowed under the base R&D zoning district classification are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Business Park designation. As part of the PDD rezoning process, flexibility is given to allow for potential commercial uses such as limited self-storage/vehicle storage, wholesale services, and warehousing facilities that traditionally are not allowed in R&D districts; however, when additional community benefits such as architectural features, increased setbacks and buffers, and additional pedestrian facilities are applied to the proposed development, the compatibility is increased. Based on the mix of uses and additional design elements proposed with this rezoning it is Staff’s opinion that this proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood: The subject property is currently zoned A-O Agricultural Open. The two properties located along the northeastern property line are developed for commercial uses. One is zoned C-2 Commercial Industrial, while the other, located at the corner of Old Wellborn Road and North Graham Road, is zoned A-O Agricultural-Open. The property to the southeast, across North Graham Road, is zoned A-O Agricultural-Open and is used for agricultural purposes. The property to the southwest is also zoned A-O, but is being utilized for a single residence. The properties located adjacent to the northwest property line are zoned A-O and are undeveloped at this time. While other properties to the northwest, located at the intersection of Old Wellborn Road and Rock Prairie Road, that are zoned C-2 are either undeveloped or developed as a veterinary clinic. Uses allowed by a traditional R&D zoning district such as office and light industrial are compatible with the surrounding commercial, industrial, and residential uses. They are typically less intense uses having lower traffic volumes and can benefit from being in proximity to certain commercial and residential uses. In the past year, the surrounding area has experienced increased growth and development pressure from commercial and residential developments. In June of this year, a planned development consisting of approximately 100 acres of single-family, townhome, office, and commercial uses was approved within the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The uses proposed in this PDD are intended to provide support and service to the growing commercial and residential uses developing in this area of College Station. Through this PDD, additional architectural design requirements, site buffering, and landscaping requirements applied to the proposed self-storage, vehicular storage, and office warehousing uses will address issues related to noise and light pollution that traditionally would make these uses incompatible with the surrounding properties. 3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment: The Planning & Zoning Commission Page 5 of 13 August 4, 2011 subject property is located along North Graham Road, which is classified as a two- lane Major Collector on the Thoroughfare Plan, but is currently built to rural standards. The property is located in close proximity to F.M. 2154 and Rock Prairie Road West; however, it does not have direct access to either roadway. The requested PDD includes office and industrial uses that the Comprehensive Plan anticipates as being suitable for this area over the 20-year Plan horizon. The intent of the office/warehouse portion of the development is to provide lease space for small service-oriented businesses that are more industrial in nature (e.g. plumbers, electricians, and professional contractors), that can serve the needs associated with the continued residential and commercial growth in this area. These types of businesses tend to have low traffic volumes and require limited location identification. Additionally, self-storage uses also tend to have low traffic volumes and are preferably located in areas removed from primary thoroughfares and gateways. 4. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: The property is currently zoned A-O Agricultural-Open, which allows for agricultural and low-density residential uses. Such uses are suitable to the property due to the existing rural environment. However, due to the continued commercial and residential growth in this area, the A-O zoning classification is not suitable for the development that what would be compatible with the surrounding uses and continued growth. 5. Marketability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment: The subject property’s current A-O Agricultural-Open zoning district limits potential development to uses such as agricultural, low-density residential, and open space. There are currently 29 acres of developed property zoned C-1 General Commercial, 23 acres of developed property zoned C-2 Commercial Industrial and 14 acres of developed property zoned for A-P Administrative Professional located within a one- mile radius of the subject property. A combined 121 acres of developed and undeveloped property within a one-mile radius of the subject property are zoned as PDD districts with some commercial and residential uses. While there are office and commercial lease spaces available within the vicinity of the subject property, the proposed rezoning will allow for the development of uses needed to support the expanding commercial and residential developments in the area. 6. Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use: This subject property is not located within the City of College Station’s water service area. Water service (domestic and fire demands) will be provided by Wellborn SUD and will be required to meet the minimum requirements set by the City’s Water Design Guidelines. The subject tract is located near an 8-inch sanitary sewer main, which runs along Rock Prairie Road. The tract is located in the Steeplechase Sanitary Sewer Impact Fee Area that gravity flows into the Bee Creek Trunk Line. This respective trunk line’s sub-basin currently serves many developments along FM2818, from areas east of Wellborn Road, to the Carters Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Much of Planning & Zoning Commission Page 6 of 13 August 4, 2011 the existing trunk line was constructed in 1973 and was shown to have several surcharging line segments in the 2011 HDR Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan Update. The City is currently in the process of initializing a capital improvement project entitled the ‘Bee Creek Relief Line’ that will install a larger diameter gravity line to increase the system capacity of the overall sub-basin in order to accept the ultimate build-out demand anticipated in this respective area. This trunk line capacity increase is necessary to proactively prevent surcharge events, possible fines from TCEQ, and customer service disruptions. Preliminary analysis of this area has identified that the existing sanitary sewer capacity can support the increased sanitary sewer demand from the proposed development, however, future demands in this respective sub-basin will need to be evaluated as development occurs. Drainage on the subject tract is generally to the southwest within the Hope's Creek drainage basin. There is currently no FEMA regulated floodplain on-site. Future development on the property will be required to comply with the City's Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance and BCS Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. REVIEW OF CONCEPT PLAN The applicant has provided the following information related to the purpose and intent of the proposed zoning district: “The purpose and intent of the proposed development is to provide office & office/warehouse space for small/local business, self storage facilities, vehicular/boat storage space, research & development space, light industrial space, wholesales service space and scientific testing/research laboratory space.” In accordance with the purpose statement, the Concept Plan proposes a mixture of office, commercial, and industrial uses. The proposed concept plan includes a two- phased development that will utilize uses allowed in the R&D Research and Development zoning districts and additional uses specific to each phase of the development. Planned uses consist of 10,000 - 12,000 square feet of office/warehouse and wholesale services, as well as 35,000 - 45,000 square feet of self-storage, and vehicular storage for Phase 1. Phase 2 of this development consists of approximately 40,000 square feet of office/warehouse, light industrial, scientific testing/research laboratory and wholesale service uses. Office/warehouse uses, Research and Development uses, and wholesale service uses in Phase 1 will be located near the front of the development along North Graham Road. Self-storage and vehicle storage uses are proposed to be located at the rear of the property and will be limited solely to the first phase of this development. The proposed layout of the development lends itself to a business park environment. Additional landscaping is proposed to lessen the visual impact that the development may have on surrounding properties. The applicant has offered to provide 25% more landscaping than what is required by the UDO throughout the site to create a more appealing look for the development. A 15-foot landscape buffer along with ornamental fencing will be provided along the northern and eastern property lines of this Planning & Zoning Commission Page 7 of 13 August 4, 2011 development. The applicant is proposing to provide a 20-foot to 40-foot conservation buffer consisting of existing, mature, vegetation along the western portion of the property to provide ample separation between the residential property and this development. The applicant is also proposing to include a 25-foot parking setback along North Graham Road to create a “greenbelt” effect along the roadway. A variable width sidewalk (6-foot to 8-foot in width) located within a pedestrian access easement a will be provided along the front of the property to encourage pedestrian connectivity when the surrounding properties are developed. At the time of plat and site plan, the project will need to meet all applicable site development standards required by the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) for the R&D Research and Development zoning classification, except for those requested modifications allowed as part of the PDD zoning classification. Staff is currently undertaking an effort to create new zoning districts to implement the different character areas envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. In the absence of a defined Business Park zoning district, the applicant and staff have negotiated through various standards to seek to attain a business park style development that is appropriate for this portion of the City, while seeking to retain flexibility for both parties. Base Zoning and Meritorious Modifications The applicant has proposed to utilize the uses allowed by the R&D Research and Development zoning classification as the base, underlying zoning district for this PDD district. However, in lieu of meeting the dimensional standards required in R&D zoned districts, the applicant is proposing to utilize dimensional standards found in Section 5.4 Non-Residential Dimensional Standards of a C-1 General Commercial zoning district for this PDD district. At the time of plat and site plan, the project will need to meet all applicable site development standards and platting requirements of the UDO for the R&D Research and Development zoning classification, except where meritorious modifications are granted with the PDD zoning. The applicant is requesting the following meritorious modifications: 1. UDO Section 5.3.H.1 a, b, c, e – “Performance Criteria for All Uses ” in R&D zoning districts: The applicant is requesting a waiver from the following performance criteria and additional standards required for all uses in the R&D zoning district: 1. Performance Criteria for All Uses a.Impervious Surface: Impervious surface is limited to 70 percent. The UDO requires this limitation of impervious surface in R&D zoning districts so that when constructed, developments in these districts will be compatible with the character and integrity of the surrounding neighborhoods. To satisfy the intent of this requirement, the applicant proposes to provide a 20-foot to 40- foot conservation buffer on the western side of the development that will consist of existing canopy and non-canopy trees ranging from 6-inches to 24- inches in diameter. The northeastern and northwestern property lines will include a 15-foot landscaping buffer, and a 25-foot parking setback will serve Planning & Zoning Commission Page 8 of 13 August 4, 2011 as a “greenbelt” along the southern property line. An internal landscaped buffer screen will also be put in place to surround the self-storage and vehicle storage portion of the development. The applicant is also proposing that at time of site plan, landscaping requirements will be exceeded by 25% of what is required by the UDO for this site. Combined, these additional development standards will increase the overall aesthetics of the site and serve to meet the intent of the impervious surface limitations. b.Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The maximum FAR in this district shall not exceed 50 percent. Floor Area Ratio refers to the ratio of the floor area of a building to the area of the lot on which the building is located. The purpose of establishing a maximum FAR not to exceed 50% is to encourage the preservation of open space, reduce the amount of impervious surface of a development, and ensure that building heights are compatible with the character of the surrounding areas. The applicant is requesting to be exempt from this requirement. As stated above, the applicant is also providing 25% additional landscaping, a 15-foot landscaped buffer along the northeast and northwest property lines, and a 20-foot to 40-foot conservation buffer to mitigate the impact this development will have on the natural environment. The applicant has stated that building heights will range from 10 feet to a maximum of 30 feet. c.Building Materials: All main buildings shall have not less than 90 percent of the total exterior walls, excluding doors, windows and window walls, constructed or faced with brick, stone, masonry, stucco or precast concrete panels. Current UDO standards do not require structures constructed in R&D zoning districts to meet the requirements of Section 7.9 Non-Residential Architectural Standards; however, there are specific building material requirements for all structures constructed in R&D districts.In lieu of meeting the building materials standards of the R&D zoning classification for all buildings the applicant proposed to provide specific architectural features and building materials standards: i. Office/warehousing, wholesale services, and R&D uses: a. Provide two or more elements of architectural relief for building mass and design on both front and side facades at least every 45 feet. b. 100% combination of masonry, stone, and/or UDO compliant façade finishes on all office/warehousing structures if visible from the right-of- way. c. No more than 66% of rooflines are on the same elevation on both front and side facades. ii. Self-Storage (Phase 1 only): 100% masonry, stone and/or UDO compliant façade finish on all eastern and western facades even if not visible from the right-of-way. iii. Vehicular Storage (Phase 1 only): 100% masonry, stone, and/or UDO compliant façade finish on the northern, eastern, and western facades. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 9 of 13 August 4, 2011 e.Other District Regulations:All processes are to be conducted inside buildings and there shall be no outside storage or business activity. Any business operations occurring during the hours between 7 p.m. and 6 a.m. must meet all the performance criteria established in this section, as well as limit vehicular access into the site through a designated access point that mitigates any adverse impacts of the traffic on surrounding residential areas. Due to the nature of the uses proposed as part of the PDD district, the applicant does not feel that these restrictions are necessary given the additional landscaping, buffering, and screening standards being proposed as part of this PDD request. The applicant is providing a 24-foot Public Way along the western portion of the property to provide connectivity to neighboring property to the North when it develops in the future. 2. UDO Section 5.4 “Non-Residential Dimensional Standards” The applicant has requested a waiver from the dimensional standards for the R&D Research and Development zoning classification, proposing instead to use the dimensional standards required for the C-1 General Commercial zoning district for this development. The table below details the dimensional standards required and those requested by the applicant: R&D Research C-1 General and DevelopmentCommercial (Required)(Requested) 20,000 Square Min. Lot Area None feet Min. Lot Width 100 feet 24 feet Min. Lot Depth 200 feet 100 feet Min. Front Setback 30 feet 25 feet Min. Side Setback 30 feet 7.5 feet Min. St. Side 30 feet 15 feet Setback Min. Rear Setback 30 feet 15 feet Max. Height None 30 feet 3. UDO Section 7.3.C.3.f.3 “Access Management – Spacing of Adjacent Driveways” The applicant has requested an 85-foot reduction to the 235-foot driveway spacing standards required for adjacent driveways located along streets classified as a Major Collector. This modification will allow the applicant to construct a second driveway to the subject property that will be located within 150 feet of the existing residential Planning & Zoning Commission Page 10 of 13 August 4, 2011 driveway located on the abutting property to the west. The second driveway will be for a public way that will allow this development to meet the block length requirements of Section 8.2 of the UDO when the property is platted. The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for PDD Concept Plans: 1. The proposal will constitute an environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding area: The Concept Plan provides for office/warehousing uses to be located at the front of the development along North Graham Road. Self-storage and vehicle-storage facilities will be located to the rear of the property and a landscaped buffer surrounding these uses will be provided to enhance the overall character of the development. All buildings will have increased aesthetic requirements and will use materials that are not generally required by the UDO for developments located in R&D zoned districts. 2. The proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, and any subsequently adopted Plans, and will be consistent with the intent and purpose of this Section: The Concept Plan reflects the policies, goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to land use and character, connectivity, market flexibility and sustainability. The Business Park future land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan is intended for areas that include office, research, or industrial uses planned and developed as a unified project. The uses proposed in this PDD zoning district are consistent with uses the Comprehensive Plan designates as appropriate for the Business Park future land use classification. 3. The proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will not adversely affect adjacent development: Adjacent properties to the northwest and southwest are largely undeveloped, but are also designated as Business Park in the Comprehensive Plan. As proposed, this development will be compatible with the adjacent commercial uses located to the northeast of the subject property due to the scale and design of the site and proposed structures. This development will serve as a transition from more intense commercial uses to the northeast and future Business Park uses to the northwest and southwest. Additionally, the proposed development includes a Public Way, projecting to the adjacent property to the North, as well as cross access easements to the eastern and western properties, which will allow for the removal of existing non-conforming driveways in the future when these properties are developed. When constructed, buildings will have a maximum height of 30 feet, will be required to provide architectural design elements on specified facades, and will use building materials that consist of stone or masonry products on specified facades. The proposal Planning & Zoning Commission Page 11 of 13 August 4, 2011 also includes provisions for a 20-foot to 40-foot conservation buffer along the west side of the property, as well as a 15-foot landscaped buffer around the remainder of the property. These buffers will serve to block direct light from vehicles entering and exiting the site and will reduce some effects of noise pollution that can be associated with these types of uses. 4. Every dwelling unit need not front on a public street but shall have access to a public street directly or via a court, walkway, public area, or area owned by a homeowners association: There are no residential uses proposed for this development. 5. The development includes provision of adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to, parks, schools, and other public facilities: At the time of platting and site plan, the applicant will be dedicating a 42-foot public access easement and providing a Public Way as defined by the UDO, along the western portion of the property. They will be constructing a variable width sidewalk, ranging from 6 feet to 8 feet in width, adjacent to North Graham Road right-of-way. The Concept Plan also includes an area reserved for an outdoor, public, picnic area near the conservation buffer. Additionally, the applicant has designed the site to take into consideration a 10-foot right-of-way dedication that will be required at platting along North Graham Road and a cross access easement along the front of the property to allow neighboring properties to the east additional access in the future when developed. 6. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity: Staff initially expressed concerns regarding noise and light pollution from vehicular traffic being a nuisance to the adjacent residential property; however, the applicant is proposing to use a 20-foot to 40-foot conservation buffer yard to include existing landscaping consisting of canopy and non-canopy trees ranging from 6-inches to 24- inches in diameter to mitigate the effects that noise and light pollution may have on the residential uses adjacent to this site. This site’s stormwater detention facilities will be located between the proposed conservation buffer and proposed Public Way to provide for increase separation between uses. Additionally, the concept plan shows a landscaped buffer screen surrounding the self-storage and vehicular storage portions of the development. 7. The development will not adversely affect the safety and convenience of vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian circulation in the vicinity, including traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use and other uses reasonably anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses in the area: A traffic impact analysis was not required for this project due to the proposed size of the project and low levels of traffic (144 trips per peak hour) that are estimated to be generated by this proposal. Furthermore, the square footage of the different land uses Planning & Zoning Commission Page 12 of 13 August 4, 2011 was capped to stay below the 150-vehicle trip threshold. At the time of platting and site plan the applicant will be dedicating a 42-foot public access easement to provide a Public Way as defined by the UDO, along the western portion of the property and will be constructing a variable width sidewalk, ranging from 6 to 8 feet in width, along southeastern portion of the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and concept plan. SUPPORTING MATERIALS 1. Application 2. Meritorious Modifications Justifications 3. Rezoning Map (provided in packet) 4. Concept Plan (provided in packet) Planning & Zoning Commission Page 13 of 13 August 4, 2011 1101 Texas Avenue South, P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM DATE: July 21, 2011 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM:Carol Cotter, P.E., Sr. Asst. City Engineer SUBJECT: Semi-Annual Report – Impact Fees 92-01, 97-01, 97-02B, 99-01, 03-02 Local Government Code requires semi-annual reporting in order to monitor the progress of impact fees and to determine when an update to the fee study is necessary. An update was recommended and approved last year, and is currently under way. There have been no major changes over the last reporting period. Staff recommends that the Advisory Committee forward this report to City Council for their status update. The City of College Station Ordinance Chapter 15, Impact Fees, designates the Planning and Zoning Commission as the Advisory Committee for review, advisement, and monitoring of proposed and existing impact fees. More specifically, the Advisory Committee is established to: 1. Advise and assist the City in adopting Land Use assumptions. 2. Review the Capital Improvements Plan and file written comments. 3. Monitor and evaluate implementation of the Capital Improvements Plan. 4. File semi-annual reports with respect to the progress of the Capital Improvements Plan. 5. Advise the City Council of the need to update or revise the Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Impact Fees. Currently the City of College Station has five impact fees in existence of which all associated construction is complete. All five of the impact fees underwent a 5-Year Update in either 2008 or 2009 (as noted below) in accordance with State Law. The following is a current status report for each of the five impact fees. (To facilitate review data changes from previous 6 months are presented in bold font.): 92-01 Sanitary Sewer ( Graham Road ) ( 508 ac. ) __ $316.07/LUE This fee was initially implemented in 1992 at $152.18 /LUE and was revised in 1996 to $289.77/LUE after approval of updated Land use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan (CIP), revised again to the $232.04/LUE in 2000 and to the current amount in April of 2008. The CIP consists of three phases originally estimated at $543,000 which have all been completed at a combined cost of $473,518.72. Fees collected over the last 6 months are $0.00 for total amount of $323,502.20 (per Account #250-0000-287.51-13). The remaining amount eligible for collection is about $18,211. The total amount to be recovered through impact fees is anticipated at 72% of original construction cost. 97-01 Sanitary Sewer ( Spring Creek – Pebble Hills) ( 2000 ac.) $98.39/LUE This fee was implemented in December 1997 at $349.55/LUE and was revised to the current amount in April of 2008. The CIP consists of Phase I (east of Hwy 6 ) and Phase II (west of Hwy 6 ). Phase I estimated to cost $1,000,000 was completed in 1999 at a cost of $631,214.59. Phase II was estimated to cost $1,350,000 and was completed at a cost of $813,752.00. The total actual cost was $1,444,966.59. Fees collected over the last 6 months are $7,576 for total amount of$559,964 (per Acct #251-0000-287.51-13). The remaining amount eligible for collection is about $196,933. The total amount to be recovered through impact fees is anticipated at 52% of original construction cost. 97-02B Sanitary Sewer ( Alum Creek – Nantucket) ( 608 ac. ) $59.42/LUE This fee was implemented in December 1997 at 243.38/LUE and was revised to the current amount in April of 2008. The CIP consisted of running a 15" sanitary sewer line from the south end of the College Station Business Park westerly along Alum Creek to the east ROW of Highway 6. The project was estimated to cost $390,000 and was completed in 1999 at a cost of $214,270.87. Fees collected over the last 6 months are $238 for total amount of $21,226 (per Acct #252-0000- 287.51-13). The remaining amount eligible for collection is about $182,141. The total amount to be recovered through impact fees is anticipated at 95% of original construction cost. 99-01 Water ( Harley )( 158 ac. ) $769.91/LUE This fee was implemented in April 1999 at $550.00/LUE and was revised to the current amount in April of 2008. The CIP consists of running an 18" water line south along the east ROW of Highway 6 approximately 4800'. The line was estimated to cost $312,000 (the impact fee is based on an 8" line @ $165,000 ). A 2400' section of the 18" line was constructed in 1999 from the south end at a total cost of $342,977.73. Fees collected over the last 6 months are $50,814 for total amount of $58,582 (per Acct #240-0000-287.51-13). The remaining amount eligible for collection is about $252,531. The total amount to be recovered through impact fees is anticipated at 91% of original construction cost. 03-02 Sanitary Sewer ( Steeplechase ) ( 715 ac. ) $357.74/LUE This fee was initially implemented in June 2003 at $300.00/LUE and was revised to the current amount in May of 2009. This CIP was constructed in two phases of sanitary sewer line construction in compliance with the proposed construction in the original report establishing the fee. Phase one crossed Wellborn Road and terminated at Old Wellborn Road consisting of 2,347 linear feet of 18 inch sewer line with a construction cost of $296,642. Phase two was completed in 2006 and continued the line along Old Wellborn Road and terminated across RPR West. Phase two consisted of 6,281 linear feet of 12 inch line and 2,062 linear feet of 18 inch line for a construction cost of $529,088 and a land cost of $87,133. The design cost for the combined phases was $148,023. The total actual cost was $1,091,886 which was less than the original report estimated at $1,596,137. Fees collected over the last 6 months are $12,521 for total amount of $46,474 (per Acct #253-0000-287.51-13). The remaining amount eligible for collection is about $744,035. The total amount to be recovered through impact fees is anticipated at 72% of original construction cost. As part of a previous Semi-Annual Report the impact of the newly adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan was evaluated. As presented in the Table below, the densities expected with the Land Use Plan adopted in 2009 are significantly different in several of the Impact Fee Areas. An update to incorporate these changes has been in progress but needed to consider the Water and Wastewater Master Plans that were under development, as well as, a City Wide Impact Fee Study that was underway. Both projects were significant to the aforementioned update. With the recent completion of both projects, the update can now proceed and is currently in progress with completion being anticipated in the next several months. Remaining EffectiveCurrentAnticipated LUECapital Impact Fee Area BuildoutImpactBuildout AdjustmentInvestment LUEFee Rate LUE to Recoup 92-01 Graham 1551 $ 316.07 1775 + 224 $ 18,000 97-01 Spring Creek 4425 $ 98.39 8384 + 3959 $197,000 97-02B Alum 3232 $ 59.42 2139 - 1093 $182,000 99-01 Harley 450 $ 769.91 440 - 10 $253,000 03-02 Steeplechase 2838 $ 357.74 7816 + 4987 $744,000 Total $1,394,000 The Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395.082 requires an annual certification letter from the City to the Texas Attorney General stating essentially that the City’s impact fee program is in compliance with state law. With your direction, this Semi-Annual Report will be forwarded to City Council for their update and the Mayor’s execution of the certification. Attachments: Impact Fee Service Areas Map Land Use at Adoption Map per Impact Fee Area Current Land Use Map per Impact Fee Area Compliance Certification Letter to Attorney General ÝÑÓÐÔ×ßÒÝÛÝÛÎÌ×Ú×ÝßÌ×ÑÒÔÛÌÌÛÎ ß«¹«¬ööôîðïï ß¬¬±®²»§Ù»²»®¿´Ù®»¹ß¾¾±¬¬ Ñºº·½»±º¬¸»ß¬¬±®²»§Ù»²»®¿´ ÐÑÞ±¨ïîëìè ß«¬·²ôÌÈéèéïïÁîëìè Ü»¿®ß¬¬±®²»§Ù»²»®¿´ß¾¾±¬¬æ Ì¸·¬¿¬»³»²¬½»®¬·º·»½±³°´·¿²½»©·¬¸Ý¸¿°¬»®íçëôÔ±½¿´Ù±ª»®²³»²¬Ý±¼»º±®¬¸»Ý·¬§±º Ý±´´»¹»Í¬¿¬·±²ôÌ»¨¿ò Í·²½»®»´§ô ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ Ò¿²½§Þ»®®§ Ó¿§±® Ý·¬§±ºÝ±´´»¹»Í¬¿¬·±²