HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/05/2012 - Agenda Packet - Planning & Zoning Commission
д¿²²·²¹ ú Ʊ²·²¹
ݱ³³··±²
ß°®·´ ëô îðïî
ɱ®µ¸±° Ó»»¬·²¹ êæðð ÐÓ
λ¹«´¿® Ó»»¬·²¹ éæðð ÐÓ
AGENDA
PLANNING&ZONINGCOMMISSION
WM
ORKSHOP EETING
A5,2012,6:00PM
PRIL AT
CHCC
ITY ALL OUNCIL HAMBERS
1101TA
EXASVENUE
CS,T
OLLEGE TATIONEXAS
1.Call the meeting to order.
2.Discussion of consent and regular agenda items.
3.Discussion of Minor and Amending Plats approved by Staff.
Final Plat ~ Amending Plat ~ Emerald Ridge Estates Phase 1
4.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the status of items within the 2012
(JS)
P&Z Plan of Work (see attached).
5.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update on the following items:
A rezoning from R-2 Duplex Residential, R-4 Multi-Family, C-1 General
Commercial, and C-2 Commercial Industrial to PDD Planned Development District
for approximately 11 acres located at 410 Texas Avenue, generally located at the
northwest corner of the intersection of Texas Avenue and University Drive. The
Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on March 1 and voted 6-0 to
recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on March 8 and voted 7-0 to
approve the rezoning.
6.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming
Meetings.
April 10, 2012 ~ Wellborn Issues & Opportunity Meeting ~ Wellborn Community
Center ~ 6:30 p.m.
April 12, 2012 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 3:00 p.m.
and Regular 7:00 p.m.
April 19. 2012 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 6:00 p.m. and
Regular 7:00 p.m.
7.Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Design Review
Board, Joint Parks / Planning & Zoning Subcommittee, Neighborhood Plan Stakeholder
Resource Team, BioCorridor Committee, Lick Creek Nature Center Task Force, Zoning
District Subcommittee, Joint Task Force on Neighborhood Parking Issues, and Wellborn
District Plan Resource Team.
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.
9.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 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.
Notice is hereby given that a Workshop Meeting of the College Station Planning & Zoning Commission, College Station,
Texas will be held on April 5, 2012 at 6:00 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 day of Month , 2012 at time .
,
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 the Workshop 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 March Day ,2012, at Time and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours
preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and
time: ______________________ by _________________________.
Dated this _____ day of_____________, 2012.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
By_____________________________
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of_______________, 2012.
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.
AGENDA
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
RM
EGULAREETING
A5,2012,7:00..
PRIL AT PM
CHCC
ITY ALL OUNCIL HAMBERS
1101TA
EXASVENUE
C
S,T
OLLEGE TATIONEXAS
1.Call meeting to order.
Pledge of Allegiance.
2.
Hear Citizens.
3. 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
4..
4.1Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting Minutes.
March 1, 2012 ~ Workshop
March 1, 2012 ~ Regular
4.2Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Final Plat for We Rent
Storage Subdivision consisting of two PDD Planned Development District lots
and one R-1 Single-Family Residential lot on 8.21 acres located at 2672 Horse
Case #
Haven Lane, generally located behind Academy Sports + Outdoors Store.
12-00500033 (LH)
Regular Agenda
5.Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent
Agenda by Commission action.
6.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a waiver request to Section 8.2.G
"Blocks" of the Unified Development Ordinance, and presentation, possible action, and
discussion regarding a Development Plat for Chick’s College Station Subdivision
consisting of one PDD Planned Development District lot on 1.498 acre located at 13601
Wellborn Road, generally located at the intersection of Wellborn Road and William D.
Case # 12-00500018 (LH)
Fitch Parkway.
7.Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Final Plat
for the F.S. Kapchinski Subdivision, Block 2, Lot 6R1, being a replat of the F.S.
Kapchinski Subdivision, Block 2, Lot 6R and the remainder of Block 2, Lots 6
and 7, consisting of 1 lot on 1.11 acres located at 1713 Park Place, located immediately
Case #12-00500025 (MR)
west of Harvey Washbanger's.
8.Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a zoning
amendment request from R-6 High-Density Multi-Family Residential to PDD Planned
Development District for 0.73 acre on Lots 9 and 10, Block 3 of the College Hills
Estates Subdivision located at 1024 and 1026 Foster Avenue, generally located at the
Case # 11-00500135 (LH) (Note:
intersection of Foster Avenue and Francis Drive.
Final action on this item is scheduled for the April 26, 2012 City Council Meeting -
subject to change)
9.Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a zoning
amendment request from A-O Agricultural-Open to R-4 Multi-Family Residential for
5.379 acres within University Heights Subdivision Phase 5 located at 3182 Holleman
Case # 12-00500030
Drive South, generally located north of Las Palomas Subdivision.
(LH) (Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for the April 26, 2012 City
Council Meeting - subject to change)
10.Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Rezoning from PDD
Planned Development District to PDD Planned Development District to add an additional
use, for 108.88 acres located at 3100 Haupt Road, generally located between Old
Case
Wellborn Road and Holleman Drive South, North of the Buena Vida Subdivision.
#12-00500006 (MR) (Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for the April 26,
2012 City Council Meeting - subject to change)
11.Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Rezoning from PDD
Planned Development District to PDD Planned Development District, for 3.19 acres
located at 2849 Barron Road, generally located at the corner of Barron Road and SH 40,
Case #12-00500041 (MR) (Note: Final action on
North of the Sonoma Subdivision.
this item is scheduled for the April 26, 2012 City Council Meeting - subject to
change)
12.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.
13.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 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.
Notice is hereby given that a Regular Meeting of the College Station Planning & Zoning Commission, College Station,
Texas will be held on April 5, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. 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 Month , 2012, 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
March ___, 2012, at _______ and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of
said meeting.
This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and
time: ______________________ by _________________________.
Dated this _____ day of_____________, 2012.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
By_____________________________
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of_______________, 2012.
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.
2012 Planning & Zoning Commission Plan of Work
Comprehensive Plan Implementation
Implementation of Adopted Plans
Summary:Project Dates:
Implementation of adopted master plans and
1/23/12 & 1/25/12: Lick Creek multi-use path public
neighborhood, district, and corridor plans, namely:
meetings.
Central College Station Neighborhood Plan, Eastgate
3/5/12: College Hills Neighborhood Association
Neighborhood Plan, Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
meeting to discuss single-family overlay.
Greenways Master Plan, Parks and Recreation Master
Plan, Water Master Plan, and Waste Water Master
Plan.
Staff Assigned: P&DS StaffAnticipated Completion: On-going
Medical District Plan
Summary:Project Dates:
10/25/11: Consultant presented draft plan at final
In partnership with the College Station Medical Center
Medical Corridor Advisory Committee meeting.
and other stakeholders, development of a plan focused
1/12/12: Council update regarding plan.
on the creation of a healthcare and wellness district
centered at the intersection of Rock Prairie Road and
2/2/12: P&Z Workshop update regarding plan.
State Highway 6.
Staff Assigned: JPAnticipated Completion: Spring 2012
BioCorridor Plan
Summary:Project Dates:
12/21/11: Councils adopted Inter-Local Agreement
In collaboration with the City of Bryan and other
regarding BioCorridor.
stakeholders, development of a corridor plan near State
Hwy 47 and Raymond Stotzer Pkwy to realize a unique
1/19/12: P&Z Workshop update regarding plan.
research district where plant, animal, and human health
2/3/12: P&Z BioCorridor Subcommittee meeting.
may be studied in one place.
3/2/12: P&Z BioCorridor Subcommittee meeting.
Staff Assigned: MH, BCAnticipated Completion: Spring 2012
Southside Area Neighborhood Plan
Summary:Project Dates:
1/30/12-2/1/12: Neigbhorhood Area Meetings.
Development of neighborhood plan for a number of
2/13/12: Neigbhorhood Resource Team meeting.
unique neighborhoods including Oakwood, College
3/20/12: Neighborhood Resource Team meeting.
Park, portions of the Knoll, McCullough Subdivision,
Redmond Terrace, and Wolf Pen Village. The plan area
4/16/12: Neighborhood Resource Team meeting.
is generally bounded by George Bush Drive, Texas
5/14/12: Neighborhood Resource Team meeting.
Avenue, and Wellborn Road.
Staff Assigned: JP, LHAnticipated Completion: Summer 2012
п¹» ï ±º í
Wellborn District Plan
Summary:Project Dates:
2/6/12: Plan Kick-Off meeting at Wellborn Community
Development of district plan for the recently annexed
Center at 6:30 PM.
Wellborn area that contains elements of a rural historic
community with a unique character that residents of the
3/26/12: Wellborn Resource Team meeting at
area desire to retain.
Wellborn Community Center at 630pm.
4/10/12: Issues & Opportunities meeting at Wellborn
Community Center
Staff Assigned: MR, LHAnticipated Completion: Fall 2012
Economic Development Master Plan
Summary:Project Dates:
10/24/11: Statement of Qualifications received;
Development of a Master Plan to provide consistent
currently working on Scope of Work with top
direction on how the City will help ensure its economic
candidate.
health for years to come while providing a positive
business development environment.
1/5/12: P&Z Workshop update on Master Plan.
2/23/12: Council approved consultant contract.
3/22/12: Project Kick-off meeting with consultant.
Staff Assigned: P&DS StaffAnticipated Completion: Fall 2012
New Zoning Districts
Summary:Project Dates:
2/17/12: P&Z Subcommittee meeting.
Create and adopt new zoning districts to implement
character and land use designations identified in the
3/2/12: P&Z Subcommittee meeting.
Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Assigned: JP
Anticipated Completion:
Neighborhood Parking
Summary:Project Dates:
2/9/12: Council approved resolution establishing Joint
Analyze neighborhood parking issues by engaging
Task Force on Neigbhorhood Parking Issues.
stakeholders, form Joint Task with Council and
recommendations that seek solutions.
2/16/12: P&Z appoints Joint Task Force members.
3/21/12: Initial Joint Task Force meeting.
4/25/12: Joint Task Force Meeting at 5 PM.
Staff Assigned: BC, TRAnticipated Completion:
Employment Diversification
Diversification of Employment Opportunities
Summary:Project Dates:
Discuss workforce and employment opportunities in the
1/12/12: Strategic Plan policy discussion with Council.
community and strategies to increase their diversity and
the City's role in providing a positive business
development environment.
Staff Assigned: P&DS StaffAnticipated Completion:
п¹» î ±º í
Housing
Affordable Housing
Summary:Project Dates:
3/1/12: Discussion at P&Z Workshop, led by
Discuss how housing affordability is measured and
Community Development Division.
provide information on affordability of homes in the
College Station and Bryan housing markets.
Staff Assigned: P&DS StaffAnticipated Completion:
Role of Planning and Regulation
Summary:Project Dates:
Discuss role of planning and regulation on housing
supply and value.
Staff Assigned: P&DS StaffAnticipated Completion:
Impact of Student Housing Market
Summary:Project Dates:
Discuss impact of single-family dwellings used for
student rental purposes on the local housing market.
Staff Assigned: P&DS Staff
Anticipated Completion:
п¹» í ±º í
Ó×ÒËÌÛÍ
ÐÔßÒÒ×ÒÙ ú ÆÑÒ×ÒÙ ÝÑÓÓ×ÍÍ×ÑÒ
ɱ®µ¸±° Ó»»¬·²¹
Ó¿®½¸ ïô îðïîô êæðð °ò³ò
Ý·¬§ Ø¿´´ ݱ«²½·´ ݸ¿³¾»®
ݱ´´»¹» ͬ¿¬·±²ô Ì»¨¿
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Craig Hall, Bo Miles, Jodi Warner, Jim Ross, James
Benham, and Jerome Rektorik
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
Mike Ashfield
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Blanche Brick
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Cowell,Lance Simms, Carol Cotter, Molly Hitchcock, Jason
Schubert, Teresa Rogers, Joe Guerra, Erika Bridges, Mary Ann Powell, Jennifer Prochazka, Matt
Robinson, Lauren Hovde, David Brower, Debbie Eller, Christina Court, and Carrie McHugh
1.Call the meeting to order.
Commissioner Miles called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
2.Discussion of consent and regular agenda items.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding Regular Agenda Item 7.
Commissioner Benham arrived at 6:17 p.m.
3.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the status of items within the 2012
(JS)
P&Z Plan of Work (see attached).
Principal Planner Schubert gave an update regarding the 2012 P&Z Plan of Work.
4.Presentation, possible action, and discussion on current demographics and the housing
market in College Station, and programs offered through the City of College Station to
(DB)
increase access to affordable housing.
Community Development Analyst David Brower discussed current demographics and
housing programs offered through the City of College Station.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding housing programs.
5.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update on the following item:
A rezoning from A-O, Agricultural Open, to R-1B, Single-Family Residential, for 65
acres located at 13500 Rock Prairie Road, generally located west of Lick Creek Park.
March 1, 2012 P&Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
The Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on January 19 and voted 5-1 to
recommend approval with conditions. The City Council heard this item February 9
and voted 7-0 to approve the rezoning as recommended by the Commission.
Commissioner Miles reviewed the above-referenced item that had been heard by the
Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council.
6.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming
Meetings.
Monday, March 2, 2012 ~ Zoning District Subcommittee ~ Administrative Conference
Room # 2 ~ 8:15 a.m.
Thursday, March 8, 2012 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop
3:00 p.m. and Regular 7:00 p.m.
Thursday, March 15, 2012 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Workshop 6:00
p.m. and Regular 7:00 p.m.
Commissioner Miles reviewed the upcoming meeting dates for the Planning & Zoning
Commission.
7.Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Design Review
Board, Council Transportation Committee, Joint Parks / Planning & Zoning Subcommit-
tee, Neighborhood Plan Stakeholder Resource Team, BioCorridor Committee, Medical
Corridor Committee, Lick Creek Nature Center Task Force.
Commissioner Benham gave an update on the Joint Parks / Planning & Zoning
Subcommittee.
Commissioner Miles gave an update on the BioCorridor Committee.
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.
No future agenda items were requested.
9.Adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m.
Approved: Attest:
______________________________ ________________________________
Bo Miles, Acting Chairman Christina Court, Staff Assistant
Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Services
March 1, 2012 P&Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
Ó×ÒËÌÛÍ
ÐÔßÒÒ×ÒÙ ú ÆÑÒ×ÒÙ ÝÑÓÓ×ÍÍ×ÑÒ
λ¹«´¿® Ó»»¬·²¹
Ó¿®½¸ ïô îðïîô éæðð °ò³ò
Ý·¬§ Ø¿´´ ݱ«²½·´ ݸ¿³¾»®
ݱ´´»¹» ͬ¿¬·±²ô Ì»¨¿
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Craig Hall, Bo Miles, Jodi Warner, Jim Ross, James
Benham, and Jerome Rektorik
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
Mike Ashfield
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Blanche Brick
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Cowell,Lance Simms, Carol Cotter, Molly Hitchcock, Jason
Schubert, Teresa Rogers, Joe Guerra, Erika Bridges, Lauren Hovde, Mary Ann Powell, Christina
Court, and Carrie McHugh
Call meeting to order
1.
Commissioner Miles called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
2.
Hear Citizens
3.
No one spoke.
Consent Agenda
4.
4.1 Consideration, discussion, and possible action on Absence Requests from
meetings.
Craig Hall ~ February 16, 2012
Mike Ashfield ~ March 1, 2012
4.2 Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting Minutes.
February 16, 2012 ~ Workshop
February 16, 2012 ~ Regular
4.3Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Final Plat for The
Barracks II Section 100 Subdivision consisting of 83 lots on 23.383 acres located
at 3100 Haupt Road, generally located between Old Wellborn Road and Holleman
Case #11-00500109 (MR)
Drive South, north of Buena Vida Subdivision.
March 1, 2012 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4
4.4Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Preliminary Plat for the
Castlegate II Subdivision consisting of 639 lots on 202.655 acres located at 4298
W.S. Phillips Parkway, located immediately west of the Castlegate Subdivision.
Case #12-00500004 (MR)
4.5Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Final Plat for the
Castlegate II Section 201 Subdivision consisting of 30 lots on 10.587 acres
located at 2600 Greens Prairie Road West, generally located west of the
Case #12-00500003 (MR)
Castlegate Subdivision.
Commissioner Ross motioned to approve Consent Agenda Items 4.1 4.5.
Commissioner Benham seconded the motion, motion passed (6-0).
Regular Agenda
5.Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent
Agenda by Commission action.
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
6.Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding two waiver requests to Section
Plat for Donald Eugene Sewell Estates Subdivision consisting of four R-1 Single-Family
Case # 11-00500191
Residential lots on 0.4954 acres located at 205 Sterling Street.
(LH)
Staff Planner Hovde presented the waivers and final plat and recommended approval.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the waivers and replat.
Commissioner Warner motioned to approve the waivers. Commissioner Benham
seconded the motion, motion passed (6-0).
Commissioner Warner motioned to approve the final plat. Commissioner Rektorik
seconded the motion, motion passed (6-0).
7.Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a rezoning from R-
2 Duplex Residential, R-4 Multi-Family, C-1 General Commercial and C-2 Commercial
Industrial to PDD Planned Development District for approximately 11 acres located at
410 Texas Avenue, generally located at the northwest corner of the intersection with
Case # 12-00500010 (JS) (Note: Final action on this item is
University Drive.
scheduled for the March 8, 2012 City Council Meeting subject to change)
March 1, 2012 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4
Principal Planner Schubert presented the rezoning and recommended approval with the
condition that the revisions agreed with the applicant be incorporated into the application
and concept plan. The staff report recommended approval with six conditions that were
resolved with the applicant prior to the meeting.
Executive Director Cowell described the agreed revisions as follows:
1) The head-in parking areas along the Public Way will be removed and may be replaced
with parallel parking. The sidewalk adjacent to the parallel parking may be reduced
to 8-foot if the parallel parking is provided.
2) One Public Way projection will be provided and constructed with Phase 2 connecting
the former Meadowland Street to the property line on the southern end of the
northern-most parking garage. The Public Way will be constructed in accordance
with all requirements (pavement width, construction standards, easement, vertical
clearance, etc) associated with Public Ways, except that the required sidewalks may
be replaced with an 8-foot unobstructed access way through the nearby amenity area,
which will also be constructed with Phase 2. Further, the easement associated with
the Public Way will address the owner's concerns with aerial rights. No other Public
Ways are required to break block length.
3) Construct dual right-turn lanes on Texas Avenue to westbound University Drive, with
the assumption TxDOT will not prohibit this construction.
4) Bus shelters will be provided as detailed in the Concept Plan and will be placed in an
acceptable location to the bus service providers.
5) The minimum utility line separation from a building will be adhered to, except that
deviations may be permitted based on specific design specifications submitted to staff.
6) Sidewalks located along Public Way Section C-C may be constructed at 6-foot off the
back of curb versus the required 8-foot, with the understanding that required
landscaping will be accommodated outside the sidewalk and/or in traversable tree
wells meeting City specifications.
Veronica Morgan, Mitchell & Morgan, gave an overview of the project and introduced
the project team.
Matthew Peterson, Humphrey & Partners, spoke regarding similar projects they have
previously developed.
Michael Smith, Humphrey & Partners, spoke regarding the layout of the development
and the multiple phases that will be developed and what will be included.
Mike McInturf spoke regarding the traffic analysis and mobility for automobiles, bicycles
and pedestrians.
Natalie Reese, IPS Group, spoke regarding how the PDD zoning will be utilized.
Commissioner Miles opened the public hearing.
March 1, 2012 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Commissioner Miles closed the public hearing.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the rezoning.
Commissioner Warner motioned to recommend approval of the rezoning based on
the condition that the application and concept plan be revised as agreed to reflect
the conditions presented and addressed in the staff report. She stated that the
motion also includes approval of the meritorious modifications as presented and
adjusted. Commissioner Benham seconded the motion, motion passed (6-0).
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 8:30 p.m.
Approved: Attest:
______________________________ ________________________________
Bo Miles, Acting Chairman Christina Court, Staff Assistant
Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Services
March 1, 2012 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4
FINAL PLAT
for
We Rent Storage
12-00500033
SCALE:
Three lots on 8.21 acres
LOCATION:
2672 Horse Haven Lane
ZONING:
PDD Planned Development District and
R-1 Single-Family Residential
APPLICANT:
Mike Hester, P.E., Hester Engineering Company
PROJECT MANAGER:
Lauren Hovde, Staff Planner
lhovde@cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 1of 3
April 5, 2012
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 2of 3
April 5, 2012
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation:
September 1977
Zoning:
A-O Agricultural-Open upon Annexation
R-1 Single-Family Residential (2004)
Planned Development District (2011)
Site development:
Part of the site was previously the location of a gas well, but this
use and associated equipment have been removed. A cell tower
is located on the 0.091 acre lot.
COMMENTS
Parkland Dedication:
Dedication is not required for non-residential plats.
Greenways:
The rear portion of the property is to remain as a privately
maintained open space. There is no Greenways dedication
associated with this plat.
Pedestrian Connectivity:
Sidewalks will be constructed along Horse Haven Lane. A 20-foot
Public Access Easement will bededicated that includesa multi-
use path that conforms to the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways
Master Plan. A sidewalk extension connectsthe multi-use path to
anexisting sidewalk within the Horse Haven Subdivision.
Bicycle Connectivity:
A20-footPublic Access Easementwill bededicatedthat includes
a multi-use path that conforms to the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Master Plan.
Streets:
The subject tract will take access from Horse Haven Lane, which
is designated as a two-lane Minor Collector on the City's
Thoroughfare Plan.
Impact Fees:
N/A
REVIEW CRITERIA
Compliance with Subdivision Regulations:
The proposed Final Plat is in compliance with
the Subdivision Regulations contained in the Unified Development Ordinance and the approved
PDD Planned Development District Concept Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Final Plat.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1.Application
2.Copy ofFinal Plat(provided in packet)
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 3of 3
April 5, 2012
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
Home of 'texas Ad-41 U niverricf
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION
(Check one) ❑ Minor ❑ Amending
($700) ($700)
FOR OFFICE SE ONLY
CASE NO.: ?)
DATES ITTED:
TIME:
STAFF:
—
El Final ❑ Vacating
($932) ($932)
❑ Reptat
($932)
Is this plat in the ETJ? E Yes ❑ No Is this plat Commercial v or Residential —
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
x❑ $7004932 Final Plat Application Fee (see above),
❑ $233 Waiver Request to Subdivision Regulations Fee (if applicable).
x❑ $600 (minimum) Development Permit Application / Public Infrastructure Review and Inspection Fee. Fee is
1 % of acceptable Engineer's Estimate for public infrastructure, $600 minimum (if fee is > $600, the balance is
due prior to the issuance of any plans or development permit).
C Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
❑x Fourteen (14) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after approval.)
❑ Two (2) copies of the grading, drainage, and erosion control plans with supporting drainage report,
El Two (2) copies of the Public Infrastructure plans and supporting documents (if applicable).
E Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (If applicable).
❑X Title report for property current within ninety (90) days or accompanied by a Nothing Further Certificate
current within ninety (90) days, The report must include applicable information such as ownership, liens,
encumbrances, etc.
X❑ Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station I.S.D.
x❑ The attached Final Plat checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not.
NOTE: A mylar of the approved preliminary plan must be on file before a final plat application will be considered
complete. if the mylar is submitted with the final plat application, it shall be considered a submittal for the
preliminary plan project and processed and reviewed as such. Until the mylar has been confirmed by staff
to be correct, the final plat application will be considered incomplete,
Date of Optional Preappllcation or Stormwater Management Conference
NAME OF PROJECT WE RENT STORAGE
ADDRESS 2672 HORSE HAVEN LANE
SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLAT:
811 ACRE TRACT BEHFND ACADEMY STORE
2-16-11
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name AL LON OFC7.ARZAK, MANAGING MEMBER, TDG MANAGEMENT, LP E-mail monica@oakchb.com
Street Address 4060 STATE HIGHWAY 6
City COLLEGE STATION State TEXAS
Phone Number 979-690-1504 Fax Number
Zip Code 77845
1/11 Page 1 of 9
Co4.3
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION (All owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple
owners):
Name SAftteletragMLE 0,0t eVf42416rV /TV E-mail
Street Address O i rzJ °,rR k s� �?1,0
city �m, lr ycY Ta¢1 State F�j� Zip Code 33fig
Phone Number Fax Number
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION:
Name MICHAEL G. HESTER, P.E., HESTER ENGINEERING CO
Street Address 7607 EASTMARK DRIVE, SUITE 253-B
City COLLEGE STATION
Phone Number 979-693-1100
State
Do any deed restrictions or covenants exist for this property?
E-mail mhester@hester-engr.com
TEXAS
Fax Number
❑ Yes ® No
Zip Code 77845
Is there a temporary blanket easement on thls property? If so, please provide the Volume and Page No.
Total Acreage 8,21 AC
Existing Use VACANT
Number of Lots By Zoning District
2. / PDD
Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District:
aogq/Ri
Floodplain Acreage
4.7 AC
Total No. of Lots 3 R-O-W Acreage NA
Proposed Use PERSONAL STORAGE FACILITY
( / �J /
Is there Special Flood Hazard Area (Zone A or Zone AE on FEMA FIRM panels) on the property? FT( Yes [ No
This information is necessary to help staff identify the appropriate standards to review the application and will be used to
help determine if the application qualifies for vesting to a previous ordinance. Notwithstanding any assertion made,
vesting is limited to that which is provided in Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code or other applicable law.
Is this application a continuation of a project that has received prior City platting approval(s) and you are requesting the
application be reviewed under previous ordinance as applicable?
JX Yes
IN' No
If yes, provide information regarding the first approved application and any related subsequent applications (provide
additional sheets if necessary):
Project Name: WE RENT STORAGE
City Project Number (if known): Case file #11-00500178
Date / Timeframe when submitted: PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTED 11-21-11, APPROVED BY P&Z 2-16-12
1111 Page2of9
A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and Preliminary Plan (if applicable):
NA
Requested waiver to subdivision regulations and reason for same (if applicable):
NA
Regarding the waiver request, explain how:
1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the
subdivision regulations will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
2. The waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
3. The granting of the waiver 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 subdivision regulations.
4. The granting of the waiver will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in
accordance with the provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Fee in lieu of sidewalk construction is being requested because of the following condition (if applicable):
1. fl An alternative pedestrian way or multi -use path has been or will be provided outside the right-of-way;
2. E' The presence of unique or unusual topographic, vegetative, or other natural conditions exist so that strict
adherence to the sidewalk requirements of the UDO is not physically feasible or is not in keeping with the
purposes and goals of the UDO or the City's comprehensive Plan;
3, 1 A capital improvement project is imminent that will include construction of the required sidewalk. Imminent shall
mean the project is funded or projected to commence within twelve (12) months;
4. Existing streets constructed to rural section that are not identified on the Thoroughfare Plan with an estate /
rural context;
5. fl When a sidewalk is required along a street where a multi -use path is shown on the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Master Plan;
Page 3 of 9
6, I� The proposed development is within an older residential subdivision meeting the criteria in Platting and
Replotting within Older Residential Subdivisions Section of the UDO; or
7, T The proposed development contains frontage on a Freeway / Expressway as designated by Map 6,6,
Thoroughfare Plan - Functional Classification, in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Detailed explanation of condition Identified above:
NOTE: A waiver to the sidewalk requirements and fee in lieu of sidewalk construction shall not be considered at the
same time by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Requested Oversize Participation NA
Total Linear Footage of
Proposed Public:
Streets / 425' ALONG HORSE
l HAVEN & 647'
�d Sidewalks MULIT-USE PATH
Sanitary Sewer Lines
Water Lines
Channels
Storm Sewers
(t)t} 1 Bike Lanes
20-
eftroutioe
sideloAte
Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat:
ACREAGE:
No, of acres to be dedicated + $
No, of acres in floodplain
No, of acres in detention
No, of acres in greenways
OR
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND;
No. of SF Dwelling Units X $
development fee
(date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory 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 are
true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf LIEN
HOLDERS identified in the title repprt are also considered owners and the appropriate signatures, must be provided as
described above.
r
Signature and
? 2? 12
Date
1/11 Page 4 of 9
6. r The proposed development is within an older residential subdivision meeting the criteria in Platting and
Replotting within Older Residential Subdivisions Section of the UDO; or
7. I— The proposed development contains frontage on a Freeway l Expressway as designated by Map 6.6,
Thoroughfare Plan - Functional Classification, in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Detailed explanation of condition identified above:
NOTE: A waiver to the sidewalk requirements and fee In lieu of sidewalk construction shall not be considered at the
same time by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Requested Oversize Participation NA
Total Linear Footage of
Proposed Public:
Streets 425' ALONG HORSE
1072 Sidewalks HAVEN & 647'
MULJT-i15E PATH
Sanitary Sewer Lines
Water Lines
Channels
Storm Sewers
Bike Lanes 1 Paths
Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat:
ACREAGE:
No. of acres to be dedicated + $
No, of acres In floodplain
No. of acres in detention
No. of acres in greenways
OR
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND:
No. of SF Dwelling Units X $ = $
development fee
(date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory 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 are
true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. if there is more
than one owner, al! owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf. LIEN
HOLDERS identified in the title report are also considered owners and the appropriate signatures must be provided as
described above.
Signature and title
I
2-22-12
Date
1I11 Page4of8
TP
1. 41'43UB' C 11/HU
N 01'13.48.E 3754'�
R-35,1 BT
my
R-50109' Deli B°2P40'
L-2_0103• 1-2515•'
Delta-23 015P Cn06F4aeu 4U05^E
T-102 m•,1 an-snr
CHD ER1-N53.I718°E
c5U-20008' I
II
li
I
LOT 1
,-N28°i]14"VI 55I5'
5 55'205? C. 79 JT
LOT 3 `/
31
3 -,
BLOCK ONE
OWNER: LOT 3
CRAIG ANOSTADT, PRESIDENT
COLLOCATION, LLC
102 NE 2ND. SUITE 176 BOCA RATON FL 33432
561-289-5199 cellulartowe1101@gmall corn
103
20 40 In
e8°23'45' _10501'
OPEN SPACE
85°08
nEz
3
LOT 2 !m
io
SURVEYOR FINAL PLAT
PAUL WILUAMS, R PL S OF THE
PAUL WILLIAMS LAND SURVEYING
3m 5 MAIN STREET, SUITE 206 WE RENT STORAGE SUBDIVISION
BRYAN. TEXAS 77803 LOT 1-3, BLOCK 1
PREPARED BY. 929-779-7670 OWNER, L0T31 & 2 ON 8.21 ACRES
MICHAEL G HESTER, PE ALTON OFCZARZAK, MANAGING MEMBER VOLUME 10076 PAGE 81
HESTEP ENGINEERING COMPANY TDG MANAGEMENT, LP MORGAN RECTOR LEAGUE, A-46
7607 EASTMARK DRIVE, SUITE 253-8 4060 HIGHWAY 6 SOUTH
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77845 COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
979-693-1100 mhester@hester-engrcom 979-690-1504 SCALE. 1'1=40' MARCH 21, 2012
FINAL PLAT
for
Chick’sCollege StationSubdivision
12-00500018
SCALE:
One commercial lot on 1.498 acres
LOCATION:
13601Wellborn Road
ZONING:
PDD Planned Development District
APPLICANT:
Cliff Carlin,Carlin White Associates
PROJECT MANAGER:
Lauren A. Hovde,Staff Planner
lhovde@cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the waiver request to Unified
Development Ordinance Section 8.2.G “Blocks” and the proposed
Final Plat. If the waiver is approved, the Plat may be approved. If
the waiver is denied, the Plat must be denied.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 1of 4
April 5, 2010
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 2of 4
April 5, 2010
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation:
June 1995
Zoning:
A-O Agricultural-Open upon Annexation
PDD Planned Development District-April2010
Preliminary Plat:
The subject tract is entirely surrounded by platted property and
public right-of-way. A Preliminary Plan for thesubdivision of
property was not required.
Site Development:
The existing single-family houses will be removed prior to on-site
commercial development.
COMMENTS
Parkland Dedication:
Dedication is not required for the platting of non-residential
property.
Greenways:
There is notgreenway required or proposed with this
development.
Pedestrian Connectivity:
Sidewalks are provided along the perimeter of the subject tract, as
well as a pedestrian connection to the abutting residential uses to
the south. These sidewalks are placed according to the approved
PDD Planned Development District Concept Plan.
Bicycle Connectivity:
There is no bicycle connectivityrequired orproposed with this
development.
Impact Fees:
N/A
REVIEW CRITERIA
Compliance with Subdivision Regulations
:The Plat is in compliance with the approved
Preliminary Planand the approved PDD Planned Development District zoning.The proposed
Final Platisin compliance with the Subdivision Regulations contained in the Unified
Section 8.2.G
Development Ordinance, with the exception of the requested to waiver to
“Blocks.”
This ordinancerequires a public street every 900feet in General Suburbanareas.
The applicant is requesting a block length waiver of 230feet along Wellborn Road
due to
the restricted access to TxDOT right-of-way. Also, the abutting property is platted and would be
unable to connect to any additional street.
In accordance with the UDO Subdivision Requirements, when considering a waiver, the
Planning and Zoning Commission should make the following findings to approve the waiver
(Staff findings are in italics below):
1)That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that
strict application of the provisions of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the
reasonable use of his land;
Apublic street would reduce the buildable area on the triangular-shaped subject tract to
the extent that it could no longer be utilized as proposed by the PDD Planned
Development District zoning. In addition, a street would only provide access to this
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 3of 4
April 5, 2010
property as the adjoining subdivision is developed and a street connection to it is not
possible.
2)That the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant;
The waiver regarding the extension of public right-of-way isnecessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right since the development is the
remnant of an originally larger tract that has already been developedand the
configuration of the property is such that street access through it would not meet
minimum street spacing standards.
3)That the granting of the waiver will not be detrimental tothe public health, safety, or
welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this
chapter; and
The granting of the requested waiver will not have negative impacts on public health
safety, welfare, or surrounding properties due to the previously developed state of the
surrounding properties. The location and configuration of the subject tract is not
conducive to the extension of a public street that would connect Wellborn Road to
William D. Fitch Parkway. The tract is located at the intersection of these roads which is
anticipated as shown on the College Station Thoroughfare Plan to havea future grade
separation. A street in this location does not meet TxDOT or City spacing requirements
andwould add an additional point of conflict that would be contrary to public safety.
4)That the granting of the waiver will not have the effect of preventing the orderly
subdivision of other land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
The granting of the requested waiver will not prevent future orderly subdivisions in the
area, as all abutting property is platted.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the waiver request to Unified Development Ordinance Section
8.2.G “Blocks” and the proposed Final Plat. If the waiver is approved, the Plat may be
approved. If the waiver is denied, the Plat must be denied.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1.Application
2.Copy of Final Plat(provided in packet)
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 4of 4
April 5, 2010
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
Home of7avar ION Ilniverriry"
ud
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
� s
CASE NO.: } V f ?�
DATE SUBMITTED:', �" r
TIME: k �S p f. li?}S,`�\
STAFF. )
�/ 3' C (?.
DEVELOPMENT PLAT APPLICATION
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
❑X $932 Development Plat Application Fee.
❑ $233 Waiver Request to Subdivision Regulations Fee (if applicable).
El $600 (minimum) Development Permit Application / Public Infrastructure Review and Inspection Fee. Fee is
1 % of acceptable Engineer's Estimate for public infrastructure, $600 minimum (if fee is > $600, the balance
is due prior to the issuance of any plans or development permit).
❑X Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used
and may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
❑X Fourteen (14) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after staff review).
❑X Two (2) copies of the grading, drainage, and erosion control plans with supporting drainage report.
x❑ Two (2) copies of the Public infrastructure plans and supporting documents (if applicable).
X❑ Title Report for property current within ninety (90) days or accompanied by a Nothing Further Certificate
current within ninety (90) days. The report must include applicable information such as ownership, liens,
encumbrances, etc.
O Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station I.S.D.
El The attached Development Plat checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are
not.
Date of Optional Preapplication or Stormwater Management Conference
NAME OF PROJECT CHICKS College Station
ADDRESS 13601 FM 2154 College Station, TX 77845
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Lot, Block, Subdivision) Lot 1, Block 1 CHICKS College Station Subdivision
SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLAT:
At the intersection of SH40 and FM2154
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name Carlin White Associates (Cliff Carlin) E-mail ccarlin@carlinwhite,com
Street Address 5906 Dolores, Ste. 100
City Houston State TX Zip Code 77057
Phone Number 713-783-8040 Fax Number 713-783-7774
1/11 Page I of 8
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION (ALL owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple
owners):
Name Discount Fuels L.L.C. E-mail lacksonfulham@me.com
Street Address 2405 Texas Ave. S. Ste. 308
City College Station State 7X Zip Code 77840
Phone Number 979-680-8080 Fax Number 979-693-1724
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION:
Name McClure and Browne Engineering/Surveying, Inc. E-mail jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com
Street Address 1008 Woodcreek, Ste. 103
City College Station State DC Zip Code 77845
Phone Number 979-693-3838 Fax Number 979-693-2554
Total Acreage 1.5 R-O-W Acreage
Current zoning of subject property PDD
Floodplain Acreage
Is there Special Flood Hazard Area (Zone A or Zone AE on FEMA FIRM panels) on the property?
Requested waiver to subdivision regulations and reason for same (if applicable):
❑ Yes X❑ No
Regarding the waiver request, explain how:
1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the
subdivision regulations will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
2. The waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
Page 2 of 8
A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and Preliminary Plan (if applicable):
Requested waiver to subdivision regulations and reason for same (if applicable):
lock Lengths
The lot is bordered to the south by an existing subdivision that did not provide a connection point. The other sides o
he site are TxDOT ROW with restricted access points.
Regarding the waiver request, explain how:
1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the
subdivision regulations will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
The lot is bordered to the south by an existing subdivision that did not provide a connection point. The other sides of
the site are TxDOT ROW with restricted access points.
2. The waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
1 ne waiver is necessary in order to develop the tract in a manner conducive to I xDU I policies.
3. The granting of the waiver 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 subdivision regulations.
the connections as shown are the satest locations tor the proposed access points to the development.
4. The granting of the waiver will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in
accordance with the provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance.
I his tract is the last one to develop in the area. There is no unplatted land adjacent to itp
Fee in lieu of sidewalk construction is being requested because of the following condition (if applicable):
1. fl An alternative pedestrian way or multi -use path has been or will be provided outside the right-of-way;
2. fl The presence of unique or unusual topographic, vegetative, or other natural conditions exist so that strict
adherence to the sidewalk requirements of the UDO is not physically feasible or is not in keeping with the
purposes and goals of the UDO or the City's comprehensive Plan;
3. I` A capital improvement project is imminent that will include construction of the required sidewalk. Imminent shall
mean the project is funded or projected to commence within twelve (12) months;
4. Existing streets constructed to rural section that are not identified on the Thoroughfare Plan with an estate /
rural context;
5. rT When a sidewalk is required along a street where a multi -use path is shown on the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Master Plan;
1/11 Page 3 of 9
-VC
3. The granting of the waiver 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 subdivision regulations.
4. The granting of the waiver 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 subdivision regulations.
Requested oversize participation
Total Linear Footage of
Proposed Public:
0 Streets
Sidewalks
0 Sanitary Sewer Lines
agg- Water Lines
0
Channels
0 Storm Sewers
0 Bike Lanes / Paths
Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Development Plat:
ACREAGE:
No. of acres to be dedicated + $
No. of acres in floodplain
Na. of acres in detention
No. of acres in greenways
OR
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND:
No, of SF Dwelling Units X $
-$
development fee
(date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory 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 are
true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the
application muss be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its
behalf LIEN HOLDERS identified in the title report are also considered owners and the appropriate signatures must be
provided as desribed above.
/
Date
Page 3 of 8
�
<�x
y� z
S %411,5' E -
-
if
NM avrt &Bo. Cw4, TAW{
FINAL PLAT
for
FS Kapchinski L6R1 B2
12-00500025
SCALE:
1 lot on 1.11 acres
LOCATION:
1713 Park Place
ZONING:
C-1 General Commercial
APPLICANT:
Craig Paul, Owner
PROJECT MANAGER:
Matt Robinson,AICP, Senior Planner
mrobinson@cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 1of 3
April 5, 2012
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 2of 3
April 5, 2012
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation:
1956
Zoning:
C-1 General Commercial
Preliminary Plat:
Unknown
Site Development:
A commercial shopping center exists on the property.
COMMENTS
Parkland Dedication:
N/A –Non-residentialdevelopment
Greenways:
N/A
Pedestrian Connectivity:
A public access easement is being provided on the existing
sidewalk along Park Place.
Bicycle Connectivity:
The Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Master Plan calls for a
bike route along Park Place. No signage currently exists.
Impact Fees:
N/A
REVIEW CRITERIA
Compliance with Subdivision Regulations:
The Final Plat complies with the Subdivision
Requirements of the Unified Development Ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1.Application
2.Copy of Final Plat (provided in packet)
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 3of 3
April 5, 2012
CITY OF COId,KGI STATION
Home of Tcxa$ Adm Usunerrdty°
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION
FOR OFFICE SE
CASE NO
DATE Sly D:
TIME.
STAFF
(Check one) ❑ Minor ❑ Amending ❑ Final ❑ Vacating ® Replat
($704) ($700) ($932) ($932) ($932)
Is this plat in the ETJ? ❑ Yes ❑ No Is this plat Commercial gl or Residential E
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
[$700-$932 Final Plat Application Fee (see above).
gE $233 Waiver Request to Subdivision Regulations Fee (if applicable).
$600 (minimum) Development Permit Application / Public Infrastructure Review and Inspection Fee. Fee is
1 % of acceptable Engineer's Estimate for public infrastructure, $600 minimum (if fee is > $600, the balance is
due prior to the issuance of any plans or development permit).
C-Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
'Fourteen (14) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after approval.)
In Two (2) copies of the grading, drainage, and erosion control plans with supporting drainage report.
fiEl Two (2) copies of the Public infrastructure plans and supporting documents (if applicable).
(El Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (if applicable).
®'Title report for property current within ninety (90) days or accompanied by a Nothing Further Certificate
current within ninety (90) days The report must include applicable information such as ownership, liens,
encumbrances, etc.
Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station I.S.D.
a The attached Final Plat checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not.
NOTE: A mylar of the approved preliminary plan must be on file before a final plat application will be considered
complete. If the mylar is submitted with the final plat application, it shall be considered a submittal for the
preliminary plan project and processed and reviewed as such. Until the mylar has been confirmed by staff
to be correct, the final plat application will be considered incomplete.
Date of Optional Preapplication or Stormwalter Management Conference
NAME OF PROJECT I'(; li►u+i`5
ADDRESS 11 lJ park altLe
SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLAT:
APPLICANT/PROJECT MAN GER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name, t� E-mail i t P L
Street Address 7 / 1) PA > /elr_ e_ -e I DO
City ( (le-7 ( ' - < "1 State r) Zip Code `'77` '/G
Phone Number 1y 7 j.r (� % � Fax Number (-,41
1/11 Page 1 of 9
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION (All owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple
owners):
Name C .� �r# Tr, (...-c f e vt f E-mail ` i ��`i fc trF e.9-"‘",
Street Address j (Z 1474 �r— f c' (C2()
City ( Fir! e5 (- o -7 State Zip Code 77 ''kc` t
Phone Number 47 r Fax Number 1'71•- �> � c??ci
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: ea1.)ce-A1-61e (( t i
Name Kext- 610 C'}U'1-LC E-mail i(jUi, cy, ktdiergtdriCk0Y4 lr\k't'1100 t.' .3M,
Street Address 4 oq et.s e
City , rrl('tf State .-1,y t,6 Zip Code •7 r;�
Phone Number ,`,)(,., , 31Q Fax Number 1,-,Cf j RtIO
Do any deed restrictions or covenants exist for this property? ❑ Yes ® No
Is there a temporary blanket easement on this property? If so, please provide the Volume Aifn and Page No.
Total Acreage 1. Total No. of Lots 1 R-O-W Acreage ,4'/
Existing Use OA r71p('itird Proposed Use f.`zyyit11.o 'Jai
Number of Lots By Zoning District / 0,1 / /
Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot Sy Zoning District:
Floodplain Acreage I. ,prb•7C o O y„ ,Ar%
Is there Special Flood Hazard Area (Zone A or Zone AE on FEMA FIRM panels) on the property?
p Yes r No
This information is necessary to help staff identify the appropriate standards to review the application and will be used to
help determine if the application qualifies for vesting to a previous ordinance. Notwithstanding any assertion made,
vesting is limited to that which is provided in Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code or other applicable law.
Is this application a continuation of a project that has received prior City platting approval(s) and you are requesting the
application be reviewed under previous ordinance as applicable?
r Yes
V No
If yes, provide information regarding the first approved application and any related subsequent applications (provide
additional sheets if necessary):
Project Name:
City Project Number (in known):
Date / Timeframe when submitted:
1/11 Page 2 of 9
A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and Preliminary Plan (if applicable):
Requested waiver to subdivision regulations and reason for same (if applicable):
Regarding the waiver request, explain how:
1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the
subdivision regulations will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
X 6
2. The waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
Al4
3. The granting of the waiver 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 subdivision regulations.
4. The granting of the waiver will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in
accordance with the provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Fee in lieu of sidewalk construction is being requested because of the following condition (if applicable):
1. r An alternative pedestrian way or multi -use path has been or will be provided outside the right-of-way;
The presence of unique or unusual topographic, vegetative, or other natural conditions exist so that strict
adherence to the sidewalk requirements of the UDO is not physically feasible or is not in keeping with the
purposes and goals of the UDO or the City's comprehensive Plan;
I A capital improvement project is imminent that will include construction of the required sidewalk. Imminent shall
mean the project is funded or projected to commence within twelve (12) months;
4. r Existing streets constructed to rural section that are not identified on the Thoroughfare Plan with an estate /
rural context;
5. [ When a sidewalk is required along a street where a multi -use path is shown on the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Master Plan;
Page 3 of 9
6. f The proposed development is within an older residential subdivision meeting the criteria in Platting and
Repletting within Older Residential Subdivisions Section of the UDO; or
7. T The proposed development contains frontage on a Freeway / Expressway as designated by Map 6,6,
Thoroughfare Plan - Functional Classification, in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Detailed explanation of condition identified above:
NOTE: A waiver to the sidewalk requirements and fee in lieu of sidewalk construction shall not be considered at the
same time by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Requested Oversize Participation
Total Linear Footage of
Proposed Public:
Streets
Sidewalks
Sanitary Sewer Lines
Water Lines
Channels
Storm Sewers
Bike Lanes ! Paths
Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat:
ACREAGE:
No. of acres to be dedicated + $
No. of acres in tloodplain
No. of acres in detention
No. of acres in greenways
OR
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND:
No, of SF Dwelling Units X $
=$
development fee
(date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory 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 are
true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. if the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf. LIEN
HOLDERS identified in the title report are also considered owners and the appropriate signatures must be provided as
described above.
Signature and title
/i 1
Date
1/11 Page 4of9
ORIGINAL PLAT
0 PM5w Hal➢IGS, Ile
21571470E TRACT
b
MIA XI.
2347,22.
'/
. ?
v/
1,2.:., 3 °per / /�\
\ \ a
\ \ F/
\ V
\
LOT 1
BLOCK 2
5%
popgunor orlana. too mew.
IGi0.M 9N/lµ/CN0]I 2
\
ZENTFeraies
611111101E OF
WRY.. Of ne WAY CLEW
REPLAT
NiIIPINSHI HOLU 0. LLC
2114 ACRE TRACT
DIVASEELEPC
b
A!1
SCALE: b _ 30'
n 30
�.to mann
m°R
meosport
FINAL PLAT
OF
LOT 6R1, BLOCK 2
F. S. KAPCHINSKI SUBDIVISION
BEING A
REPLAT
OF
LOT 6R, BLOCK 2
F. 5. KAPCHINSKI SUBDIVISION
VOLUME 834, PAGE 631
AND THE REMAINDER OF
LOTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 2
F. 5. KAPCHINSKI SUBDIVISION
VOLUME Y. PAGE 618A
1 11 ACRES
CO LEGE STATON BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
SCALE: 1 INCH - 30 FEET
SURVEY DATE 0E0. 2011
PUT OATS' 02-01-12
JOB NtukezE. 152R
Ca FILE. awom ls10. 11-e42 (1ob). $,
77803
REZONING REQUEST
FOR
FOSTER AVENUE APARTMENTS
11-00500135
REQUEST:
R-6 High Density Multi-Family to
PDD Planned Development District
SCALE:
2 lots on 0.73 acres
LOCATION:
1024and 1026 Foster Avenue
APPLICANT:
Jesse Durden, CapRock Texas
PROJECT MANAGER:
Lauren A. Hovde,Staff Planner
lhovde@cstx.gov
OVERVIEW:
This request is to use the PDD Planned Development District to
strive toward the creation of an Urban environment for a multi-
family development, while seeking compatibility with the existing
residential neighborhood.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request based on its
consistencywith the Comprehensive Plan and Eastgate
Neighborhood Plan.
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 1of 8
April 5, 2012
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 2of 8
April 5, 2012
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 3of 8
April 5, 2012
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date:April 5,2012
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: April 26, 2012
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:
College Hills Estates HomeownersAssociation was consulted during the creation
of the proposed zoning district. The Association had the opportunity to comment
on the architecture of the building and layout of the site.
Property owner notices mailed: 15
Contacts in support:None.
Contacts in opposition:Two, both calls were in general opposition to the density
which is allowed by right under the existing R-6 High-
Density Multi-Family Residential zoning.
Inquiry contacts:One for a general inquiry of what the project involved.
ADJACENT LAND USES
DirectionComprehensivePlanZoningLand Use
East
Neighborhood R-1 Single-Family Residential and Single-family
ConservationR-6 High-Density Multi-Familyresidential
West
Urban and C-1 General CommercialChili’s Restaurant
Redevelopment
South
Urban and R-1 Single-Family Residential and College Station
RedevelopmentC-1 General CommercialCity Hall
North
Urban andR-6 High-Density Multi-Familyvacant
Redevelopment
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation:
March 1939
Zoning:
R-1 Single-Family Residential
R-6 High Density Multi-Family
Final Plat:
College Hills Subdivision
Site development:
The site is currently developed with three housing structures including
one-single-family house and two apartment buildings.
REVIEW CRITERIA
1.Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
The proposed zoning is consistentwith the
Urban Redevelopment land use designation found in the Comprehensive Plan Future Land
Use and Character Map. The designation language of the Community Character Chapter
states that such a designation should be used to accommodate intense development activity
including townhouses, duplexes, and high-density apartments. As part of the
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 4of 8
April 5, 2012
Redevelopment designation, the Comprehensive Plan requires careful site planning and
building design to complement the existing neighborhood.The Eastgate Neighborhood Plan
specifies that there is a need to “promote redevelopment around the perimeter of the
neighborhood that meets community needs and is complimentary to the neighborhood.” The
Plan also describes that the purposeof a PDD Planned Development Districtis to promote
and encourage innovative development that issensitive to surrounding land uses. In
addition, the Plan discusses increasing the density in the core or College Station to reduce
pressure on greenfield development for apartments and other student-oriented rentals
toward the fringe of the City.
2.Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and
with the character of the neighborhood:
Most of the properties that abut Foster Avenue
on the east and west side, including the subject lots, are zoned R-6 High-Density Multi-
Family. The properties along this portion of the west side of Foster Avenue aredesignated
as Urban Redevelopment in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Character Map. As
described above, this designation specifically promotes multi-family development.The east
side of Foster Avenue is designated as Neighborhood Conservation. The lot directly across
Foster Avenue from the subject lots is zoned R-1 Single-Family Residential. This indicates
the City and resident’s desire forthe character and integrity ofthe neighborhood to be
continued in the current or an improved fashion. Redevelopment activity proposed along
the west side of Foster Avenue must taken into considerationthe existing neighborhood and
special attention is required to ensure compatibilitybetween the different land uses and
densities.
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 Unified
Development Ordinancestates that dense multi-family development should occur within
closeproximityto the Texas A&M University campus. Being located across from campus
andwithin the first block off of Texas Avenue, the intensity of development in this location is
anticipatedto be higher. This is contrasted by the need for appropriatedevelopment that
abuts the existing single-family neighborhood. The proposed PDD Planned Development
District allows for the density which is appropriate for the location while incorporating
additional elements, discussed in the later portion of this report, that increase the
compatibility with the neighborhood.
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 PDD
Planned Development District will allow for the development of high-density multi-family
housing. The same use is permitted under the current R-6 High-Density Multi-Family zoning
district. The existing use on the property is anapartment complexdeveloped at 12.3units
per acre.
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 current
zoning district of R-6 High-Density Multi-Family allows for a viable use that has been in
operation for several decades. The apartment building currently has 9units. As visible from
the number of registered rental units in the Eastgate neighborhood, there is a market for
student rentals in this area due to the convenient distance to campus. The marketability is
increased by the proposed PDD Planned Development District, due to the requested
meritorious modifications, because of a higher achievable unitcount than with a R-6 High-
Density Multi-Family district.
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 5of 8
April 5, 2012
6.Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilitiesgenerally
suitable and adequate for the proposed use:
There are existing 2-inch, 6-inch, and 8-
inchwater lines available to serve this property. At site development, further analysis of
existing waterline capacity will be required and improvements to the existing water system
may be necessary to support domestic and fire flow demands. There is also an existing 12-
inch sanitary sewer line along Foster Ave. which may provide service to this site. Drainage
is mainly to the south within the Wolf Pen Creek Drainage Basin. Drainage and other public
infrastructure improvements required with site development shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the BCS Unified Design Guidelines. Existing infrastructure,
with the possible exception of the current water system, appears to be adequate for the
proposed use.The proposed development will be allowed a single point of access from
Foster Avenue.
REVIEW OF CONCEPT PLAN
The applicant has provided the following information related to the purpose and intent of the
proposed zoning district:
“To provide a sustainable, pedestrian and bicycle-friendly multi-family
development that responds to demands for the College Station community and
that meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Eastgate Neighborhood
Plan. The PDD zoning will encourage responsible redevelopment of the site in a
manner that is compatible with the existing character of the Eastgate
neighborhood and one that sets the tone for future redevelopment nearby.”
Base Zoning and Meritorious Modifications
The applicant is proposing to develop using the R-6 High-Density Multi-Familyzoning
classification standards for the requested PDD. At the time of site plan, the project will need to
meet all applicable site development standards of the UDO for the R-6 High-Density Multi-
Family zoning classification, except where meritorious modifications are granted with the PDD
zoning. The applicant is requesting the following meritorious modifications:
1.UDO Section 5.2“Residential Dimensional Standards”:
A reduction in the building setbacks will promote an Urban environment and allows the parking
to be placed in a less obtrusive locationsto enable thedevelopment to be more compatible with
the neighborhood.
Requested Dimension
Standard R-6Dimension
10 feet
Front Setback (Foster)15 feet
10 feet
Street Side Setback (Francis)15 feet
1.5 feet
Rear Setback (Chili’s)20 feet
2.UDO Section 7.2.I“Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Required”
The number of parking spaces required by the Unified Development Ordinance is determined by
The applicant is
the number of bedrooms per dwelling unit and the size of said bedrooms.
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 6of 8
April 5, 2012
requestingto supply 75% of the parking requirement found in Section 7.2.I of the Unified
Development Ordinance.
The development will consist primarily of 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom
units which require additional parking per bedroom than3-bedroom or 4-bedroom units. The
reduction in parking allows the development toachieve a high number of units while reducing
the visibility of cars.
The Unified Development Ordinance provides the following review criteria for PDD
Concept Plans:
1. The proposal will constitute an environment of sustainedstability and will be in
harmony with the character of the surrounding area:
An increase in density on the subject
property will broaden the housing choices for renters in the Eastgate Area. By placing the
development within close proximity to campus, the resident dependency on vehicles to access
the Universitywill decrease.Residentsmay instead utilize alternative means of transportation
such as biking and walking.In addition, the College Hills Estates HomeownersAssociation was
consulted on the site layout and building design. The tallest portion of the building will be
located at the core, defined as 30 feet from the abutting rights-of-way,of the lot and will be a
maximum of 50-feet in height (four stories). The perimeter of the building will bea maximum of
35-feet in height (three stories).
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, and
neighborhood integrity. The Urbandesignation in the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use
Map is intended for areas that include multi-family residential housing, as proposed with this
PDD. The Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways Master Plan is being followed with the proposed
sidewalksalong Foster Avenue and Francis Drive. Bicycle parking facilitiesare also proposed
at a ratio of one space per bedroom which is not a requirement for multi-family development. In
addition, several components are proposed to promote and protect neighborhood integrity.
a) Utilize architectural materials ofhardi-board and brickto mimicexisting architecture.
b) Provide one bicycle parking space per bedroom.
c) Limit apartment signage to the low-profile option.
d) Provide 8-foot wide sidewalks along Foster Avenue and Francis Drive.
3. The proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will
not adversely affect adjacent development:
The redevelopment of this tract will encourage
future development within the area designated as Redevelopment in the Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use and Character Map. There is apotential to relieve some rental pressure from
the area designated as Neighborhood Conservation, which could encourage apotential
increase in owner-occupied units withinthe Eastgate neighborhood by providing alternative
rental options in the area.
The lessened parking requirement and the location of parking to theside and rear of the
building will reduce the visible impact ofa parking lot on the adjacent land uses and pass-by
traffic.
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:
The development will have a single point of access to Foster Avenue. Sidewalks
will be provided along Foster Avenue and Francis Drive.
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 7of 8
April 5, 2012
5. The development includes provision of adequate public improvements, including, but
not limited to, parks, schools, and other public facilities:
New public infrastructure is limited
to the addition of 8-foot wide sidewalks along both Foster Avenue and Francis Drive within the
bounds of thesubject property.
6. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity:
The proposed
development has the potential of promoting public health by encourage walking and bicycling as
a means of transportation among its residents. This encouragement is in the form of ample
bicycle parking, and the addition of sidewalks along Foster Avenue and Francis Drive.
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:
The intent of providing walking and
bicycle facilities within the property is to reduce the number of vehicular tripsnecessary for
residents. The availability of campus, retail shopping, and dining within a close proximity of the
sitehelpsalternative means of transportation more likely.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request based on its consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan and Eastgate Neighborhood Plan.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1.Application
2.Rezoning map (provided in packet)
3.Concept Plan (provided in packet)
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 8of 8
April 5, 2012
a,.
C[TY OF COLLEGE STAI`
Hw»e of 7ecru A&M Uuivarsitj
FOROFFlr'' ""
CASE ND.:
DATE SUS iTrsi7: " t '7 " t f:�i,
TIME: CCU'{ . 71-9
l
STAFF;
ZONI AP AMENDMENT (REZONING) APPLICATION
PLANNED DISTRICTS
(Check one)
x0 Planned Devjt District (PDD) ❑ Panned - Mixed Used Development (P-MUD)
MINIMUM SU€ IVI1TTAL REQUIREMENTS:
El $1,165 Rezonibation Fee. f> t S' I: / E t VAC
XCJ' Application corn full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjaltered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided,
0 Traffic impact or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for the
proposed requ
Ei One (1) copy Imensioned Rezoning Map on 24"x36" paper showing:
a. Land affeci
b. Legal desaf area of proposed change;
c. Present zd
d. Zoning clan of all abutting land; and
e. All public ate rights -of -way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land.
VVritten legal can of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is
applicable).
0 A CAD (dxfldvidel space State Plane NAD 83 or GIS (shp) digital file (e-mailed to P&DS_Digitai
_Subnnittal@ce
0 Fourteen (14) d the Concept Plan on 24"x36" paper In accordance with Section 3,4.D of the UDC.
0 The attached C)'lan checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not
checked off.
NOTE: If a petitionining Is denied by the City Council, another application for rezoning shall not be filed
within a period of lifrom the date of denial, except with permission of the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Date of Optional Preapj Conference July 13, 2011
NAME OF PROJECT jvenueApartments
ADDRESS 1O24-1426Avenue, College Station, TX 77840
LEGAL DESCRIPTION3ck, Subdivision) Lot 9 (10'ot), Lot 9 (60' of), and Lot 10, Block 3, College Hills
GENERAL LOCATION = PERTY IF NOT PLATTED;
TOTAL, ACREAGE
1Of10 Page 9 of 7
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name CapRock Texas, Jesse Darden (Project Manager for Re -Zoning) E-mail jesse.durden@caprocktx.corn
Street Address P.O. Box 12214
city College Station State TX Zip Code 77842
Phone Number (979) 492-0425 Fax Number (979) 314-7606
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION:
Name CC RCS 1 LP c/o Clint Cooper E-mail ccooper@caldwellcos.com
Street Address 1700 Research Parkway #240
city College Station State TX Zip Code 77845
Phone Number (979) 260-7000 Fax Number
OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e. project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.):
Name Hlll+Frank Architects, Gary Hill (Architect) E-mail garyl@hfi-architects.com
Street Address
City Houston
Phone Number
1800 Saint James Place, Ste. 205
(713) 877-1274
State TX
Fax Number
Zip Code 77056
This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated 6/1/10 and 6/15/10 and recorded in Volume 9664 , Page 108
of the Brazos County Official Records.
Existing Zoning R-6 High Density Multifamily Proposed Zoning PDD - Planned Development District
Present Use of Property Residential Apartments
Proposed Use of Property Residential Apartments with a base zoning of R-6
Proposed Use(s) of Property for PDD, if applicable:
Residential Apartments with a base zoning of R-6
P-MUD uses are prescribed in Section 6.2.C. Use Table of the Unified Development Ordinance.
If P-MUD:
Approximate percentage of residential land uses:
Approximate percentage of non-residential land uses:
REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. List the changed or changing conditions In the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary.
As the College Station multifamily market has expanded in recent years, an oversupply of 3 and 4 bedroom rental
units has been created. in response to that oversupply and to meet the specific needs of a niche market, we are
proposing a development with a unit mix that contains more 1 and 2 bedroom units than what is typically seen in
College Station. The zone change is in response to the parking needs of a development with this unit mix inside
the Eestgate redevelopment zone.
10110
Page 2 of 7
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.
This zone change is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Eastgate Neighborhood Plan. Both plans
designate this area as a Redevelopment zone and promote responsible multifamily redevelopment around the
perimeter of the Eastgate neighborhood. The Eastgate area is a hot rental area, and our project will help pull
single-family renters out of the neighborhood core into the fringes, reducing the stress on the internal transportation
and parking infrastructure and helping accomplish the goals of both the Comprehensive Plan and Eastgate
Neighborhood Plan.
3, How will this zone change be compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with
the character of the neighborhood?
See attached "Application Details".
4. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the rezoning district requested.
The property suitable for multifamily uses as described in the PDD due to its adjacency to existing restaurants,
proximity to the Texas A&M campus (< 400 feet), proximity to 3 major retail centers (< 1/2 mile), and location within
en area that is currently composed of mostly rental housing. Many existing residential units in the area are being
renovated as part of an overall redeveloprent push. Landscaping in the setbacks will separate the building from the
existing residential units to the north. Adequate utilities are present for the proposed scale of development, and we
will limit street access to one location along Foster Avenue.
5. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
Because the multifamily uses proposed in this PDD are the same as what is currently permitted under R-6, the
answer in #4 above applies here as well. In addition, the property has the potential to seive as a great buffer to the
traffic and commercial intensities along Texas Avenue. Multifamily development is appropriate as it is the best
available development tool to transition between the commercial and single-family uses.
6. Explain the marketability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
Again, we believe there is an oversupply of 3 and 4 bedrooms (with lower parking ratios) in the market. As a pure
R-6 development, the marketability and feasibility of the property is reduced as a result of the UDO's regulation of
parking.
7. List any other reasons to support this zone change.
in general, supporting this zone change will enable the developer to create alternative housing choices in Eastgate
which will draw renters out of less appropriate neighborhood core (thereby reducing traffic and noise impacts in the
heart of the neighborhoods. For more details on site specific additions, please see attached "Community Benefits".
10110
Page 3 of 7
8. State the purpose and intent of the proposed development.
To provide a sustainable, pedestrian and bicycle -friendly redevelopment site that responds to demands of the
College Station community and that meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Eastgate Neighborhood
Plan, The PDD zoning will encourage responsible development of the site in a manner Chet is compatible with the
existing character of the Eastgate neighborhood and one that sets the tone for future redevelopment nearby.
CONCEPT PLAN SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. What Is the range of future building heights?
Future building heights will range from /2' /o 50'. Heights above 35' will be restricted to the core of the property
(except for the stairwell access area as shown on the Concept Plan), defined as the area of property 30' off the
right -of --way of Foster Avenue to the rear setback, and 30' off Francis Lane to the side setback. See "Building
Height & Massing" under Application Details.
2. Provide a general statement regarding the proposed drainage.
Drainage of the site is proposed to be underground and within future landscaped and parking areas on the site.
3. List the general bulk or dimensional variations sought.
See attached.
q, If variations are sought, please provide a list of community benefits and/or innovative design concepts to justify the
request.
See attached.
10110
Page 4 of 7
5. Explain how the concept plan proposal will constitute and environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony
with the character of the surrounding area.
The concept plan proposal promotes responsible development of residential apartments in an area just feet from
Texas A&M, retail, office, and restaurants. Access to the property will be limited to one drive off Foster Avenue,
reducing conflict points and congestion on the main interior artery into Eastgate. Because of the site's proximity to
campus, we're including an abundance of bicycle racks, which will encourage the use of bicycles as the means of
primary transportation. This will reduce the potential traffic impacts on the area and help maintain the character of
the neighborhood. Our project will puff renters out of the core of the Eastgate neighborhood, improving current
traffic conditions and noise concerns in the area, creating a more harmonious and sustainable development.
6. Explain how the proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposal is in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and the more specific Eastgate Neighborhood Plan's
goals for the area. it lays the foundation for a responsible, urban, pedestrian and bicycle -friendly, residential
redevelopment in an area just feet from the front door of Texas A&M. The plan takes into account the existing
character of the neighborhood, and provides an appropriate, transitional development between commercial uses to
the west and residential rentals to the east Our focus is providing high -quality housing options that enhance the
overall quality -of -life experience in the Eastgate neighborhood.
7. Explain how the concept plan proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will not
adversely affect adjacent development.
This proposal will raise the bar for redevelopment in the area, and is corpelible with permitted uses on abutting
sites. Properties to the west are commercial, and will benefit from the increased number of residents in the area.
Properties to the north, south and east are predominantly small lot residential rentals, and most structures are in
need of renovation or redevelopment This proposal paves the way forhigh-quality, new construction in an area
that needs revitalization. Overall, the project should serve to lessen the existing strain on Eastgate's core traffic and
parking infrastructure by pulling those residents from the core of Eastgate to its fringe. For specific architectural
elements, please see the attached Application Details.
6. State how dwelling units shall have access to a public street if they do not front on a public street.
Units will be accessed by vehicles through the driveway on Foster Avenue. Parking will be provided on the ground
level, and residents will have access to the building via stairs. Pedestrians and bicyclists will be able to access the
building at locations along Francis Street.
g, State how the development has provided adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to: parks, schools,
and other public facilities.
The development will meet all UDO requirements for public improvements, and will also add 8' sidewalks within the
public right-of-way along our property lines. ,4t-p-ntt-of the project; -we will also st ipethecrosswalks at -Foster
Avenue & Francis -Street that are -adjacent to our property.( -crosswalks),
10/10 Page 5 of 7
40. Explain hew the concept plan proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity,
Our plan enhances the area by providing a high -qualify alternative housing option close to campus. We've paid
close attention to resident and neighborhood safety, and provide adequate access points in/out of the development.
The building's design elements (as described in the attached Application Details) were developed to ensure
conformity with the existing Eastgate neighborhood and safety amongst its residents.
11. Explain how the concept plan proposal 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 reasonable anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses In the area.
Through thoughtful and responsible planning, our project takes into account the increases in pedestrian, bicycle and
vehicular traffic caused by our development. By encouraging the use of bicycles and the University bus system
(Reveille and Excel lines), our project reduces the impact on the existing public infrastructure and will not be
detrimental to the pubic. Existing bus stops are at Campus View Apartments (G. Bush & University Oaks and
Foster/Lincoln intersection (1500' away).
Pease note that a "complete site plan" must be submitted to Planning & Development Services for a formal review after
the "concept plan" has been approved by the City Council prior to the issuance of a building permit - except for single-
family development.
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true,
correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE.
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner; all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf.
Signs ure and title I) bate
10110
Page 6 of 7
Foster Avenue Apartments
Meritorious Modifications:
1, UDO Section 5.2 - Reduction in building setback requirements for R-6 uses.
a. Min. Street Side Setbacks from 15.0' to 10.0'
b. Min. Front Setbacks from 25.0' to 10.0'
2. Reduction in Off -Street Parking Requirements per UDO Section 7.2.i
a. Off -Street parking facilities shall meet 75% of the number of specified parking space
requirements of Section 7.2.i.
Community Benefits:
1. Because this site is already zoned for R-6 multifamily, we believe that our willingness to expend
the resources required to provide a thoughtful, neighborhood -driven, architecturally -
appropriate design has been an overall community benefit.
2. This development provides an alternate housing choice for residential renters in the Eastgate
neighborhood. This attraction of renters from the core portions of the neighborhood to the
fringe will ease traffic and parking infrastructure impacts and enable a safer, sustainable, family -
conducive environment within Eastgate.
3. The development provides 8.01 sidewalks, not required in this area per the UDO.
4_,-.. The-developnient provides for -striping of the 2-adjacent-cross-walks atthe-foste'`r-& Francis -
intersections: This encourages pedestrian and bicycle use in -a •safe,masnnerand-is far •above• 4
-what-is-requiredby-the-YD0
5. The development, located within a designated Redevelopment Area, revitalizes a highly visible
property just a few feet from Texas Avenue, a Primary Image Corridor.
6. Utilization of sound redevelopment design principles including urban, pedestrian and bicycle -
oriented development. These principles are endorsed by the US Green Building Council and our
Comprehensive and Strategic Plans as a manner to reduce our overall carbon footprint and
encourage a healthier, more vibrant cornmunity.
7. The project will use non-polluting lighting fixtures that will not allow light to filter into the
neighborhood and allow the project remain compatible with its surroundings.
Foster Avenue Aartiments
Application Details:
Question 3,Pa e 3 - The uses identified by this zone change request are identical to those allowed by
the current zoning designation, R-6. Our team has studied the architectural styles of neighborhood, and
is proposing a development that conforms to existing aesthetics and the community character of the
Eastgate neighborhood. We plan to accomplish conformity through the following:
Building Height & Massing:
Portions of the building that front Foster Avenue and Francis Street will be limited to 3 stories
(35' in height). The portion of the building at the care of the property will be limited to 4 stories
(50' in height),
Building Elements:
The building will incorporate architectural elements and materials that mimic the original and
historical elements of the Eastgate neighborhood. These elements include the use of brick and
wood -style (hardi) siding.
Also, in lieu of a freestanding apartment identification sign (allowed in R-6 up to 10' in height),
the project will incorporate just 1 low profile monument sign. These architectural design
elements of the project will be compatible with, and will &so enhance, the existing character of
the neighborhood.
In addition to a focus on architectural elements, the project places strong emphasis on creating
a pedestrian and bicycle -friendly environment. Because of the site's close proximity to the
Texas A&M campus and local retail, we believe residents will take advantage of the opportunity
to walk and bike from home.
a,.
C[TY OF COLLEGE STAI`
Hw»e of 7ecru A&M Uuivarsitj
FOROFFlr'' ""
CASE ND.:
DATE SUS iTrsi7: " t '7 " t f:�i,
TIME: CCU'{ . 71-9
l
STAFF;
ZONI AP AMENDMENT (REZONING) APPLICATION
PLANNED DISTRICTS
(Check one)
x0 Planned Devjt District (PDD) ❑ Panned - Mixed Used Development (P-MUD)
MINIMUM SU€ IVI1TTAL REQUIREMENTS:
El $1,165 Rezonibation Fee. f> t S' I: / E t VAC
XCJ' Application corn full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjaltered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided,
0 Traffic impact or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for the
proposed requ
Ei One (1) copy Imensioned Rezoning Map on 24"x36" paper showing:
a. Land affeci
b. Legal desaf area of proposed change;
c. Present zd
d. Zoning clan of all abutting land; and
e. All public ate rights -of -way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land.
VVritten legal can of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is
applicable).
0 A CAD (dxfldvidel space State Plane NAD 83 or GIS (shp) digital file (e-mailed to P&DS_Digitai
_Subnnittal@ce
0 Fourteen (14) d the Concept Plan on 24"x36" paper In accordance with Section 3,4.D of the UDC.
0 The attached C)'lan checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not
checked off.
NOTE: If a petitionining Is denied by the City Council, another application for rezoning shall not be filed
within a period of lifrom the date of denial, except with permission of the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Date of Optional Preapj Conference July 13, 2011
NAME OF PROJECT jvenueApartments
ADDRESS 1O24-1426Avenue, College Station, TX 77840
LEGAL DESCRIPTION3ck, Subdivision) Lot 9 (10'ot), Lot 9 (60' of), and Lot 10, Block 3, College Hills
GENERAL LOCATION = PERTY IF NOT PLATTED;
TOTAL, ACREAGE
1Of10 Page 9 of 7
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name CapRock Texas, Jesse Darden (Project Manager for Re -Zoning) E-mail jesse.durden@caprocktx.corn
Street Address P.O. Box 12214
city College Station State TX Zip Code 77842
Phone Number (979) 492-0425 Fax Number (979) 314-7606
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION:
Name CC RCS 1 LP c/o Clint Cooper E-mail ccooper@caldwellcos.com
Street Address 1700 Research Parkway #240
city College Station State TX Zip Code 77845
Phone Number (979) 260-7000 Fax Number
OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e. project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.):
Name Hlll+Frank Architects, Gary Hill (Architect) E-mail garyl@hfi-architects.com
Street Address
City Houston
Phone Number
1800 Saint James Place, Ste. 205
(713) 877-1274
State TX
Fax Number
Zip Code 77056
This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated 6/1/10 and 6/15/10 and recorded in Volume 9664 , Page 108
of the Brazos County Official Records.
Existing Zoning R-6 High Density Multifamily Proposed Zoning PDD - Planned Development District
Present Use of Property Residential Apartments
Proposed Use of Property Residential Apartments with a base zoning of R-6
Proposed Use(s) of Property for PDD, if applicable:
Residential Apartments with a base zoning of R-6
P-MUD uses are prescribed in Section 6.2.C. Use Table of the Unified Development Ordinance.
If P-MUD:
Approximate percentage of residential land uses:
Approximate percentage of non-residential land uses:
REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. List the changed or changing conditions In the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary.
As the College Station multifamily market has expanded in recent years, an oversupply of 3 and 4 bedroom rental
units has been created. in response to that oversupply and to meet the specific needs of a niche market, we are
proposing a development with a unit mix that contains more 1 and 2 bedroom units than what is typically seen in
College Station. The zone change is in response to the parking needs of a development with this unit mix inside
the Eestgate redevelopment zone.
10110
Page 2 of 7
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.
This zone change is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Eastgate Neighborhood Plan. Both plans
designate this area as a Redevelopment zone and promote responsible multifamily redevelopment around the
perimeter of the Eastgate neighborhood. The Eastgate area is a hot rental area, and our project will help pull
single-family renters out of the neighborhood core into the fringes, reducing the stress on the internal transportation
and parking infrastructure and helping accomplish the goals of both the Comprehensive Plan and Eastgate
Neighborhood Plan.
3, How will this zone change be compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with
the character of the neighborhood?
See attached "Application Details".
4. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the rezoning district requested.
The property suitable for multifamily uses as described in the PDD due to its adjacency to existing restaurants,
proximity to the Texas A&M campus (< 400 feet), proximity to 3 major retail centers (< 1/2 mile), and location within
en area that is currently composed of mostly rental housing. Many existing residential units in the area are being
renovated as part of an overall redeveloprent push. Landscaping in the setbacks will separate the building from the
existing residential units to the north. Adequate utilities are present for the proposed scale of development, and we
will limit street access to one location along Foster Avenue.
5. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
Because the multifamily uses proposed in this PDD are the same as what is currently permitted under R-6, the
answer in #4 above applies here as well. In addition, the property has the potential to seive as a great buffer to the
traffic and commercial intensities along Texas Avenue. Multifamily development is appropriate as it is the best
available development tool to transition between the commercial and single-family uses.
6. Explain the marketability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
Again, we believe there is an oversupply of 3 and 4 bedrooms (with lower parking ratios) in the market. As a pure
R-6 development, the marketability and feasibility of the property is reduced as a result of the UDO's regulation of
parking.
7. List any other reasons to support this zone change.
in general, supporting this zone change will enable the developer to create alternative housing choices in Eastgate
which will draw renters out of less appropriate neighborhood core (thereby reducing traffic and noise impacts in the
heart of the neighborhoods. For more details on site specific additions, please see attached "Community Benefits".
10110
Page 3 of 7
8. State the purpose and intent of the proposed development.
To provide a sustainable, pedestrian and bicycle -friendly redevelopment site that responds to demands of the
College Station community and that meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Eastgate Neighborhood
Plan, The PDD zoning will encourage responsible development of the site in a manner Chet is compatible with the
existing character of the Eastgate neighborhood and one that sets the tone for future redevelopment nearby.
CONCEPT PLAN SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. What Is the range of future building heights?
Future building heights will range from /2' /o 50'. Heights above 35' will be restricted to the core of the property
(except for the stairwell access area as shown on the Concept Plan), defined as the area of property 30' off the
right -of --way of Foster Avenue to the rear setback, and 30' off Francis Lane to the side setback. See "Building
Height & Massing" under Application Details.
2. Provide a general statement regarding the proposed drainage.
Drainage of the site is proposed to be underground and within future landscaped and parking areas on the site.
3. List the general bulk or dimensional variations sought.
See attached.
q, If variations are sought, please provide a list of community benefits and/or innovative design concepts to justify the
request.
See attached.
10110
Page 4 of 7
5. Explain how the concept plan proposal will constitute and environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony
with the character of the surrounding area.
The concept plan proposal promotes responsible development of residential apartments in an area just feet from
Texas A&M, retail, office, and restaurants. Access to the property will be limited to one drive off Foster Avenue,
reducing conflict points and congestion on the main interior artery into Eastgate. Because of the site's proximity to
campus, we're including an abundance of bicycle racks, which will encourage the use of bicycles as the means of
primary transportation. This will reduce the potential traffic impacts on the area and help maintain the character of
the neighborhood. Our project will puff renters out of the core of the Eastgate neighborhood, improving current
traffic conditions and noise concerns in the area, creating a more harmonious and sustainable development.
6. Explain how the proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposal is in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and the more specific Eastgate Neighborhood Plan's
goals for the area. it lays the foundation for a responsible, urban, pedestrian and bicycle -friendly, residential
redevelopment in an area just feet from the front door of Texas A&M. The plan takes into account the existing
character of the neighborhood, and provides an appropriate, transitional development between commercial uses to
the west and residential rentals to the east Our focus is providing high -quality housing options that enhance the
overall quality -of -life experience in the Eastgate neighborhood.
7. Explain how the concept plan proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will not
adversely affect adjacent development.
This proposal will raise the bar for redevelopment in the area, and is corpelible with permitted uses on abutting
sites. Properties to the west are commercial, and will benefit from the increased number of residents in the area.
Properties to the north, south and east are predominantly small lot residential rentals, and most structures are in
need of renovation or redevelopment This proposal paves the way forhigh-quality, new construction in an area
that needs revitalization. Overall, the project should serve to lessen the existing strain on Eastgate's core traffic and
parking infrastructure by pulling those residents from the core of Eastgate to its fringe. For specific architectural
elements, please see the attached Application Details.
6. State how dwelling units shall have access to a public street if they do not front on a public street.
Units will be accessed by vehicles through the driveway on Foster Avenue. Parking will be provided on the ground
level, and residents will have access to the building via stairs. Pedestrians and bicyclists will be able to access the
building at locations along Francis Street.
g, State how the development has provided adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to: parks, schools,
and other public facilities.
The development will meet all UDO requirements for public improvements, and will also add 8' sidewalks within the
public right-of-way along our property lines. ,4t-p-ntt-of the project; -we will also st ipethecrosswalks at -Foster
Avenue & Francis -Street that are -adjacent to our property.( -crosswalks),
10/10 Page 5 of 7
40. Explain hew the concept plan proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity,
Our plan enhances the area by providing a high -qualify alternative housing option close to campus. We've paid
close attention to resident and neighborhood safety, and provide adequate access points in/out of the development.
The building's design elements (as described in the attached Application Details) were developed to ensure
conformity with the existing Eastgate neighborhood and safety amongst its residents.
11. Explain how the concept plan proposal 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 reasonable anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses In the area.
Through thoughtful and responsible planning, our project takes into account the increases in pedestrian, bicycle and
vehicular traffic caused by our development. By encouraging the use of bicycles and the University bus system
(Reveille and Excel lines), our project reduces the impact on the existing public infrastructure and will not be
detrimental to the pubic. Existing bus stops are at Campus View Apartments (G. Bush & University Oaks and
Foster/Lincoln intersection (1500' away).
Pease note that a "complete site plan" must be submitted to Planning & Development Services for a formal review after
the "concept plan" has been approved by the City Council prior to the issuance of a building permit - except for single-
family development.
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true,
correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE.
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner; all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf.
Signs ure and title I) bate
10110
Page 6 of 7
Foster Avenue Apartments
Meritorious Modifications:
1, UDO Section 5.2 - Reduction in building setback requirements for R-6 uses.
a. Min. Street Side Setbacks from 15.0' to 10.0'
b. Min. Front Setbacks from 25.0' to 10.0'
2. Reduction in Off -Street Parking Requirements per UDO Section 7.2.i
a. Off -Street parking facilities shall meet 75% of the number of specified parking space
requirements of Section 7.2.i.
Community Benefits:
1. Because this site is already zoned for R-6 multifamily, we believe that our willingness to expend
the resources required to provide a thoughtful, neighborhood -driven, architecturally -
appropriate design has been an overall community benefit.
2. This development provides an alternate housing choice for residential renters in the Eastgate
neighborhood. This attraction of renters from the core portions of the neighborhood to the
fringe will ease traffic and parking infrastructure impacts and enable a safer, sustainable, family -
conducive environment within Eastgate.
3. The development provides 8.01 sidewalks, not required in this area per the UDO.
4_,-.. The-developnient provides for -striping of the 2-adjacent-cross-walks atthe-foste'`r-& Francis -
intersections: This encourages pedestrian and bicycle use in -a •safe,masnnerand-is far •above• 4
-what-is-requiredby-the-YD0
5. The development, located within a designated Redevelopment Area, revitalizes a highly visible
property just a few feet from Texas Avenue, a Primary Image Corridor.
6. Utilization of sound redevelopment design principles including urban, pedestrian and bicycle -
oriented development. These principles are endorsed by the US Green Building Council and our
Comprehensive and Strategic Plans as a manner to reduce our overall carbon footprint and
encourage a healthier, more vibrant cornmunity.
7. The project will use non-polluting lighting fixtures that will not allow light to filter into the
neighborhood and allow the project remain compatible with its surroundings.
Foster Avenue Aartiments
Application Details:
Question 3,Pa e 3 - The uses identified by this zone change request are identical to those allowed by
the current zoning designation, R-6. Our team has studied the architectural styles of neighborhood, and
is proposing a development that conforms to existing aesthetics and the community character of the
Eastgate neighborhood. We plan to accomplish conformity through the following:
Building Height & Massing:
Portions of the building that front Foster Avenue and Francis Street will be limited to 3 stories
(35' in height). The portion of the building at the care of the property will be limited to 4 stories
(50' in height),
Building Elements:
The building will incorporate architectural elements and materials that mimic the original and
historical elements of the Eastgate neighborhood. These elements include the use of brick and
wood -style (hardi) siding.
Also, in lieu of a freestanding apartment identification sign (allowed in R-6 up to 10' in height),
the project will incorporate just 1 low profile monument sign. These architectural design
elements of the project will be compatible with, and will &so enhance, the existing character of
the neighborhood.
In addition to a focus on architectural elements, the project places strong emphasis on creating
a pedestrian and bicycle -friendly environment. Because of the site's close proximity to the
Texas A&M campus and local retail, we believe residents will take advantage of the opportunity
to walk and bike from home.
FRANCIS STREET
COMMERCIAL
ZONING C-1
73 ACRES
EXISTING ZONING. R-6
PROPOSED ZONING.
PDD - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
----- - ------
FOSTER AVENUE
RESIDENTIAL
ZONING R-6
Zoning Map
n r L L
r it A N x
es. Clot now
Zoning
Map
1
COMMERGIAI
ZONING C-1
BLOCK 3
LOT 10
N 161 53' 01"W- 115.1T
FOUR STORIES
PROPOSED AI'ARTNICNT BUILDING
TI IREE STORIES
CB = 5 02' 00'4
LO= TT43'
T= 4326'
L= 71 32'
R=5000'0' 0=5
12' ALLr0
7-3
N
N 461 53' 01"W - 59 83'
714 ACRES
ZONING R-0
PART OF
LOT 9
BLOCK 3
PROPOSED PARKING AREA
RESIDENTIAL
ZONING R-6
10
�I _' BUILDING SE1 DAGKLI9 ACE GS 391 E- 6011' I--
560' 62'4P'E-�1' I'
IIN.
'GIDEWPLK —_-
9 b
FOSTER AVENUE
( SO' ROW )
_u: iLepl P121
FLOODPLAIN NOTE
11 pL L
W
R 4 i0 K
GC SCS I LP
clo Clint Cooper
L414 In 2012
SD
REZONING REQUEST
FOR
UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS PH 5
12-00500030
REQUEST:
A-O Agricultural-Open to R-4 Multi-Family Residential
SCALE:
5.379 acres
LOCATION:
3182 Holleman DriveSouth
APPLICANTS:
Joe Schultz, P.E., Schultz Engineering, LLC
PROJECT MANAGER:
Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner
lhovde@cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the zoning request.
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 1of 6
April 5, 2012
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 2of 6
April 5, 2012
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 3of 6
April 5, 2012
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date:April 5, 2012
AdvertisedCouncil Hearing Dates: April 26, 2012
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: 22
Contacts in support:None
Contacts in opposition:None
Inquiry contacts:None
ADJACENT LAND USES
DirectionComprehensivePlanZoningLand Use
NorthUrbanR-3 Townhousetownhouses(under
construction)
South
UrbanA-O Agricultural-OpenLas Palomas
Subdivision
(duplexes)
East
UrbanA-O Agricultural-OpenVacant and single-
family residential
WestUrbanR-4 Multi-FamilyVacant and
stormwater detention
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation:
March 2008
Zoning:
A-O Agricultural-Open uponAnnexation
Preliminary Plan:
A Preliminary Plan forthe University Heights Subdivision was
approved in 2011. A Preliminary Plat was originallyapproved on
the subject propertyforOakland Ridge Subdivisionin2007.
Final Plat:
This phase of University Height has not been final platted.
Site development:
Vacant.
REVIEW CRITERIA
1.Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
The R-4 Multi-Family Residential zoning request is consistentwith the Future Land Use and
Character Map that designates this property as Urban. An Urban land use designation is for
areas intended for intense development activities such as townhomes, duplexes, and
apartments, all of which are allowed in the R-4 zoning district. The subject tract and all
abutting properties are designated as Urban on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use
and Character Map. In addition, the subject tract is bordered on the east side by Holleman
Drive South, designated as afuture 4-Lane Major Collector, though it is currently built as a
2-lane rural roadway.
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 4of 6
April 5, 2012
2.Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and
with the character of the neighborhood:
Surrounding development includes future townhouse and detached single-family, existing
duplex housing, and several existing single-family residential uses. The property
immediately south of the subject tract is designated as Urban, and is currently developed as
Las Palomas Subdivision, a duplex development.
The land use to the east (across Holleman Drive South) is vacant property and asingle-
family house with an A-O Agricultural-Open zoning. To the south, the Las Palomas duplex
subdivision is also zoned A-O Agricultural-Open. The property to the west, was zoned R-4
Multi-Family Residentialin 2008 at the same time the property north of the subject tract was
zoned R-3 Townhouse. Also in the area are duplexes along Cain Road and future
townhouses as part of the planned Barracks development. In general, the zoning request is
compatible with the existing and planneddevelopments in the area.
The proposed R-4 zoning district, which allows townhomes, duplexes, and apartments, will
allow a maximum of 20 dwelling units per acre. This will expandthe abuttingR-4 zoning in
the preliminary platted University Oaks Subdivision.
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 suitability of the proposed R-4 zoning linked to the surrounding land uses being of a
similar nature, both multi-family and duplex housing. The surrounding area is anticipated to
havedevelopment for student and rental housing, which is consistent with the plans for this
portion of the University Heights Subdivision.
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 current zoning of the property, A-O Agricultural-Open, is not suitable for the subject
tract. It is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Planland use designation of Urban,
and is not compatible with the surrounding zoningdistricts.Due to its size, the subject tract
development is limited to one single-family residential lot or a variety of agricultural related
land uses. This type of development is not suitable for the property due to the intensity of
the adjacent land uses.
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 marketability of the subject tract is broad due to itslocation and access to Holleman
Drive South. Development in the immediate vicinity ranges from an estate scale to multi-
family residential. Staff does not believe themarketability of the subject tract is limited to
multi-family residential, but is aware that an A-O Agricultural-Open zoning is not a viable
zoning for the development of the subject tract due to its size and surrounding uses.
6.Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities generally
suitable and adequate for the proposed use:
The subject tract is located within the Wellborn Special Utility District waterservice area.
Future platting and development of the tract will have to provide adequate fire flow to
support the proposed use.
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 5of 6
April 5, 2012
The subject tract is located just north of a 12-inch sanitary sewer main as itcrosses
Holleman DriveSouthand heads east, this linegravity flows into the Bee Creek TrunkLine.
This respectivetrunk line's sub-basin currently serves many developments alongHarvey
Mitchell Parkway, from areas east of Wellborn Road, to the Carters Creek Wastewater
TreatmentPlant. Much of the existing trunk line was constructed in 1973 and was shown to
haveseveral surchargingline segments in the 2011 HDR Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Master Plan Update. The City is currently inthe process of initializing a CapitalImprovement
Project in anticipation of the ultimate build-out demand anticipated for thesubject sewer
shed area.The subject tract is not located within a FEMA regulatedSpecial Flood Hazard
Area. Development of the subject tract requiresmitigation ofpost development flows and
followsthe BCS Storm Water Design Guidelines. The subjecttract is located adjacent
toHolleman Drive, a 4-Lane Major Collector -Suburban Context, on theCity's Thoroughfare
Plan.The tract is also located adjacent to Kenyon Drive and the future extension of Los
Portales Drive,both of which are local streets.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the zoning request based on its consistencywith the
Comprehensive Plan and existing or planned use of the surrounding properties.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1.Application
2.Rezoning map (provided in packet)
Planning and Zoning CommissionPage 6of 6
April 5, 2012
(7 A�lQ tIJecl'
tt
CITY OF CI .LH:GR STATION
Home of leear Aemll University`
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CASE NO.:
DATE SUBMITTED:
TIME:
STAFF:
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONING) APPLICATION
GENERAL
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
El $1,165 Rezoning Application Fee.
x❑ Application completed in full, This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used
and may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
❑x Traffic Impact Analysis or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for
the proposed request.
Ej One (1) copy of a fully dimensioned map on 24" x 36" 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. All public and private rights -of -way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land.
X❑ Written legal description of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is
applicable).
El A CAD (dxf/dwg) - model space State Plane NAD 83 or GIS (shp) digital file (e-mailed to
P& DS_Digital_Submittal@cstx.gov).
NOTE: If a petition for rezoning is denied by the City Council, another application for rezoning shall not be fled
within a period of 180 days from the date of denial, except with permission of the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Date of Optional Preapplication Conference N/A
NAME OF PROJECT University Heights- Phase 5
ADDRESS Holleman Drive South
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Lot, Block, Subdivision)
GENERAL LOCATION OF PROPERTY, IF NOT PLATTED:
Holleman Drive South at the intersection of Holleman and Kenyon Drive North of the Los Palomas Subdivision
N/A
TOTAL ACREAGE 5.379 Acres
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name Joe Schultz P.E., Schultz Engineering, LLC E-mail /oeschultz84@verizon.net
Street Address 2730 A Longmire Drive
City College Station State Texas Zip Code 77845
Phone Number 979.764.3900 Fax Number 979.764.3910
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION:
Name MJBS Holleman, LTD., a Texas limited partnership E-mail Pschultz@regents-austin.com
Street Address 5704 Travis Green Ln.
City Austin State Texas Zip Code 78745
Phone Number 512-413-8748 Fax Number (979) 764-3910
10/10 Page 1 of 3
OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e
Name
Street Address
City
Phone Number
project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.):
E-mail
State
Fax Number
This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated February 28, 2011
of the Brazos County Official Records.
Existing Zoning A-O Agricultural Open
Present Use of Property Vacant
Proposed Use of Property Apartments or Condos
Zip Code
and recorded in Volume 10052 Page 256
Proposed Zon
Hi L-D,,,,,,ity Multi -Family '4 ti, je j
3-z-/
REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. List the changed or changing conditions in the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary.
Phase 1 of the University Heights Development is now complete and homes and townhomes for student living will
be under construction soon. The recent re -zoning of 10 acres to the south of this tract to R-4 multi -family residential
indicates the market needs higher density residential in this area. The kl'gher.derrsity multi -family residential use is
buffered from single-famlly residences by Holleman Drive South to the east, the duplexes to the south, future
multi -family to the west and townhomes to the north.
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.
The zone change is in accordance with the future land use and character map that designates this property as
urban. An urban land use designation is for areas intended for intense development activities such as townhomes,
duplexes, and apartments, all of which are allowed in the RI zoning district.
4
3, How will this zone change be compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with
the character of the neighborhood?
The current zoning is A-0 on the existing duplex development, Los Palomas, because the development existed prior
to annexation. The current zoning to the west is F3-4 multi -family and the currenjzoning to the north is R-3
townhomes. All of these uses are allowed in R The owner is requesting Raning so that there can be even
more diversity in the types of student living choices in this area. The closest single-family residential tots to this
property am in Phase 1 of the University Heights subdivision and these dwellings will be marketed to students. This
zone change will be in character with the existing neighborhood which is primarily student occupied residential
dwellings.
10/10 Page 2 of 3
4, Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the rezoning district requested.
This property is part of the ongoing University Heights development and already has the access and utility
infrastructure in place for the requested zoning. Access will be from Kenyon Drive or the future extension of Los
Portales Drive. The property will have public right-of-way on 3 sides and duplex development on the other side. The
lack of adjacent uses that could be affected by this use makes the proposed zoning ideal for this tract.
5. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district,
The property Is not suitable for A-0 zoning since a single residential lot is one of the few uses that is allowed !n this
district and that use would not be suitable for this location.
8. Explain the marketability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
Thera is no marketability of the property for the uses allowed in the current 4-0 zoning.
7. List any other reasons to support this zone change.
This location has adequate access to TAMU via Holleman Drive South and Its proximity to the TAMU campus has
led to the ongoing development of student housing to this area. The re -zoning would allow for a small !' `
development which would provide another option for student living In the area. er 1.1,14`-
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true,
correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED 8Y ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner, If there is more
than one owner, ail owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the applicafion
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application an its behalf,
P---4
c JW d I A &
Signature and title
thifht“ i
Date ' d
10113 I print Form 1 Page 3 al 3
ZONED R-3
ThPirtrb
1/ 1
ZONED R-4 \y
i'I
t-
UNIVERSITY
HEIGHTS -PHASE 1 11
COMMON AREA 4
(DETENTION yy b
POND)
I
� I
22
s
r)
I
\l 'I
I
Li -_I
or
GN.N _r1li !III u,l,,.- 5 ] EE�EE ._ Et% ' :,,,EE„
1- 1 —o+s ve nms _uoolvl r - -
1 73C. /53
1I
Paloma Ridge Di ive
I I
1-
UNIVERSITY HEI HTS-1PHASIE 1
ZONED RT310517/276
r42 ➢E ➢ZE - mma'
u E n . !
Kenyon Dame
ZONED A-0
LECEf ID
eC-crvE ' IME
Er SING ZONNG urC
—r—r—v— HE'LL NC
IMF In_
/ VICINITY MAP
41
5.379 ACRES , „ ou,e.s 1 m�,
.{ I:I II��
EXISTING ZONING A-0 RE
-qi
1 CITY
PROPOSED ZONING R-4 g� LIMITS
I /it , /t2p— t t til
/ N
E4Z I'4➢'p - 54E54'
ZONE6 A-0
re
Lb
LET
LINE Tuff
-OwDui. rnwi NiI .-IVRO r4IRECTION
12.2t5' II
gII r-r,nl K• ,„ „o,E
//
//
L
J% .__PROJECT
LOCATION
I
II
3/
NOT TO VCALE
ZONING MAP
UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS
PHASE 5
5 379 ACRES
EXISTING ZONING
A-0 - AGRICULTURAL (N[N
PROPOSED ZONING
R4 - MULTI-1AMILV
COLI64a Lc4/i!1,r rowan,
OiION, , MAAS
KALE C'-iE rf EEl•Aa, o,
13
OPER
arria
n.a'r\ Lrru re
OgTist
REZONING REQUEST
FOR
3100 HAUPT ROAD
12-00500006
REQUEST:
PDD Planned Development District to PDD Planned Development
District w/ an additional use
SCALE:
108.88 Acres
LOCATION:
3100 Haupt Road, generally located between Old Wellborn Road
andHolleman Drive South, north of the Buena Vida Subdivision.
APPLICANTS:
Heath Philips, Heath Phillips Investments, LLC
PROJECT MANAGER:
Matt Robinson, AICP, Senior Planner
mrobinson@cstx.gov
OVERVIEW:
The proposed PDD rezoning request is an amendment to the
previously approved PDD zoning in order to add commercial
amusement/water recreation uses to the development, in addition
to adjusting the development layout to comply with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning with the condition that
the commercial amusement/water recreation usesareremoved
from the concept plan and the list of permitted uses.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 1of 10
April 5, 2012
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 2of 10
April 5, 2012
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 3of 10
April 5, 2012
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date:February 16, 2012
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: March 8, 2012
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:
Barracks at RockPrairie Owner’s Association
Property owner notices mailed: 26
Contacts in support:None at time of staff report
Contacts in opposition:1
Inquiry contacts:None at time of staff report
ADJACENT LAND USES
DirectionComprehensive PlanZoningLand Use
North
Urban –Growth Area 5A-O Agricultural OpenVacant
SouthGeneral Suburban –R-1 Single-Family Vacant, townhomes (The
Growth Area 5Residential;Barracks),single-family
R-3 Townhouse;residences (Williamsgate
A-O Agricultural OpenSubdivision and future Buena
Vida Subdivision)
East
6-lane major arterial on Old Wellborn Road, Railroad
Thoroughfare Plantracks and Wellborn Road
WestGeneral Suburban –A-O Agricultural OpenVacant, Holleman Drive South
Growth Area 5,
Major Collector on
Thoroughfare Plan
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation:
2002
Zoning:
A-O Agricultural Open upon annexation (2002)
A-O Agricultural Open to PDD Planned Development District
(2011)
Final Plat:
Barracks II Section 100 (2012)
Site development:
The first phase of the development is currently under construction.
ZONING HISTORY
In June 2011, the property was rezoned from A-O Agricultural Open to PDD Planned
Development District and included a mix of commercial and single-family attached (townhome)
and single-family detached residences. The original proposal included a wake board ski facility
within two of the detention pond areas. At the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council
meetings concerns were expressed about the proposed wake board facilities, specifically
regarding light, noise, buffers and whether the use was appropriate for the area. City Council
approved the rezoning with the condition that the wakeboard use be removed. Since that time, a
Preliminary Plan has been approved for the development along with a Final Plat for the first
phase of the development.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 4of 10
April 5, 2012
The developer is requesting the rezoning amendment to provide additional uses, which include
a recreational center with a commercial wake board ski facility, administrative offices, a
maximum 3,500 square foot restaurant, and retail sales related to the wakeboard facility.
Additionally, the rezoning revises the original approved layout to incorporate an open
waterway/drainage easement through the center of the development, which results in a
reduction in the numberof townhomes from the original proposal and some rearrangement of
streets and alleys. Some aspects of the site layout modifications are due in part to the
requirements of the US Army Corpsof Engineers, as the developer is proposing to preserve
additional stretches of the existing natural channel.
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
2.Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and
with the character of the neighborhood:
3. Suitability of the property affected by the amendment for uses permitted by the
district that would be made applicable by the proposed amendment:
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:
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 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as General Suburban and is located
in Growth Area 5. It states that the area between Cain Road and Rock Prairie Road should be
used for General Suburban activities, including high-density single-family lots (minimum 5,000
square feet), townhomes, duplexes, as well as suburban or neighborhood commercial and office
uses.
The property is currently zoned PDD Planned Development District, allowing for a mixture of
single-family residences, offices and commercial development. Residential uses are capped at
a proposed density of 8.45 units per acre and will continue the type of residential development
immediately to the south of the subject property, which are zoned and developed for single-
family residences and townhomes. These properties include The Barracks, a townhome
development, as well asthe Williamsgate and Buena Vida subdivisions that are zoned R-1
Single-Family Residential.
Commercial uses are primarily proposed to be located along Old Wellborn Road, which is
parallel to the existing railroad tracks. Through the PDD, additional controls are being applied
that address issues related to architectural design, size, scale, and buffering as well other
specific items.
Additional uses beyond what are currently allowed under the C-3 Neighborhood Commercial
designation were approved with the original rezoning. These uses include a shooting range-
indoor, car wash, commercial garden/greenhouse/landscape maintenance, commercial
amusement, office and retail sales/service with storage areas being greater than 50% of the
space, and self-storage allowing the storage of equipment, materials, recreational vehicles, or
boats in buildings with at least three enclosed sides. As mentioned previously, additional
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 5of 10
April 5, 2012
standards have been included to address issues of design, size, scale and buffering.
Additionally,a couple of the proposed uses are presently allowed to some degree under a
general C-3 Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. This includes commercial amusement,
which is allowed under a Conditional Use Permit, and self-storage without the storage of
equipment and vehicles outside.
The proposed revised PDD zoning includes the addition of commercial amusement uses and
water recreation activities that include a commercial wakeboard ski facility, administrative
offices, a maximum 3,500 square foot restaurant, and retail sales related to the wakeboard
facility. The applicant has stated that the proposed additional uses are to increase the
marketability of the property. A landscaped buffer between the recreation center and property to
the north is proposed and includes plantings that shall provide 100% opacity to a height of at
least 8-feet. Lighting will be in accordance with the Unified Development Standards. The
proposed hours of operation for the wakeboard ski facility are from no earlier than 8 a.m. to 10
p.m.
6.Availability of water, wastewater, storm water, and transportation facilities
generally suitable and adequate for the proposed use:
The subject tract is located in the Wellborn Special Utility District waterservice area. Future
development of the tract will have to meet the City’s minimum fire flow requirements. The
subject tract is located adjacent to a 12-inch sanitary sewer main which runs along the south
and east property boundaries. The tract is locatedin 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 Harvey Mitchell Parkway, from areas east of
Wellborn Road, to the Carters Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Much of 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 acapital 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 theincreased sanitary sewer demand from the proposed
development, however, future demands in this respective sub-basin will need to be evaluated as
development occurs.
The subject tract is in the Bee Creek Tributary “B” drainage basin. The subject tract isnot
located within a FEMA regulated Special Flood Hazard Area per FEMA FIRM panel 182C.
Future development of the tract will have to meet the requirements of the City Storm Water
Design Guidelines. The subject tract is located adjacent to Old Wellborn Road (local) to the east
and Holleman Drive West (4 Lane Major Collector –Suburban Context) to the west. Three
future thoroughfares bi-sect the property: Deacon Drive (2-Lane Major Collector –Urban
Context), General Parkway (2-Lane Minor Collector –Suburban/Urban Context) & Towers
Parkway a 2-Lane Minor Collector –Suburban/Urban Context adjacent to the school district
owned property.
REVIEW OF CONCEPT PLAN
Modifications from the previously approved concept plan include the addition of uses,
rearrangementof streets/alleys and the addition of a waterway/drainage easement. Additional
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 6of 10
April 5, 2012
uses consist of commercial amusement with water recreation activities, that includes a
commercial wakeboard ski facility, administrative offices, a maximum 3,500 square foot
restaurant, and retail sales related to the wakeboard facility.
The applicant has provided the following information related to the purpose and intent of the
proposed zoning district:
The Barracks II Subdivision was previously granted PDD Zoning to develop a
“
residential community for students in the 18-30 year age range. The planned
development includes a mixture of housing options and commercial businesses that
cater to the student population. The intent has not changed. This rezoning request
merely adds another allowable use to the existing PDD Zoning. The Recreation Center
and ski facility are intended to enhance the marketability of this mixed use development
to buyers in the target demographic.”
In accordance with this purpose statement, the Concept Plan includes a mixture of residential,
commercial and office uses. Commercial uses are proposed primarily along Old Wellborn Road,
with an additional commercial tract located at the future intersection of Deacon Drive and
Holleman Drive South. These areas will be limited to C-3 Neighborhood Commercial uses, with
additional allowed uses consisting of a shooting range –indoor, car wash, commercial
garden/greenhouse/landscaping, commercial amusement, office and retail sales/service with
storage areas being greater than 50%, and self-storage allowing equipment, materials,
recreational vehicles and boats in a building enclosed on three sides. These uses would be
limited to commercial tracts 2, 3 and 4, whichare located along Old Wellborn Road.
Additionally, commercial tract 4 is the only commercial tract where self-storage units would be
permitted. As proposed, restaurants are not a permitted use in Commercial Tracts 2, 3 or4. All
commercial structures willbe required to be in compliance with the Non-Residential
Architectural Standards as well as being compatible in size, roof type and pitch, materials, and
architecture with the surrounding residential uses. A recreation center that includes a Wake
Board Ski Park is proposed to utilize two of the three detention ponds that are necessary to
serve the development. The recreation center, which includes offices, a pro shop, a 3,500
square foot restaurant and other amenities, will be required to meet all UDO requirements.
Residential uses consisting of single-family detached residences and townhomes are proposed
for the remainder of the site. Residential density is proposed at a max of 8.45 dwelling units per
acre. The townhomes are proposed to be located arounda 1.62 acre park at the center of the
development with an additional 2.25 acres of park land located around the perimeter of the
townhomes. Single-family detached residences are proposed to be located nearest the school
district owned property, located along Holleman Drive South that could potentially be the
location of a future school.
As mentioned, the layout of the development has changed some from the previously approved
concept plan. Layout changes have been made in order to incorporate an open
waterway/drainage easement through the center of the development. This waterway/drainage
easement is in response to requirements of theUS Army Corp of Engineers as the developer is
proposing to preserve additional stretches of the existing naturalchannel. Asa result, a number
of townhome units have been removed and the layout now has more townhomes taking direct
access to local streets as opposed to access via alleys.
At time of site plan and plat, the project will need to meet all applicable standards required by
the UDO except those discussed below. Staff is currently undertaking an effort to create new
zoning districts to implement the different character areas envisioned by the Comprehensive
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 7of 10
April 5, 2012
Plan. In the absence of a defined General Suburban zoning district, the applicant and staff have
negotiated through various standards to seek to attain a general suburban style that is
appropriate for this portion of the City, while seeking to retain flexibility for both parties.
Base Zoning and Meritorious Modifications
The existing zoning was approved with the following base zoning and meritorious modifications
listed below. There are no new modifications being requested with the rezoning amendment.
The applicant has proposed to utilize R-1 Single-Family Residential; R-3 Townhouse; and C-3
Light Commercial as the base, underlying zoning districts for standards not identified in the
PDD. At the time of site plan and plat, the project will need to meet all applicable site,
architectural and platting standards required by the Unified Development Ordinance except
where meritorious modifications are granted with the PDD zoning. The applicant has requested
the following meritorious modifications:
1.Section 6.3 “Specific Use Standards”
The applicant has requested that the following uses be permitted within the Commercial
Tracts shown on the concept plan in addition to the uses currently allowed under the C-3
zoning district:
Shooting Range –Indoor
Car Wash
Commercial garden/greenhouse/landscape maintenance
Commercial Amusement
Office and retail sales/services with storage areas being greater than 50% of the
space (i.e., office/warehouse with overhead doors)
Self-storage –equipment, materials, recreational vehicles, or boats in buildings
with at least three enclosed sides
2.Section 5.2. “Residential Dimensional Standards”
The applicant has proposed the following modified setback requirements (UDO
requirements are in parentheses):
UseR-1R-3
Min. Front Setback20’ (25’)20’ (25’)
Min. Side Setback5’ (7.5’)5’ (7.5’)
The applicant states that the purpose is to allow slightly larger buildings and slightly more
units within the same space, while maintaining a density that is compatible with the
Comprehensive Plan.
3.Section 5.4 “Non-Residential Dimensional Standards”
Theapplicant has requested that the minimum rear setback for self storage structures
adjacent to a public alley be five feet. Current UDO requirements for commercial buildings
located within a C-3 zoning district is 15 feet. The applicant’s justification is that the alley will
have a 24-foot right-of-way that provides adequate separation distance and that the rear
wall of these units will have no openings or vehicular or pedestrian traffic on that side of the
storage facility. Additionally, the intent is to utilize the rear wall of the self-storage building to
act as the buffer wall between land uses as requested in modification number 5 listed below.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 8of 10
April 5, 2012
4.Section 7.6 “Buffer Standards”
The applicant is requesting the ability to count the rear wall of a self-storage building that is
adjacent to an alley serving residential units as meeting the buffering requirement for
commercial uses abutting single-family uses. The wall height would be a maximum of 15
feet and constructed of stone. The applicant’s justification is that the maximum height for a
buffer wall is 8-feet and that the buffer requirements produce a 15-foot buffer yard that
would be hidden from view.
5.Section 7.4 “Signs”
The applicant is requesting that Commercial Tracts 2, 3, and 4 each be permittedto erect a
freestanding sign that is no taller than 20 feet in height. Current, UDO requirements limit
signage in C-3 zoning districts to low profile signs, which are a max of 4 feet in height and
60 square feet in area. The applicant’s justification for the request is that the commercial
tracts are situated next to elevated railroad tracks and that the view to the commercial
businesses will be obstructed from view.
6.Section 8.2 “Blocks”
a)The applicant is requesting that block lengths of up to 1,000 feet be permitted on
designated single-family and townhome blocks. Specifically, these blocks are noted as
SF Block 4, SF Block 9, and TH Block 7. Current UDO requirements limit block lengths
to 900 feet in areas designated as General Suburban. The applicant’s justification for the
longer block lengths is to limit the number of street connections between single-family
and townhome areas in an effort to eliminate the occurrence of townhome residents
parking in front of single-family homes. A 15-foot widecommon area is proposed along
TH Block 7 to allow for future pedestrian traffic through the block.
b)The applicant is requesting a 1,250-foot block length along Deacon Drive for the Ski
Park (WBP Block 1). The Ski Park is comprised of two ponds that serve as detention
areas. Combined with the third detention area adjacent to Commercial Tract 2, these
ponds are necessary to accommodate the drainage needs for the development and are
located at the point where the natural drainage system exits the site. With the proposal
to utilize two of these ponds as a Ski Park, a long block without an intermediate break in
it is necessary.
7.Section 8.2.E.6 “Dead-End Streets” and Section 8.2.F “Alleys”
The applicant is requesting that dead end streets in residential areas (single-family and
townhome) be allowed to extend a maximum of 100 feet in length and that the dead-end
alley adjacent to Commercial Tract 4 be allowed to extend to the property line
(approximately 110 feet). Current subdivision requirements limit dead-endstreets and dead-
end alleys to 100 feet in length or the depth of one lot, whichever is less. This affects the
areas near Commercial Tract 1 and the Ski Park as the proposed lot width of the townhome
lots are 30 feet wide along the right-of-way. Additionally, the alley adjacent to Commercial
Tract 4 exceeds 100 feet in width, which is longer than the proposed townhome lot width. In
this instance it would leave a small strip of privately-owned land between the alley and the
property line. In both instances,future extension of the street/alley would be sought when
the adjoining properties developed.
8.Section 6.3.Q “Specific Use Standards –Storage (Self-Service)”
The applicant is requesting that accessory uses of an office and living quarters be allowed in
the self-storage facility. Each of these uses would be limited to no more than 1,000 square
feet in size. Additionally, the selling, renting, leasing of trucks or trailers would not be
permitted. Current UDO requirements prohibit accessory uses for self-storage businesses
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 9of 10
April 5, 2012
located within a C-3 zoning designation. The applicant’s justification is that due to the large
concentration of townhomes, they anticipate moving to be a common occurrence and that
the need for the sale of related materials for moving and extended hours may be needed.
9.Section 7.5 “Landscaping” and Section 7.8 “Drainage and Stormwater Management”
The applicant is requesting that the landscaping requirements for the Ski Park development
be limited to the building, parking and amenity areasof the Ski Park. The ponds themselves
would be removed from the landscaping point calculations, but would still be subject to
streetscaping requirements along the rights-of-way. UDO requirements for landscaping point
calculations are based on the overall size of the site and require that detention ponds be
incorporated into the landscape design. Given that the majority of the Ski Park area is
comprised of the ponds, it would be difficult, if not impossible to meet the landscaping
requirements.
10.Section 8.2.E.4 “Adequate Street Access”
The applicant is requesting that a Remote Emergency Access be permitted to serve as a
connection to the requirement that when there are more than 30 lots to be served by
external street connections, a minimum of two connections to external paved public streets
be provided. Current UDO subdivision requirements state that the Planning and Zoning
Commission may allow a Remote Emergency Access when the development is being
phased or when the constraints of the land prevent the provision of a second street
connection. The applicant is requesting this modification in an effort to phase subsequent
streets accordingly. The requirement for two street connections to external paved public
streets would still be required when 100 or more lots are served.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Meritorious modifications granted previously are proposed to carry over with the PDD
amendment. Additionally, the revised concept plan is generally the same layout as what was
previously approved, with modifications to add drainage/waterways, a revised street/alley layout
around the park, and the addition of the commercial amusement uses and recreation center that
includes a wakeboard ski park, restaurant and other accessory uses.
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and concept plan with the condition that the
commercial amusement uses and water recreation activities, which includes the wakeboard ski
facility be removed from the allowed uses. While staff previously recommended approval of the
wakeboard ski facility use, the basis for the recommendation is City Council’s previous decision
thatthe wakeboard ski facilities are incompatible to the adjacent land uses.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1.Application
2.Meritorious Modifications Justification
3.Rezoning map (providedin packet)
4.Concept Plan (provided in packet)
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 10of 10
April 5, 2012
(41'
CTI Y OF Cou.x;Gp STA rIoN
Horne of Texas A&M Univearrty"
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CASE NO • IC.
DATE SUBMITTED°
TIME: t''. [_%`;`•)
STAFF:
""1_1"7)
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONING) APPLICATION
PLANNED DISTRICTS
(Check one)
[l Planned Development District (PDD) ❑ Planned - Mixed Used Development (P-MUD)
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
$1,165 Rezoning Application Fee.
El Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
Traffic Impact Analysis or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for the
proposed request,
One (1) copy of a fully dimensioned Rezoning 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. All public and private rights -of -way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land.
❑x Written legal description of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is
applicable).
❑x A CAD (dxf/dwg) - model space State Plane NAD 83 or GIS (shp) digital file (e-mailed to P&DS_Digital
_Submittal @ cstx. g ov)
El Fourteen (14) copies of the Concept Plan on 24"x36" paper in accordance with Section 3.4.D of the UDO.
>; The attached Concept Plan checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not
checked off.
NOTE: 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.
Date of Optional Preapplication Conference
NAME OF PROJECT The Barracks 1! Subdivision
ADDRESS 3100 Haupt Road, College Station
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Lot, Block, Subdivision) Crawford Burnett League, A-7
GENERAL LOCATION OF PROPERTY IF NOT PLATTED:
Generally located north of Rock Prairie Road between Wellborn Road and Holleman Drive South.
TOTAL ACREAGE 108.88 ac
10/10 Page 1 of 7
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name Heath Phillips E-mail heath_superiorstructures@
Street Address 3302 General Parkway yahoo.com
City College Station State Texas Zip Code 77845
Phone Number 979-229-5906 Fax Number 979-690-1041
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION:
Name Heath Phillips Investments, LLC E-mail
Street Address
City
Phone Number
(same as above)
State
Fax Number
Zip Code
OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e. project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.):
Name E-mail
Street Address
City State Zip Code
Phone Number Fax Number
This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated May 13, 2010
of the Brazos County Official Records.
Existing Zoning PDD Proposed Zoning PDD (with additional land use)
Present Use of Property generally vacant, but the first phase is being developed for residential and commercial uses
Proposed Use of Property residential, commercial
Proposed Use(s) of Property for PDD, if applicable:
(see accompanying Concept Plan and related documents for specific uses.)
and recorded in Volume 9627 , Page 073
P-MUD uses are prescribed in Section 6.2.C. Use Table of the Unified Development Ordinance,
If P-MUD:
Approximate percentage of residential land uses:
Approximate percentage of non-residential land uses:
REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. List the changed or changing conditions in the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary.
There is a highly competitive student housing market in College Station that continues to expand southward along
Holleman Drive. Many options are presently available to students and/or investors that have unique, attractive
amenities intended to make each product more appealing that others in the community. The Barracks II
Subdivision is attempting to compete in this market but needs a similar amenity to enhance its marketability. The
requested zoning change adds language to the existing PDD Zoning which allows for a Recreation Center that
includes a cable wake board ski facility.
10/10 Page 2 of 7
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, it is accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. How will this zone change be compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with
the character of the neighborhood?
The original Concept Plan for The Barracks 11 was developed with the Recreation Center and ski facility as an
integral part of the development. The target demographic for this project are students in the 18-30 year age
category, which is the same age category that commonly participates in wake boarding. The facility will be used as
a marketing tool, and everyone who purchases property in The Barracks 11 will know it is there. Most developed
property around this facility already consists of student housing and more is being developed at this time. This
added use will coexist with these surrounding developments with changing the character of the area.
4. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the rezoning district requested.
The Recreation Center and ski facility will be constructed in and around two of the three detention ponds planned
for The Barracks 11. The ponds will be over -excavated to allow for permanent water pools. Few other uses are
available for the detention pond areas. The anticipated improvements are in keeping with the City's goal of
improving the aesthetics of these otherwise unusable areas.
5. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
As indicated above, the detention pond areas are generally unusable for other purposes. they can only be used as
open areas, but are subject to flooding on a regular basis.
6. Explain the marketability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
The student housing market in College Station is highly competitive, with numerous new options coming on-line that
include amenities such as indoor/outdoor fitness centers, high-def theaters, lazy rivers, and cyber cafes. Under its
current zoning, The Barracks 11 Subdivision can be marketed just as any other student housing development, but it
lacks a unique draw to lure potential buyers away from these competing options. The developer believes the
addition of the Recreation Center and its wake board ski facility described herein will provide this incentive and
greatly improve the marketability of the property.
7. List any other reasons to support this zone change.
When originally presented for rezoning, the opponents of this additional use portrayed the wake board ski facility as
a loud and offensive activity that would detract from adjoining properties. The developer wishes to alleviate these
fears. The Recreation Center and ski facility will be an integral marketing tool in The Barracks 11 Subdivision that
meets all City requirements for noise levels and lighting. While special events are anticipated at the facility, they will
be limited in size and scope so that they do not become a nuisance to other residents and detract from the future
sale of lots or commercial properties.
10/10 Page 3 of 7
8. State the purpose and intent of the proposed development.
The Barracks 11 Subdivision was previously granted PDD Zoning to develop a residential community for students in
the 18-30 year age range. The planned development includes a mixture of housing options and commercial
businesses that cater to the student population. That intent has not changed. This rezoning request merely adds
another allowable use to the existing PDD Zoning. The Recreation Center and ski facility are intended to enhance
the marketability of this mixed use development to buyers in the target demographic.
CONCEPT PLAN SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. What is the range of future building heights?
(see accompanying documents)
2. Provide a general statement regarding the proposed drainage.
(see accompanying documents)
3. List the general bulk or dimensional variations sought.
(see accompanying documents)
4. If variations are sought, please provide a list of community benefits and/or innovative design concepts to justify the
request.
(see accompanying documents)
10/10 Page 4 of 7
5. Explain how the concept plan proposal will constitute and environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony
with the character of the surrounding area.
(see accompanying documents)
6. Explain how the proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
(see accompanying documents)
7 Explain how the concept plan proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will not
adversely affect adjacent development.
(see accompanying documents)
8. State how dwelling units shall have access to a public street ifthe_y do not front on a public street.
(not applicable)
g. State how the development has provided adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to: parks, schools,
and other public facilities.
(see accompanying documents)
10/10 Page of
1 p, Explain how the concept plan proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
(see accompanying documents)
11. Explain how the concept plan proposal 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 reasonable anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses in the area.
(see accompanying documents)
Please note that a "complete site plan" must be submitted to Planning & Development Services for a formal review after
the "concept plan" has been approved by the City Council prior to the issuance of a building permit - except for single-
family development.
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true,
correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. 1f there is more
than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to .sign the application on its behalf.
lr'
� ✓2
Signature and title' Clete /
10110
Page 6of7
THE BARRACKS II SUBDIVISION
Rezoning Request
January 9, 2012
Background
In June, 2011, the College Station City Council granted PDD Zoning to The Barracks II Subdivision.
All of the requested land uses and zoning modifications were granted with the exception of the cable wake
board ski facility and its associated landscaping and sign restrictions. Since that time, the initial phase of
development has begun and is anticipated for completion in early 2012.
The developer of The Barracks I1 Subdivision is requesting that a Recreation Center, which includes
a cable wake board ski facility and restaurant, be added as an approved use within the development. Ilis
reasoning is that the market for townhomes or small single family homes that target the student population is
highly competitive due to the abundance of offerings in College Station. In order to lure potential buyers,
developers must offer unique, attractive amenities that set their product apart front the multitude of other
housing options. The Recreation Center and ski facility will provide a unique amenity that is not found
anywhere else in the area, and the developer believes it will greatly enhance the marketability of the
residential housing being created.
The Concept Plan showing the anticipated development scheme has changed slightly from the
original submittal. The layout of streets within the townhome area has been modified to allow an open
waterway through the site. While its design has not been completed, this open waterway is envisioned to he
a greenway through the center of the development with walking trails and water features. This change in the
layout slightly reduces the number of townhome lots being planned. No other significant changes are
proposed and the overall development concept remains the same as before.
The information presented below is essentially the same information as previously submitted for the
original rezoning request. There are no changes to the land uses already granted for this property and the
original development concept remains the same. This rezoning request merely adds the Recreation Center,
ski facility and auxiliary features to the list of acceptable land uses within the development. More detailed
descriptions of the operation and management of the Recreation Center are given to provide a thorough
understanding of the facility.
General Information
The Barracks R Subdivision is being presented for rezoning as a Planned Development District
(PDD) containing a mixture of open space, residential and commercial land uses. It is a 108-acre
development in the arca bounded by Wellborn Road on the east, Holleman Drive South (formerly IG&N
Road) on the west, Cain Road to the north and Rock Prairie Road to the south. The 2009 Comprehensive
Plan designates this part of the City as a General Suburban planning area. Following are two excerpts from
that document describing the uses that arc intended for this specific area and for other areas with the same
designation.
• The area between Cain Road and Rock Prairie Road should be used for general suburban
activities. High -density single family Lots (minimum 5,000 square feet), townhomes, and
duplexes shall he limited to that portion of the area designated as General Suburban on the
Future Land Use & Character map and shall incorporate design criteria including, hut not
limited to, minimum open space, floor -to -area ratios, and bufferyards. Suburban or
neighborhood commercial and office uses are also appropriate in this area. (page 2-14, 2-
15)
• General Suburban - This land use designation is generally for areas that should have an
intense level of development activities'. (page 2-18)
The PDD Zoning classification was created to provide developers and the City with flexibility in the way that
land uses and regulations are applied to formulate neighborhood environments envisioned in the
Comprehensive Plan. The definition of a PDD Zone as described in Section 5.5.0 of the UDO is as follows:
The purpose of the Planned Development District is to promote and encourage innovative
development that is sensitive to surrounding land uses and to the natural environment. If this
necessitates varying from certain standards, the proposed development should demonstrate
community benefits.
The PDD is appropriate in areas where the land use plan reflects the specific commercial,
residential, or mix of uses proposed in the PDD. A PDD may be used to permit new or innovative
concepts in land utilization not permitted by other zoning districts. While greater flexibility is
given to allow special conditions or restrictions that would not otherwise allow the development
to occur, procedures are established to insure against misuse of increased flexibility.
Using these descriptions and a guide, the developer has worked closely with the City staff to create a planned
development containing an innovative mixture of land uses that meet these criteria and address the unique
issues associated with this site. The term "neighborhood cormnercial" as used in the Comprehensive Plan is
not clearly defined, so a certain amount of latitude was uscd to balance the needs of future residential and
commercial property owners. The planned uses in The Barracks II generally fall within R-1, R-3 and C-3
Zoning Classifications, with a few additional uses that the developer believes will enhance this development
and produce the General Suburban environment described in the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of this
document is to describe the opportunities and constraints of this site, then to define the modifications to R-1,
R-3 and C-3 Zoning Classifications that are being requested to create this Planned Development District
Zone.
Proposed Land Uses
Planning for The Barracks II Subdivision has focused on producing a mixture of residential and
commercial properties that coexist in close proximity and draw upon the needs of the other to form a
sustainable suburban environment. To achieve this, the developer has targeted a specific demographic
population to formulate the types of housing, business and recreational activities that are needed to support
this neighborhood. The developer is also attempting to broaden the scope of permitted businesses to include
those that could serve similar demographic populations in the immediate area around this project.
The targeted demographic are college age students and young families who range in age between 18
and 30 years. These populations are often new to the community and are here for a relatively short time
while they complete their undergraduate and/or graduate studies. As indicated previously, the proposed land
uses in the development generally fall into the following three categories.
1. Single Family Residential (SF) as defined by the R-1 Zoning Classification.
2. Townhome Residential (TH) as defined by the R-3 Zoning Classification.
3. Light Commercial (COM) as defined by the C-3 Zoning Classification.
In addition to the allowable uses described in the UDO for C-3 Zoning, the developer is requesting that the
following uses be permitted within the Commercial Tracts shown on the Concept Plan.
A. Shooting Range --Indoor
B. Car Wash
C. Commercial garden/greenhouse/landscape maintenance
D. Commercial amusement
E. Office and retail sales/services with storage areas being greater than 50% of the space (i.e.
office/warehouse with overhead doors)
F. Self Storage
A fourth land use being proposed is a Recreation Center (RC) that includes a cable wake board ski facility.
This is a unique land use that is not specifically described or regulated by the UDO. It is a water activity that
uses an oval shaped cable system to pull wake board skiers around a pond allowing them to perform jumps or
other stunts much like a skier behind a boat. The ski facility will be located in the detention pond area,
which will be over excavated to hold a permanent pool of water. The Recreation Center will include a small
office, pro shop, restaurant, deck, pool, beach volleyball and other amenities often found on a beach or lake.
It will be one of the principle amenities used to attract young people to live in the development.
These added land uses were expressly chosen to create a desirable, vibrant and stable neighborhood in which
to live. The meritorious modifications that arc described on the following pages are intended to tailor these
land uses in a manner that will help achieve this goal.
Site Description
The site of The Barracks I1 Subdivision has three unique characteristics that significantly impact the
way it can be developed. The layout shown in the Concept Plan and the wording of the General Notes have
been crafted to address these issues and produce an economically viable development.
1. School Site — A portion of the western boundary of the site adjoins a 27-acre tract owned by College
Station ISD. While there are no current plans for the district to build a school on the site, there is a
good potential for this to occur in the future. The potential for this future school creates unique
opportunities for The Barracks II Subdivision including joint agreements for the extension of streets
and utility lines, as well as strategic placement of residential and commercial land uses around it.
Preliminary discussions between College Station ISD, the City and the developer have already led to
tentative agreements that provide two thoroughfares on the school district property as part of this
development.
2. Railroad Tracks — One of the most obvious drawbacks of this site is its proximity to the railroad
tracks on its east side. These tracks are situated between Wellborn Road and Old Wellborn Road,
and are elevated above the natural ground to heights that vary from about 5 feet to about 8 feet.
These tracks pose two significant problems for the site. First is the visual barrier they create which
effectively blocks the ability for traffic on Wellborn Road to see into the site. The second is access
into the site from Wellborn Road, which is presently linnited to railroad crossings at Rock Prairie
Road and Cain Road. Both of these streets are outside the boundaries of this development. Thc
College Station Thoroughfare Plan calls for the extension of Deacon Drive through the site, but there
is no railroad crossing for that street and there are no plans to provide one in the near future.
3. Topography -- Thc topography of this site is very flat, particularly though the center portions where
a small channel exists that flows into a tributary of Bee Creek. In order to build streets across very
flat terrain like this, a large volume of earthen fill is needed to create sufficient slopes on the streets
(and their adjoining lots) to meet the BCS design criteria, so it is vital to have a sufficient source of
this fill in close proximity to the site. The large detention ponds and the over -excavated material for
the Recreation Center ponds will greatly offset the need for importing additional material. The City
is presently studying the potential for a Regional Detention Pond downstream that would preclude
the need for detention on the site, but it is not likely to be in place within a suitable timeframc for
this development to use.
Justification for Meritorious Modifications
The following modifications to general R-1, R-3 and C-3 zoning requirements are requested to create
the PDD Zoning for The Barracks II Subdivision. Justifications are provided for each requested
modification. The numbering and lettering of these modifications correspond with those on the General
Notes shown on the Concept Plan. The other conditions included in the General Notes that are not described
below are specific restrictions or allowances that do not require variances from the UDO.
2. General bulk or dimensional variations are as follows:
a. Single Family (SF) residential development (variations from R-1 zoning)
• Front setback distance — 20 ft without rear access, 15 with rear access
• Rear setback distance — 20 ft
• Side setback distance — 5 ft
• Street side setback distance — 15 ft
Justification: The primary benefit of these setbacks distances is to allow .slightly larger
buildings and slightly more units within the same geographical space. The number of
residential units and the open spaces shown on the Concept Plan were carefully balanced to
produce an acceptable density that follows the Comprehensive Plan, yet still yield sufficient
quantities of sellable lots to make the development economical. Sinular setback distances
have been used successftdly in the Castle Rock Subdivision by this same developer.
b. Townhome (TH) development (variations from R-3 Zoning)
• Front setback distance — 20 ft without rear access, 15 with rear access
• Rear setback distance — 20 ft
• Side setback distance — 5 ft
• Street side setback distance — 15 ft
Justification: (same as for 2.a. above)
e. Commercial (COM) development
• Restaurants shall not be permitted in Commercial Tracts 1, 2, 3, or 4.
Justification: This was a negotiated agreement with the City .staff in exchange for a
stand-alone restaurant being allowed in the Recreation Center. The rationale is to limit
this type of use within this development. Previously, restaurants were being allowed in
the commercial tracts along Old Wellborn Road, but the developer believes the demand
for restaurants on those tracts will be minimal. He believes it is much more likely that a
restaurant will be economically feasible in the Recreation Center.
• The rear setback for self storage structures adjacent to a public alley will be 5 feet.
Justification: The developer anticipates that .self storage units will be constructed in
Commercial Tract 4 immediately behind the alley serving the townhomes along General
Parkway. The rear wall of these units will have no openings and there will be no
vehicular or pedestrian traffic on that side of the storage facility (see General Note 4. c.).
The alley has a 24' right of way so there is already a significant separation distance
between the buildings. A large rear setback for the storage units serves no purpose in
this specific location.
• In locations where the rear wall of self storage building is adjacent to an alley serving
residential units, the rear wall may serve as the buffering wall between land uses. Wall
height may be a maximum of 15 feet and consist of approved materials described in the
UDO Section 7.6.F.3.a.
Justification: The self storage facility will likely include spaces for the storage ofRVs,
large boats and other tall vehicles that cannot fit into normal units, so the wall and roof
structure will be higher than those of standard units. Buffering requirements in the
UDO currently require a masonry wall between 6 and 8 feet high at the property line,
plus a 15' setback between residential and non-residential buildings. In this case, that
requirement produces a 15 ft area of unused space between the buffer wall and the rear
of the storage building. This area would be hidden, from view thus inviting undesirable
vegetative growth, illegal dumping and potential security corrcernrs. The, developer
requests that the rear wall of the storage unit be allowed to fitnction as the buffer wall
since it will not have openings that permit access or visibility to the townhornes.
d. Commercial Tracts 2, 3, and 4 will each be permitted to erect a freestanding sign in
accordance with Section 7.4.N of the UDO. 'These signs may be raised to a maximum height
of 20 feet.
Justification: Commercial tracts 2, 3 and 4 are situated next to the elevated railroad tracts
along Wellborn Road. The view from vehicles traveling on Wellborn Road is greatly
obstructed, particularly to objects that are 10 feet or lower behind the tracks. General C-3
zoning limits businesses to low profile that are a mcaxinrtrm of 4 feet high or attached signs
on the buildings themselves. If held to these standards, advertising signs for businesses that
locate on any of these three tracts will be ineffective in reaching traffic on Wellborn Road.
The developer is requesting that each of the three tracts be allowed to erect a freestanding
sign up to a maximum height of 20 feet that will display advertising for the businesses in
each tract. Signage like this will greatly enhance opportunities on the west side of the tracks
where many businesses have previously been reluctant to locate due to access, noise and
visibility problems.
e. Block Lengths of up to 1000 feet will be permitted on designated Single Family (SF) and
Townhome (TH) blocks. These blocks are noted as SF Block 4 and TH Block 7.
Justification: Several iterations ofthe Concept Plan have been drawn and discussed with the
City staff: One of the concerns in these discussions has been the potential for guests of the
townhome residents to park on streets in front of single family homes. The layout shown on
this version of the Concept Plan attempts to address that concern by limiting the number of
street connections between the Single Family and Tounrhome areas to one. In so doing, the
total length of one block within the Single Family area is 922 feet and one in the Townhorne
area is about 955 feet, all of which exceed the 900 ft limit in the UDO. fl 15 ft wide common
area has been added to TH Block 7 to allow pedestrian traffic through and break up the
block length, although there is presently no destination at the end of the common area for
pedestrians to enter.
f. Dead end streets in residential areas (SF and TH) arc permitted up to a maximum of 100 feet
in length. The dead-end alley adjacent to Commercial Tract 4 shall extend to the property
line (approximately 110 feet).
Justification: This modification to the UDO involves two residential streets on the north side
of Deacon Drive, one near Commercial tract 1 and one near the Recreation Center.
Current regulations state that dead end streets and alleys may be a maximwn of 100 feet or
I lot width, whichever is shorter. In the case of the two streets that have townhome lots
fronting onto them, a single lot will only be about 30 feet wide, leaving the remaining
portion of the street unavailable for development. This modification allows more of the
space on the short dead-end streets to be used.
This modification also addresses the alley near the south property line that separates the
townhomes along General Parkway and Commercial Tract 4. Extension of the alley to the
south property line will permit future access to the adjoining property. Without this
extension, a small strip of privately owned land will exist between the end of the alley and
the property line.
The developer has discussed the street and alley variances with the Fire and Sanitation
Departments. Both have agreed that this requested modification will not cause difficulty
with their normal operations.
4. Special conditions for commercial (COM) development
d. The self storage facility will be permitted to incorporate an office on the premises for
management and security. The office shall be permitted to sell equipment or materials
related to storage and moving, but shall not sell/rent/lease trucks or trailers. The office will
be limited to a maximum of 1000 sf. Living quarters for the managers of the facility will
also be permitted within the premises. These quarters shall be no larger than 1000 sf.
Justification: Due to the proximity of the self storage, facilities to a large concentration of
townhomes, the developer anticipates moving to be a common occurrence and a need will
exist for related materials (i.e. boxes, locks, packing material, etc.). The developer requests
that sales of such materials be permitted from an on -site manager's office. In addition, the
developer foresees the potential that the on -site manager may need to be available for
extended hours and weekends to accommodate the needs of customers and enhance security
at the facility. For this reason, the developer also requests that small living quarters for the
on -site manager be permitted.
General C-3 zoning permits self' storage facilities to be constructed, but it places a
stipulation that "accessory uses are prohibited". The term "accessory uses" is not defined,
leaving the subject of what is permitted open to debate. The requested modification clarifies
this issue by clearly stating two other uses that are anticipated on the site.
5. Special conditions for the Recreation Center are as follows:
c. Landscaping requirements in the UDO will be applied to the building, parking, and amenity
areas of the Recreation Center. The remainder of the Recreation Center is excluded from
these requirements.
Justification: As previously described, the Recreation Center and ski facility is a unique
land use that is not found anywhere else in this area, so certain rules that are normally
applied to development sites do not apply to this facility. Landscaping requirements are
calculated based on the overall size of a site, but since the two bodies of water used for the
Recreation Center comprise a majority of the surface area, it is not possible to install
landscaping that would normally be required as specified in the UDO. This requested
modification removes the ski areas ,from these landscaping calculations. Streetscaping
requirements along rights -of -way will still apply to this facility.
d. A block length of up to 1250 feet is allowed along Deacon Drive in front of the Recreation
Center (RC Block 1).
Justification: As shown on the Concept Plan, the Recreation Center and ski facility is
situated in and around two ponds which both serve as detention areas. There is a third
detention area adjacent to Commercial Tract 2, These three ponds are sized to
accommodate the drainage needs of the development and located at the point where the
natural drainage .system exits the site. The combined area of all three ponds takes up a
significant portion of the total development. The Recreation Center that the developer is
planning in two of these ponds necessitates a long block without intermediate public
crossings.
The Concept Plan shows two public streets on each side of the Recreation Center that
provide access to the undeveloped adjoining tract. The portion of this adjoining tract
immediately north of the Recreation Center includes a large floodplain that will likely never
be developed so there is little chance of an attraction that would need access through the
facility.
8. When there are more than 30 lots to be served by external street comnections, a minimum of two
connections to external paved public streets shall be required. A Remote Emergency Access is
permitted to serve as one of these connections. Two street connections to external paved public
streets shall be required when 100 or more lots are served.
Justification: This requirement closely follows the requirement in the UDO for access to
residential developments. Wording in the UDO states that when more than 30 lots are to be
served in a subdivision, then the Planning and Zoning Commission is given the discretion to
allow a Remote Emergency Access "where development phasing or constraints of the land
prevent the provision of a second street connection". This requested modification to the UDO
makes the decision to allow the Remote Emergency Access as part of the J'DD Zoning so that
phasing of subsequent streets can be planned accordingly.
The initial phase of [he Barracks II Subdivision includes Commercial Tract 1 and a portion of'
the residential area on the north side of Deacon Drive. Deacon Drive will be the primary
access. Deacon Drive will be a 48 f wide street over its entire length and the expense of
building it will be very high. It is not economically feasible to extend Deacon Drive across the
entire development to Old Wellborn Road until subsequent phases are brought on-line. Thus,
the second connection to external streets needs to be a Remote Emergency Access roadway as
described above.
i
2r0
SCALE IN r
nb
- E ACRE TRPC
N 42 14'I7' E 340279'
S 41'21'39' M b01.
[EARL. L TOWER ANN
3331,61
N2E
fr
CAIN Rn9➢
TOR PS ACRES
EXIS I W O CONING
PI lfl - PLANNED ❑EV FLOPMEN I NIS IRLCT
PROPOSED ZONING.
PDD - PLANNED DEVELOP\INN 1' DKTRTCT
4l in lb'W 3,06' P ?if' VII
S 1'IP'46 _Af L
ROES PR IR E ROAD
III
I I J_ . I I
OISIGE. LID
1130/5,0
FUMED o-o
A
m
N9V9RR] DRIVE
iC
➢EACON ➢RIVE
1y -�
I'. --
LEGEND
unuof was
1F NRAN i--
.rrM1. 020 PIPELINE
VICINITY MAP
¢R r
NOT TO SCALE
REZONING MAP
THE BARRACKS II DEVELOPMENT
- 108.88 ACRES
�_ - EXISTING ZONING
) — VDU- P LAN, 9LD UEVELUF MLN I UI STOICT
PROPOSED ZONING
Ppo - PLAN'DEVELOPMENT DISTFIC
ARAN1FOPO CU6w2R LEAGUE A-7
DEVELOPER: �W yr SURVEYOR:
922 0 m'e Eirkre. 10%Chan. �uMon €, 02 new
OWNER:
,mss, uc. ENGINFMR:
CAM ROAO
• EO ON • 000 N00100 A5 E51OSU XEf0 15
CTHSETTADNPESS'0 1100 Mir 0000
THIS _ ▪ :s10000ED SPECIAL FLOOT
OD MVM0 0FU
0E01.
EFRjWNlNFN6 DE FATE
MA IN. MD N
._ .
VICINITY MAF
GENERAL NO I Lb
F FND
CONCEPT PLAN
T111; BARRACKS lI SUBDIVISION
1 nR 71 ACRES
PHILLIPS
ENGINEERING
REZONING REQUEST
FOR
2849 BARRON RD
12-00500041
REQUEST:
PDD, Planned Development to PDD, Planned Development
SCALE:
3.19 acres
LOCATION:
2849 Barron Rd
APPLICANTS:
Jesse Durden, CapRock Texas
PROJECT MANAGER:
Matt Robinson, AICP, Senior Planner
mrobinson@cstx.gov
OVERVIEW:
The proposed PDD rezoning request is an amendment to the
existing PDD zoning in order to reorient buildings, adjust building
sizes and to seek a waiver to the multi-use path requirement along
SH 40.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning with the condition that
the request of the waiver to the multi-use path be removed.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 1of 8
April 5, 2012
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 3of 8
April 5, 2012
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 4of 8
April 5, 2012
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Commission Hearing Date:April 5, 2012
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: April 26, 2012
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:
Sonoma Homeowners Association
Property owner notices mailed: 34
Contacts in support:None at the time of Staff Report
Contacts in opposition:None at the time of Staff Report
Inquiry contacts:1
ADJACENT LAND USES
DirectionComprehensivePlanZoningLand Use
North
Minor Arterial/A-O, Agricultural OpenSingle-family
(across Barron Rd)Suburban Commercial
South
R-1, Single-FamilySingle-family
General Suburban
Residential
East
General SuburbanR-1, Single-FamilySingle-family
Residential
West
C-3, Light-CommercialSingle-family
Highway /
(across SH 40)
Suburban Commercial
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Annexation:
1995
Zoning:
A-O, Agricultural Open to C-3, Light Commercial (2006)
C-3, Light Commercial to PDD, Planned Development (2008)
Final Plat:
Unplatted
Site development:
Vacant
REVIEW CRITERIA
1.Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan in this area calls
for Suburban Commercial. This designation is intended for “concentrations of commercial
activities that cater primarily to nearby residents versus the larger community or region.” As
a result, design of these structures are intended to be compatible in size, roof type and
pitch, architecture, and lot coverage with the surrounding single-family residential uses.
The current zoning of the property is PDD, Planned Development District with a base C-3,
Light Commercial zoning. The proposed rezoning is adjusting the layout from the previously
approved PDD Concept Plan, with no additional uses being proposed.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 5of 8
April 5, 2012
2.Compatibility with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and
with the character of the neighborhood:
The uses requested for the PDD are those
allowed under the C-3 zoning designation, with the addition of drive-thrus that are presently
excluded in C-3 districts. Given the proposed layout of the Concept Plan, drive-thrus could
not be accommodated on the site without a revised rezoning and Concept Plan. The
proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding R-1 zoned properties. A 15-foot buffer
yard with a 6-foot wall is being provided along the property line of the R-1 properties. This is
the minimum buffer requirement for commercial uses against single-family and would be the
standard buffer required were this to develop in a C-1 or C-3 district where such uses are
allowed.
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 property is
located at the intersection of a minor arterial and a highway. This is a suitable location for a
small scale commercial development that could serve the existing Sonoma and Southern
Trace residential subdivisions, other existing larger lot residential in the area, as well as
future residential planned for in the area.
4.Suitability of the property affected by theamendment for uses permitted by the
district applicable to the property at the time of the proposed amendment:
The size
and location of the property is suitable for light commercial uses. With its proximity to single-
family lots, the uses allowed under the C-3Light Commercial zoning district are suitable for
this property.
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
property is currently marketable for small scale commercial and office uses. The purpose of
the request is to reorient the buildings on the site and adjust the building square footages.
6.Availability of water, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation facilities generally
suitable and adequate for the proposed use:
The subject tract is located adjacent to an
18-inch water main along Barron and a 24-inch water main along SH 40. The subject tract is
located adjacent to an 8-inch sanitary sewer main which is located near the northeast
property corner. The subject tract is located adjacent to and may take access to either
Barron Road (Minor Arterial) and/or SH 40 (Freeway); however, access to SH 40 will require
TxDOT approval and permitting. TxDOT has indicated in their comments that a deceleration
lane would be required for a driveway along SH 40.
Construction of the Barron Road widening has been completed and this minor arterial is
capable ofcarryingup to 30,000 daily trips.
The subject tract is located in the Spring Creek Drainage Basin. There is no FEMA
regulated Special Flood Hazard Area located on this tract. Development of this tract will be
required to meet the City’s Storm Water Design Guidelines. The subject tract is located in
the Spring Creek Sanitary Sewer Impact Fee Area.
CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA
1.The proposal will constitute an environment of sustained stability and will be in
harmony with the character of the surrounding area:
The rural character in the area has
been changing with the construction of the new College Station ISD High School, continued
build out of the Sonoma Subdivision, and future planned single-family residential across
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 6of 8
April 5, 2012
Barron Road. The proposed concept plan revises the previously approved concept plan and
would provide suburban commercial uses for the existing and proposed residential in the
area.
Changes from the previously approved concept plan include reorientation ofbuildings,
adjustment of building sizes and a request for a waiver to the multi-use path requirement
along SH 40.
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 proposed uses are in conformance with
the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies to provide neighborhood-focused retail in
proximity to residential areas. The proposal includes buildings that incorporate residential
components such as covered porches, single windows, and the use of timber and glass as
architectural accents.
3.The proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will
not adversely affect adjacent development:
The proposed layout meets the minimum
buffer standards between commercial and residential uses. This buffer consists of 15-foot
buffer yard and a 6-foot masonry wall. But given the proximity to single-family homes, there
should be greater consideration for reconfiguration to decrease the impact it will have on the
existing and future residential uses on the surrounding lots.
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:
All structures in the concept plan front on either SH 40 or Barron Road.
5.The development includes provision of adequate public improvements, including, but
not limited to, parks, schools, and other public facilities:
No public open space is being
dedicated with this proposal. The concept plan does incorporate a detention area for
stormwater management on the east side of the property. No parkland dedication is required
for commercial projects, and no voluntary dedications are proposed. The applicant has
requested a waiver to the multi-use path requirement along SH 40. This multi-use path is
identified on the Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Master Plan and is planned to extend
along SH 40 from SH6 to FM 2154. Staff is not supportive of the waiver request as it is vital
to provide the multi-use path when the property develops so that adequate room is given
and that the future multi-use path connection is not lost.
6.The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity:
Staff does not believe
that the improvements will be materially injurious to properties in the vicinity. Although, it
may have an impact on the resale value of homes directly adjacent to the commercial site.
The development will not adversely affect the safety and convenience of vehicular
7.
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:
The proposed development
was not required to submit a traffic impact analysis because it did not generate enough
traffic to surpass the150 vehicles per the peak hourthreshold.This development willtake
access on SH 40 and on Barron Road.
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 7of 8
April 5, 2012
Construction on Barron Road has been recently completed.With this construction,Barron
Roadhas beenupgraded from a two-lane rural collector to a four-lane minor arterial to
include bike lanes and sidewalkson both sides of the street.The Barron Road project also
included a traffic signal at the intersection of Barron Road and SH 40. This development will
not affect the safety and convenience of vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian circulation on
Barron Road.
Thedriveway accessing SH 40 will include the extension of the right turn lane to Barron
Road, this will in effect create a right turn deceleration lane onto the proposed driveway.
This requirement was at the direction of TxDOT and will be part of thepermitting process.
This development will not affect the safety and convenience of vehicular, bicycle and
pedestrian circulation on SH 40.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and concept plan with the condition that the
meritorious modification for a waiver to the multi-use path requirement be removed. The
concept plan makes small revisions to the previously approved zoning, with changes to the size
and layout/orientation of buildings being requested. Staff feels that the proposal is generally
consistent with the Suburban Commercial guidelines set forth in the Comprehensive Plan, with
the exception of the waiver request.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1.Application
2.Concept Plan (provided in packet)
3.Rezoning map (provided in packet)
Planning & Zoning CommissionPage 8of 8
April 5, 2012
CITY OF COLT T4Cr STATION
Home of TntsA&M Univeasir/
FOR OFFICJJEONLY
CASE NO.. 1 . LI 1
DATE S�U ITTEI ' (9611 I
TIME: (AL
STAFF. .17
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONING) APPLICATION
PLANNED DISTRICTS
(Check one)
❑X Planned Development District (PDD) ❑ Planned - Mixed Used Development (P-MUD)
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
ID $1,165 Rezoning Application Fee.
Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
El Traffic Impact Analysis or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for the
proposed request.
One (1) copy of a fully dimensioned Rezoning 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. All public and private rights -of -way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land.
111 Written legal description of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is
applicable).
❑X A CAD (dxf/dwg) - model space State Plane NAD 83 or GIS (shp) digital file (e-mailed to 4"&E) : „Diciit !
_Subrn t'•;,=Nls cstx,goy).
Fourteen 144) copiie, of.
y,the Concept Plan on 24"x36" paper in accordance with Section 3.4.D of the UDO.
The attac ed �on ept Plan checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not
checked off.
NOTE: 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.
Date of Optional Preapplication Conference 11/16/11 and 2/15/12
NAME OF PROJECT 3.19 Acres Barron Road Re -Zoning
ADDRESS 2849 Barron Road, College Station,TX 77845
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Lot, Block, Subdivision)
GENERAL LOCATION OF PROPERTY IF NOT PLATTED:
3.19 acres, Robert Stevenson Survey, A-54, College Station, Brazos County, Texas
TOTAL ACREAGE 3.19 acres
10/10 Page 1 of 7
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name CapRock Texas E-mail lesse.durden@caprocktx.com
Street Address 110 Lincoln Avenue, Ste. 103
City
College Station State Zip Code 77845
Phone Number 979-307-0321
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION:
Name Dunlap Family Trust c/o Jill Mary Dunlap, Trustee
Street Address 3104 Broadmoor Drive
City Bryan State
Phone Number Fax Number
Fax Number 979-314-7606
E-mail
Zip Code 77802
OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e. project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.):
Name Schultz Engineering (Civil Engineer) E-mail loeschultz84@verizon.net
Street Address 2730 Longmire Drive, Ste. A
City College Station State TX Zip Code 77845
Phone Number 979-764-3900 Fax Number 979-764-3910
This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated unknown and recorded in Volume 854 , Page 57
of the Brazos County Official Records.
Existing Zoning PDD Proposed Zoning PDD
Present Use of Property Vacant Land
Proposed Use of Property Commercial Uses with a base zoning district of C-3
Proposed Use(s) of Property for PDD, if applicable:
See attached sheet for Proposed Uses.
P-MUD uses are prescribed in Section 6.2.C. Use Table of the Unified Development Ordinance.
If P-MUD:
Approximate percentage of residential land uses:
Approximate percentage of non-residential land uses:
REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. List the changed or changing conditions in the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary.
Market conditions have changed since the last PDD Concept Plan was submitted, resulting in the need for
modifications.
10/10 Page 2of7
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.
This zone change is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and mirrors the current zoning on the property.
3, How will this zone change be compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with
the character of the neighborhood?
The uses allowed by this zone change mirror those uses already allowed under the current PDD ordinance. The
property will comply with the development design requirements contained in the UDO and will therefore conform
with the character of the neighborhood.
4. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the rezoning district requested.
The uses permitted by the zoning district requested are suitable, as the property is located a lighted, hard comer of
a city street and highway, in a growing submarket of College Station.
5. Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
The uses permitted by the current zoning district are suitable, as the property is located a lighted, hard corner of a
city street and highway, in a growing submarket of College Station.
6. Explain the marketability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district.
The marketability of the property is limited due to the building configurations provided on the current PDD Concept
Plan.
7. List any other reasons to support this zone change.
This change request will allow for a new project to be constructed on the comer of Barron Road and SH 40. The
area is in need of commercial services, especially with the opening of the new College Station High School in
August of 2012.
1 pi1 p Page 3 of 7
8. State the purpose and intent of the proposed development.
To provide a safe, appropriate, viable commercial site that meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and
encourages development in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding properties.
CONCEPT PLAN SUPPORTING INFORMATION
1. What is the range of future building heights?
One story, 12' - 30'
2. Provide a general statement regarding the proposed drainage.
The site slopes toward Barron Road and east. Detention and drainage for the site will be provided with on -site
detention ponds.
3. List the general bulk or dimensional variations sought.
$fl AIT CH¢O
4. If variations are sought, please provide a list of community benefits and/or innovative design concepts to justify the
request.
5ft r trAtWty
1 D/10 Page 4 of 7
5. Explain how the concept plan proposal will constitute and environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony
with the character of the surrounding area.
The Concept Plan promotes responsible development of a key commercial site through adherence to the UDO's
intent for setbacks, landscaping, building size, etc.
6. Explain how the proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposal conforms to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan by carefully accounting for the character of the
surrounding properties, then providing an appropriate, transitional commercial buffer to the residential areas to the
east and south.
7, Explain how the concept plan proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will not
adversely affect adjacent development.
This development will maintain the high standards set by the previous PDD, the UDO and the Comprehensive Plan.
8. State how dwelling units shall have access to a public street if they do not front on a public street.
N/A
g. State how the development has provided adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to: parks, schools,
and other public facilities.
The development will utilize existing water and sewer lines, provide adequate internal detention, and meet all UDO
requirements for public improvements.
10110 Page5of7
Q, Explain how the concept plan proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity
The development will meet all UDO requirements regarding health, safety and welfare.
11. Explain how the concept plan proposal will not adversely affect the safety and convenience of vehicular, bicycle, tor
pedestrian circulation in the vicinity, including traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use and
other uses reasonable anticipated in the area considering existing zoning and land uses in the area.
Close attention has been paid to customer accessibility and safety, and adequate shared access points in/out of the
development are proposed.
Please note that a 'complete site plan" must be submitted to Planning & Development Services for a formal review after
the "concept plan" has been approved by the City Council prior to the issuance of a building permit - except for single-
family development.
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true,
correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on ifs behalf
uvi.0
Signature and title
Date
10/10 Page 6 of 7
3.19 Acres Barron Road Re -Zoning
Community Benefits:
+ Self-imposed height limitations protect neighborhood integrity and privacy
+ Phase 1 areas nearest to the residential zones will increase their landscaping point totals by
50% (45 pts/1000SF in lieu of 30 pts/1000SF of site area).
+ Commitment to reduced use of metal roofing reduces glare and allows better conformity with
nearby residential uses.
+ Commitment to use of stone, stucco/EIFS, glass and timber reduces the commercial feel of
alternative materials (tilt -wall concrete, masonry block, etc.)
Meritorious Modifications:
+ UDO Sections 8.2. & 8.4 - Waiver of the multi -use path requirement along SH 40.
02
IL
EN
, 10
SONOMA - PHASE 1 BCD,
PLAT VOL 8305, PG. 233
IL `:'E`o Porrns 10' FIJNIFEP 5 AFOUL FOLEE
___ _ __ P.U.E.
345° 57' 15"E - 348 45' 1.
EXISTING ZONING: PDD
PROPOSED ZONING: PDD
3.19 ACRES
9461/96
20'
P.U.E. 6918/231 \ 1
N50° 01' 33'W- 116.85' " N49" 04' 54"W- 12428
STATE HIGHWAY 40
ROW VARIES
N55° 16' 58
58 96
I
I
NifF
ZONED R-1
LOT 23
Nip
JONATHANEBRION PAMICLL
ZONED R-1
LOT14
BRENNANPATPES BA IDEX
ZONED RA
LOT 25
BLOCK 2
NiF
MICHAEL8 KIMOERIY II GUEse
10118
60
NP
W j SUZANNE elEEPH MC NwH
To7-1
of
SONOMA PHASE2
PLAT VOL. 8502, PG. 285
10'
30'
P.U.E
wE
OMMYD MCFALL
ZONED RI
LOT EA
eZAi;n
R--8IAuL0
ONE0
-------------
10'
P.U.E.
Curve Table
IUS DELTA
IC
ORD
CURVE O#I B294HI 50000 I094'4212" 542BNT 73, 5' CNNO2'40'2W DIRECTION
NOTES
1, BEARINGS SA5E0 ON DEED CALL PEARDINOS OF THE
COLLEGE STATION INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT -
IA 28 ACRE TRACT -VOL 3804, PG 243, OF THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
2 THE SUBJECT TRACT DOES NOT LIE WITHIN THE 100
YEAR FL000PLA IN ACCORDING TO THE F C MA FLOOD
INSURANCE PATE MAP FOR BRAZOS COUNTY, TRAPS
AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY NO
48041CO200C EFFECTIVE DATE. JULY 2, 1992,
OO
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINO & ZONING
CHANGE BOUNDARY
LOT LINE
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
PROPERTY CORNER
ZONING MAP
3.188 ACRES
CURRENT ZONING'
919 AC PODPLANNED DEVELOPMENT D1S BLOT
PROPOSED ZONING
0,4 AC POD -PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DE-faIP.T
ROBERT STEVENSON SURVEY, Ado
COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
Map Truhl
SURVEYOR
,,; ::..,.'.4.,
MARCH 2012
ENGINEER011-11.1:17, pp
L.
'Pea
3°IW`t,5
rl/F
SHANNON WALTON
ZONED R-1
LOT b
PHASE 1
[BUFFER
PARKING
i SONOMA-PHASE1
NIF PLAT VOL. 8305, PG. 233 wF
ILSE & JARED PORRAS JFNNIFER A SAOIIL ROLFES
z0NOTIE0R-1 \ PHASE 2 ZON7DBR-1
BUFFER
STORM WATER DETENTION AREA .\\\
PHASE TWO \.
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING \
EXISTING ZONING: PDD L
a PROPOSED ZONING: PDD a \ SONOMA- PHASE 2
0b 3.19 ACRES \ PLAT VOL. 8502, PG. 285
N
ANITA WHITLEY
ZONED R-1
LOT 23
NWJONATHAN & BRION PAMPELL
ZONED R-1
LOT 24
N,T
BRENNAN PATRICK BAJDEK
ZONED R-1
LOT 25
PARKING
a
o
PARKING 1
PARKING
PHASE ONE
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING
Ct,
PARKING
)
STATE HIGHWAYROW VARIES ITCH PARKWAY
BLOCK 2
N,F
MICHAEL&KIMBERLYH GUESS
ZONED R.I
LOT 20
N/F
SUZANNE & JOSEPH MCHUGH
ZONED R-1
PARKING LOT 97
b4
IU
NIF
TOMMYD MCFALL
ZONED R-1
LOT za
----PHASE 2/
BUFFER
NNE
OMER J. AC05TA &KIMBERLY
KOEHLER
ZONED 5-1
LOT 29
\; PHASE 1
\7"-BUFFER
2/1
b 4 .
LEGEND
PHASE I BUFFER AREA
PHASE 2 BUFFER AREA
•®®® fit ® PHASE LINE
CONCEPT PLAN
3.19 ACRES
ROBERT STEVENSON SURVEY, A-54
COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
OWNER:
Dunlap Family rrual
3104 Broadmoor Drive
Bryan, TX 77802
SURVEYOR:
Kling Engineering & Surveying
4101 Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77002
(979) 9404212
MARCH 2012
ENGINEER:
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC
PO Box 11095
College Station, TX 7942
(979)7043909
Ia41
30is
/1ID
CONCEPT PLAN NOTES:
1, THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT IS C-3 AND THE LAND USES PROPOSED FOR THIS PROPERTY ARE AS
FOLLOWS
—EDUCATIONAL FACILITY, INDOOR INSTRUCTION
—EDUCATIONAL FACILITY, PRIMARY & SECONDARY
—GOVERNMENT FACILITIES
—HEALTH CARE, MEDICAL CLINICS
— PARKS
— PLACES OF WORSHIP
—ANIMAL CARE FACILITY, INDOOR
— ART STUDIO/GALLERY
— DAY CARE, COMMERCIAL
— DRY CLEANERS & LAUNDRY
—DRIVE—IN/DRIVE—THRU WINDOW
—FUEL SALES*
—OFFICES
— PERSONAL SERVICE SHOP
—PRINTING/COPY SHOP
—RADIO/TV STATION/STUDIO
—RESTAURANT*
—RETAIL SALES & SERVICE
— STORAGE, SELF STORAGE
— UTILITY*
—WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES — INTERMEDIATE*
— WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES — MAJOR (CUP REQUIRED)
*USES HAVE SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS PER UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 6.3, SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS
CONDITIONS: DRIVE—IN/DRIVE—THRU NOT ALLOWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH RESTAURANT USE
2. THE RANGE OF BUILDING HEIGHTS IS ANTICIPATED TO BE FROM 12' TO 30'
3 THE STORM WATER DRAINAGE FROM THIS SITE WILL BE TAKEN TO THE BARRON ROAD STORM SEWER
SYSTEM. STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UDO.
4 THE DETENTION POND FOR THIS SITE WILL BE GENERALLY LOCATED AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.
5 THE GENERAL BULK OR DIMENSIONAL VARIATIONS (MERITORIOUS MODIFICATIONS) SOUGHT ARE AS
FOLLOWS.
UDO SECTION 8 2 & 8.4 — WAIVER OF THE MULTI —USE PATH REQUIREMENT ALONG SH 40,
WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY.
6 A 15' WIDE BUFFER WILL BE PROVIDED IN PHASES AS SHOWN ON THE CONCEPT PLAN.
THE BUFFER WILL MCET THE UDO REQUIREMENTS WITH THE PHASE 1 BUFFER AREA HAVING THE
LANDSCAPE POINTS INCREASED BY 50% (45 POINTS/1000 SF IN LIEU OF 30 POINTS/1000 SF OR
BUFFER AREA.
Z. ARCHITECTURE FOR THE SITE WILL MEET AND EXCEED ALL NRA STANDARDS. THE PHASE 1 BUILDING
WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN A MANNER WHICH REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF EXPOSED METAL ROOFING.
METAL ROOFING THAT IS EXPOSED WILL BE ANGLED IN A MANNER THAT REDUCES THE PROFILE OF THE
METAL. MOSTLY FLAT AND/OR SINGLE —SLOPED ROOFING MAY BE USED ON PHASE 1 IN CONJUNCTION
WITH OTHER RESIDENTIAL DESIGN ELEMENTS, LIKE COVERED PORCHES, SINGLE WINDOWS, SCALE— AND
NEIGHBORHOOD APPROPRIATE ENTRY FEATURES. VARIOUS PARAPET HEIGHTS, AND AWNINGS. IN ADDITION,
THE USE OF NEIGHBORHOOD —APPROPRIATE STUCCO/EWE, TIMBER, AND CLASS AS ARCHITECTURAL
ACCENTS WILL FURTHER SUPPORT TRANSITION FROM SH 40 INTO THE NEARBY RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
8. SITE LIGHTING WILL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED IN THE UDO,
9. PHASE 1 BUILDING SIZE WILL RANGE FROM 4,500-6,000 SF. PHASE 2 BUILDING SIZE WILL RANGE
FROM 8,000-13,000 SF. THE PHASE 2 IMPROVEMENTS MAY BE CONSTRUCTED AS ONE OR TWO
BUILDINGS.
CONCEPT PLAN
3.19 ACRES
ROBERT STEVENSON SURVEY, A-54
COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
OWNER'
Dunlap Family Trual
3104 Broaamnm Dane
Bryan, Tx 77802
SURVEYOR:
Kling En9mnenng & Survayng
4101 Texea Avenue
Collar* Station, TA 77802
079).046-6212
MARCH 2012
ENGINEER'
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC
PO Ban 11995
College Siouan, TX 77E42
10750704-1009