HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/18/1996 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES
CJ
Planning & Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
April 18, 1996
7:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Hawthorne, Commissioners Smith, Garner, Lightfoot
and Lane.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Gribou and Hall.
STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, Assistant City Engineer Morgan and Planning
Technician Thomas. (Councilman Crouch was in the audience.)
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes from the Commission meeting of March 28, 1996.
• Commissioner Lightfoot moved to approve the Commission minutes from the meeting of march 28,
1996. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Approval of minutes from the joint meeting with the City Council of
March 28, 1996.
Commissioner Garner moved to approve the minutes from the joint meeting with the City Council of
March 28, 1996. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Approval of minutes from the Commission meeting of April 4, 1996.
Commissioner Smith moved to approve the Planning and Zoning Commission minutes from thc; meeting
of April 4, 1996. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - (-).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Presentation and discussion of the mandatory Impact Fee Report
update. As the designated Advisory Committee, comments must be forwarded to the City
Council regarding the report. (96-808)
Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the Impact Fee Report update for sanitary sewer service area
"92-01", located north of Graham Road between Wellborn Road and State Highway 6. This area
consists of approximately 530 acres of agricultural, industrial, low density residential and institutional
uses. The total number of acres in the sanitary sewer service area has decreased by 24 acres between
1992 and 1996 due to the proposed changes in the sewer discharge directions. The area north of Rock
• Prairie Road in Edelweiss Estates is proposed to discharge to another sewer area and can no longer be
included in the sanitary sewer service area "92-01".
I •
•
Assistant City Engineer Morgan explained that the land use assumptions are based on the City's
Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the Edelweiss Estates Master Plan and the history of development in
this area over the past six years. Projecting the average growth over the last seven years to the: next ten
year period (2006) would result in approximately 600 new single family dwelling units to this service
area. As Edelweiss Estates is presently proposed, it will add 428 new units, while the area east of
Schaffer Road will add 340 new units. Both areas have been estimated at 3.5 dwelling units per acre.
Assuming that the average rate of growth will rise again within the next ten year period, it is anticipated
that the total 768 dwelling units will build out in the next ten years. It is also anticipated that all of the
multi-family acreage will build out between 1996 and 2006. Due to a change in zoning, the number of
medium density residential acres anticipated has decreased from the 1992 projection. In addition, the
density at which the current medium density development is occurring, is well below that originally
projected in the 1992 report. It is not anticipated that the amount of proposed commercial acreage in
the service area will build out within the ten year period from 1996 to 2006. In addition, the industrial
frontage within the service area, along the south side of Graham Road and east of Schaffer, is more
likely to develop between 2006 and 2016.
Assistant City Engineer Morgan stated that the Capital Improvement Plan for sanitary sewer service
area "92-01" was developed using the land use assumptions for the service area. Originally, it consisted
of three phases. Phase one has been constructed since the impact fee ordinance was adopted in 1992.
It extended a gravity sanitary sewerline from Graham Road on the southeasterly corner of the service
area northerly along the North Fork of Lick Creek to Schaffer Road, where it now serves part of the
Van Reit property and then westerly along Graham Road to Wellborn Road where it serves properties
on both sides of Graham Road, west of Schaffer Road. The actual project cost for this phase was
$365,000. Phase two begins where phase one intersects Schaffer Road and will extend a sewerline
northerly along Schaffer to connect to the Family Tree lift station and will remove the list station from
service. This phase will serve a part of the developing Edelweiss Estates property, the undeveloped part
of the Westchester Park Subdivision and provide capacity for growth in the developed areas and
schools. The preliminary estimated project cost is $138,000. The estimated costs related to the
dismantling of the existing lift station represent approximately 4% of the cost of this phase and is not
eligible for cost recovery through impact fees. Phase three consists of extending a sewerline from the
existing line in Graham Road at Schaffer westerly along the south side of Graham Road for a di:>tance of
approximately 1900 feet. It will serve an undeveloped 400 foot depth of property which fronts on the
south side of Graham Road. The preliminary cost estimate is $152,000. The total estimated cost of
these sanitary sewer improvements to serve this service area is $655,000. These costs include
engineering and design, land acquisitions, construction and project management costs.
Assistant City Engineer Morgan explained that the costs subject to impact fees are proportioned by the
ration of new living unit equivalents (LUE's) to the total living equivalents served. Both the number of
new and total living equivalents served has decreased significantly since 1992. This is due in part to the
decreased acreage of medium density residential property projected to be developed, the decreased
density at which the medium density property already under construction will develop, and the decrease
in total service area by 24 acres. This means there are less units among which to divide the capital
improvement cost. In the area of cost recovery, the estimated cost of the capital improvements has
increased over the last four years. The total capital cost of the three phase sewer project has risen from
$543,000 to $655,000. Some of this cost increase has been due to general inflation in construction
costs that have occurred recently. The original cost estimate for phase one was $315,000 while the
total constructed cost was $365,000, an increase in project cost of 13%. all construction costs have
been re-estimated for this 1996 update. Inflationary figures are not typically found in impact fee
calculations, as the mandatory land use and capital improvement plan update is designed to allow you to
compensate for these variables. Phase two's eligible costs have been increased since 1992. Although
some of the costs that will be incurred with phase two are not recoverable, such as: the remov:~l of the
existing lift station, there is more eligible cost in phase two than originally estimated. The revised
impact fees, once the changes in land use projections and capital costs have been calculated, show the
maximum impact fee to increase by approximately $130.00 per LUE.
P & Z Mirn~tes Ap~~il 18, 1996 Page 2 of ;l
•
•
•
The Commission had no comments on the land use assum tions since it is based o:n current
p
development information and approved master plan.
The Commission also agreed with the capital improvement plan as submitted. The City Council will
have to decide if the increased costs will be paid for by the developer or by the citizens as a whole.
Commissioner Smith suggested that staff include an additional slide for the City Council presentation
which explains how the different factors increased the impact fee per unit. He also stated that staff did
an excellent job on the report and the executive summary was especially helpful.
Commissioner Lane stated that did not have a problem with the overall concept of the residents paying
for the sanitary sewer instead of the entire city; however, the process is extremely tedious and requires
constant maintenance. He questioned the effectiveness of collecting the impact fees considering the
associated staff costs versus the amount of money that is collected. He questioned that if in the long
run, the process is even worth the amount of staff time required to monitor, update and implement the
program.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Amendment to the Subdivision Regulations pertaining to the
platting process and the responsibilities of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council. (96-806)
City Planner Kee presented the amendment to the Subdivision Regulations and stated that the following
changes are included the amendment:
-- Generally take the City Council out of the plat review process and give the
Commission plat review and approval/denial authority.
-- Give the City Engineer authority for the approval of minor and amending plats.
-- Better defines and explains a master development plan and a master preliminary plat.
-- Removes the requirement for impact studies except when an applicant is requesting
oversize participation.
City Planner Kee informed the Commission that the amendment was directed by the City Council at a
joint Commission and Council meeting where the development review process was discussed and staff
suggested this amendment as a way to streamline the platting process. This ordinance amendment is
scheduled to proceed to the City Council on May 9, 1996 with comments from the Commission.
Chairman Hawthorne questioned staff regarding any established criteria that the City Engineer may
follow when he decides to take a plat to the Commission. He stated that that section of the ordinance
sounds like the City Engineer has the authority to not approve a plat for any reason even if he does not
want to make the decision. There should be checks and balances incorporated into the process.
City Planner Kee stated that the City Engineer must present the plat to the Commission if he does not
feel comfortable. The only reason he could not approve a plat is if a variance is involved or the plat did
not meet the technical requirements of the ordinance. She stated that she could add the City Planner to
that section of the ordinance so that both the City Engineer and City Planner would have approval
authority of a plat.
Commissioner Smith moved to recommend approval of the amendment to the Subdivision Regulations
pertaining to the platting process with the comments made by the Commission and proposed by staff.
Commissioner Lane seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0).
P & Z Mir~r~tes April 18, 1996 Page 3 of -t
AGENDA ITEM NO. G: Other business.~-
There was no other business.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn.
Commissioner Smith moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0).
APPR - D:
'~, .~
:~
~- /.
__ ~~..
Chairman, Kyle Hawthorne
ATT
Pranrling Technician, Natalie Thomas
P & Z Minutes April 18, 1996 Page 4 of ,l
•
r ~
L J
1.
2.
~,
4.
S
G.
7.
8.
~.
10.
11.
I2.
1.3.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18e
1~.
,20.
~21,
Z~.
~~.
24.
ZS.
~Canrring ~' Zoning Cofnmission
Guest ~,egister
DaEe
rr~ne Acfrfress