HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/07/1998 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES
Planning a_nd Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
May 7, 1998
7:00 P.M.
L~
•
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Massey, Commissioners Parker, Lightfoot, Gribou, and
Silvia.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Garner and Rife.
STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, Assistant City Engineer Morgan, Graduate Engineer
Kaspar, Staff Assistant Charanza, Development Coordinator Volk,
Transportation Planner Hard, Director of Parks & Recreation Beachy,
Assistant Director of Parks & Recreation Ploeger, Communications &
Information Services Manager Shear, Office of Management & Budget
Director Cryan, and Assistant City Attorney Robinson..
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes from the meeting of April 16, 19980
Commissioner Silvia moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of April 16, 1998 as writtena
Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing and consideration of rezoning 88.8 acres bound by
Barron Road, Shenandoah and undeveloped property to the south and west (to be called
Shenandoah Phases 6-10) from A-O Agricultural Open to R-1 Single Family Residential. Also
consideration of a Master Preliminary Plat of the same property dividing same into 277
residential lots and one 12 acre city park. (98-107 & 98-309)
City Planner Kee presented the staff report and stated that this property is west of the existing
Shenandoah Subdivision and is a continuation of the same type of residential development. Southern
Plantation Drive will continue and connect into these new phases and the developer will dedicate I2
acres of parkland. The Parks Board reviewed the proposed parkland dedication and recommends that
the Commission and Council accept the proposal. It is in excess of the ordinance requirement which is
approximately 2 acres. Lot size will average .208 acres per lot and there will be 17.5 acres of right-of
way eventually dedicated,
Ms. Kee explained that there is a drainage way and detention facility located in the park that the City
will own and maintain along with the parkland.
Ms. Kee stated that the land use plan shows this area for medium density single family development and
the thoroughfare plan shows minor collector roadways going through the tract. Southern Plantation
P&Z Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 1 of9
and Alexandria function as these collectors. The rezoning and master preliminary plat comply with the
Comprehensive Plan for development in this area.
• Ms. Kee explained that Staff has been working with property owners in this area over the past several
months to define thoroughfare locations. Southern Plantation is shown to decrease from a 70 foot
right-of--way to 60 feet through these new phases. This complies with the minor collector shown on the
thoroughfare plan.
Staff recommended approval of the rezoning and master preliminary plat.
Commissioner Silvia asked if there was any floodplain on this property. Ms. Kee explained that there is
creek and detention area but no established floodplain on any phase of the property.
Chairman Massey opened the public hearing.
Mr. Mike McClure, Project Engineer for the Property, explained that the detention facility would be
different from the Edelweiss model. The existing terrain is wooded and they would only clear enough
for building of the berm. He also explained that the applicant, in meeting with the Parks Board,
requested that the money set aside from parkland dedications in this zone be used to develop this park
immediately. He understood that the Parks Board intended to develop as much of the park as possible
right away. He thought that there would be a jogging trail and minimal park equipment.
Chairman Massey closed the public hearing.
• Commissioner Gribou moved to recommend approval the rezoning request and the Master Prelirrunary
Plat as submitted. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public hearing and consideration of rezoning approximately 1.72 acres
located on the southeast corner of Deacon and Wellborn Road being Lot 10, Block 71 of
Fraternity Row, from C-1 General Commercial to R-5 Apartment Medium Density. (98-108)
City Planner Kee presented the staff report and stated that the request is in conformance with the Land
LJse Plan and is in harmony with the existing pattern of development in the area, with multi-family uses
serving as a buffer between the intersection and the low density residential uses further east along
Deacon. Ms. Kee explained that the subject property was part of a larger tract that was zoned and
platted in the mid-1980's for a fraternity subdivision with a commercial use at the intersection. The
Land Ilse Plan reflects the property as attached residential. Staff recommended approval of the request.
Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. Seeing no one to speak in favor of or in opposition to this
request, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Lightfoot moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request. Comrrussioner Parker
seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0).
•
P&Z Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 2 of 9
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing and consideration of a Final Replat for Lots 2R through
9R, Block C and Lots 2R through lOR, Block D of Ashford Square, a resubdivision of 5.82 acres
on the south side of Southwest Parkway, west of the Dartmouth/Southwest Parkway intersection
• which includes 19 duplex lots. (98-215)
Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report and stated that the site is located on the rear
portion of the Ashford Square Center and was recently rezoned from A-P Administrative Professional
to R-2 Duplex. A replat of this property was approved by the Commission earlier this year, This replat
simply alters lot lines in order to create 2 additional lots. A staff review of this plat was completed and
all comments have been addressed. Staff recommended approval of the Final Replat as submitted.
Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. Seeing no one to speak in favor of or opposition to this
request, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Parker moved to approve the replat as submitted. Commissioner Gribou seconded the
motion which passed unopposed (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing and consideration of a vacating and resubdivision plat
for Lots 1-7, Block 4 of West Knoll Section 2 located at the southwest corner of the Dexter and
Southwest Parkway intersection. (98-216)
Graduate Engineer Kaspar presented the staff report and stated that the purpose for this vacating and
resubdivision plat is to shift the lot lines and remove various public easements that do not have any
public utilities in them in order to prepare this property for development in the near future. The
developer is proposing to construct residential duplexes similar to those already existing in the area.
• Staff recommended approval with the following conditions:
• that the two 12 foot private access easement be recorded prior to the filing of this plat,
• that a drainage report for the proposed detention facility be provided to staff for review prior to the
filing of this final plat.
Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. Seeing no one to speak in favor of or opposition to this
request, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Gribou moved to approve the plat with the staff conditions stated. Commissioner Silvia
seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a preliminary plat of Wheeler Subdivision Phase II,
approximately 8,47 acres located on the southwest corner of Lincoln and University "rive. (98-
310)
Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report and stated that the plat shows three
commercial tracts with a 30' access easement extending from University to Lincoln, Ms. Morgan
explained that Staff reviewed the plat and found general compliance with all applicable requirements
except as follows:
•
P&Z Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 3 of 9
1. The buffer easement that was a condition of the zoning needs to be shown.
2. Remove notes 4.a and 4.b regarding easements that are not located on the subject property.
• 3. Add the Lone Star Gas easement.
4. Add a 10' Public Utility Easement along the southwest property line of Lot 3 that will connect
m the southwest corner of Lot 1 to the 20' PUE located on Lot 3, Block 1, One Lincoln Place.
5. Add a 10' Public Utility Easement along the Lincoln frontage.
6. Add the existing Floodway per the September 1997 Study performed by Kling Engineering.
7. Relocate the 30' access easement back to the position that was originally submitted and add a
temporary access easement that more closely aligns with the Shoney's Hotel Driveway across
University Drive. Add a note that the temporary access easement will discontinue when medians
are installed in University Drive.
8. It is the intent of the developer to provide a regional detention pond for all three proposed lots
to meet drainage requirements. Therefore, the pond will need to be dedicated at the time the
first lot is final platted.
9, Add a Public Utility Easement to cover the proposed sanitary sewerline to Lot 3.
Staff recommended approval with the stated conditions.
Commissioner Parker moved to approve the plat with the staff conditions stated. Commissioner Gribou
seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Establishment of parking requirements for College Station Business
Center.
• This item was pulled prior to the meeting.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Consideration of the Wolf Pen Creek Master Plan Revisions.
City Planner Kee explained that the reasons for bringing this item back to the Commission were because
there were some questions brought up by Mr. Paul Clarke regarding the outstanding balances in the TIF
fund, to answer questions regarding the revisions and the TIF, and to bring the Commission up to date
on the other meetings held on this issue. There was a TIF Board meeting held Friday April 17 (day
after the Commission Meeting), and a public meeting held May 6 in which property owners in the area
were invited. Staff would also like the Commission to make a motion relative to the overall master plan
to carry forward to the Council on May 28, 1998 (tentative). Ms. Kee introduced Budget Director
Charles Cryan.
Mr. Cryan explained the differences between the numbers presented to the Commission at the April 16
meeting and the actual occurrences. He stated that there are timing rifferences between when the
increment funds are actually available. The City requests and actually receives the increment a full year
after the value is assessed. This means the value assessed as of January 1, 1997 will not actually be
billable or receivable by the City until March 1998. Mr. Cryan explained that participation was not
requested from the school or county for the first two years.
Mr. Cryan stated that the percent tax rate that Mr. Clarke presented to the Commission was
substantially higher than the actual rate. The school district chose to utilize only its "local assignment
• rate" which is 86 cents per $100 valuation as opposed to its total rate of $1.74. The local assignment
rate becomes available an additional year later than the other increment revenues.
P&Z Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 4 of 9
Mr. Cryan explained that the University Commons property that was rezoned to the Wolf Pen Creek
Zone was never added to the Wolf Pen Creek TIF district and therefore no increment from the
development of that property is or will be available to the TIF unless the College Station City Council,
• Brazos County Commissioners Court and CSISD Board decides to set aside the increment to be spent
within the Wolf Pen Creek TIF. That would be a policy decision that the various elected officials would
have to make. If such a decision is made it would not be a part of the TIF as established.
Mr. Cryan went over the TIF fund summary that is in the FY 9798 approved budget. The money will
remain in the TIF fund until it is determined how it will be spent
Mr. Cryan said that there was a meeting with Mr. Clarke and he received similar information.
Parks & Recreation Director Beachy explained there was a public hearing held May 6 as the
Commission recommended. There were approximately 100 - 120 invitations mailed, fifteen people
actually attended the meeting. Some comments received from the meeting include:
* Create Vistas into the Corridor
* Include pedestrian access under Texas Avenue area.
~ Include small indoor theater at festival site,
* Develop strong marketing plan.
~ Include future lakes in plan.
* Concentrate on fixing the entire creek,
* Include this as a CIP project.
• Mr. Beachy explained that some of the revisions to the implementation of the plan include:
* Revise existing lake area
* Provide additional parking
* Make channel improvements (Dartmouth to Texas Avenue)
* Provide additions to the Amphitheater
* Finish bike loops
* Provide focal points
* George Bush Drive extension (CIP)
* Festival Site interaction
* Future Lakes
Mr. Beachy stated that the summary of the plan is as follows:
* Lake concepts are not economically viable at the present time but should be included for future
development.
* Encourage commercial development -discourage multi-family development
* Use existing resources
* Core area should enhance amphitheater and hotel.
~ Dedicate some TIF for site cleanup and marketing plan.
* Include elements in next Capital Improvements Program.
* Develop interim finance plan for overall project.
* Hire engineering firm to design project
• ~ Begin construction in fiscal year 1999.
P&ZMrnutes May 7, 1998 .Page S of 9
Mr. Beachy said that the master plan would be revised to include the above changes prior to being to
future presentations to the Parks Board, TIF Board, and City Council. The Parks Board will meet May
12, TIF will meet either on May 15th or May 23rd, and City Council May 28 or early June.
• Commissioner Parker had concern with the pedestrian access under Texas. He feels that this could
cause potential problems. He doesn't feel he could support this portion of the plan. Mr. Beachy
explained that this would be a design problem and they have similar concerns with the Bike Loop
project. There are also maintenance concerns and handicap requirements for these issues. The group
felt there should be an access point to cross at the location.
Commissioner Gribou asked if staff knew of what the cost would be for these pedestrian crosses. Mr.
Beachy said that there have been preliminary estimates done, but no finalized numbers. No cost
estimates have been done for the pedestrian walk at Bee Creek. A design firm looked at the location of
Texas Avenue and Highway 30, but quickly decided that there was not enough in the budget. Mr.
Beachy said that maybe there could be potential of including this in the Texas Avenue widening project
design.
Commissioner Silvia explained that it was his understanding that the creation of the lake across from the
hotel would be put off for a while. Mr. Beachy said that at the present time these lakes would not be
created until the issues of the bank stabilization and silt problems could be addressed. Commissioner
Silvia said that he understood that in order to do this, the "meandering" was to be removed from the
stream in the undeveloped area which would more or less reduce the siltation in the lake area. Mr.
Beachy explained that this would help, but they were looking at reducing the overall link but it would
still need some meanders which would help slow the water flow. This would have to been confirmed by
an engineering firm. The engineering firm would also determine which types of bank treatments would
• be most appropriate. Mr. Silvia said that his concern is that the lake areas are the basics of what would
be developed in the area and it would probably be one of the most important items for the beautification
of the hotel site. Mr. Beachy said that this has been the sentiment of the last two public meetings. The
main part of the silt problems are coming between Texas Avenue and Dartmouth, but also there are
severe silt problems behind the Meridian Apartments, Redmond Terrace, and around the Willow Branch
area. The discussions at the public meeting was the need to address all of these issues as part of the
solution instead of trying to work with the middle part of the problem.
Commissioner Gribou said that the whole point is that it should not be piecemealed. He felt that the
comments from the public meeting altered what he felt were problematic summaries. He would like to
see the lakes added back into the plan. He feels that the narrow stream is meaningless in terms of what
should be developed in the area. He said that he would like the lakes to be one of the strong elements.
He would like the City Council to see a conceptual plan that includes lakes as perceived in the future.
He would like more input from the design community especially landscape designers, and engineering
firms to address the drainage concerns.
Mr. Beachy said that one of the attendees from the public meeting suggested that there was a need to
add some elements to enhance the area and make it more attractive.
Chairman Massey asked Mr. Beachy if the plan presented was really a master plan or an implementation
or action plan? Mr. Beachy said that he would call it a master plan, and once the "picture" is approved,
• the next step would be the implementation of the project. He said that there would have to be accurate
P&Z Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 6 of 9
cost estimates for the different elements to come up with the implementation plan. Mr. Massey
explained that he thought that there is a mixture of a master plan and implementation plan. He wanted
an explanation of whether the Commission should endorse the "concept" of the plan or recommendation
• that the first priority should be site cleanup. He asked if the Commission should not recommend which
features should be included in the plan. Would there be a design review board to help review the
recommended elements? Mr. Beachy explained that Staff was looking for the Commission's guidance
and consideration of the master plan. There was a recommendation to create a group to be responsible
for the implementation of the plan. He said that once there is approval on the plan, Council may
designate the group for implementation.
Commissioner Gribou moved to forward the master plan on to Council with the addition of water
features. Commissioner Silvia seconded the motion.
Commissioner Lightfoot asked if the presented plan was actually altered from the original? Mr. Beachy
said that this is an altered plan. Mr. Lightfoot stated that he liked the original plan better than the
revised plan because it includes the lakes and addresses the concerns of the property owners. He said
that he wasn't sure he liked the idea of changing something that was never done to begin with.
Commissioner Gribou said that he was involved in the original master plan and he said that at the time
he felt very strong about it. He said that the only reason he would be willing to support the revised
master plan is because of the changes that have occurred in the actual development that actually altered
the master plan to an extent already. He explained that he also felt that there was a very good original
master plan that has never been implemented for a number of reasons.
Commissioner Lightfoot felt that there were still a number of uncertainties and he said that he couldn't
• recommend the "ifs" to the Council.
Chairman Massey said that he felt that after you change direction many times, you are not sure which
direction you really need to go in. There have been a few situations that have changed, the Conference
Center, the rezoning of the western end, and other environmental issues that have changed and he felt
that the revisions are more of an update to the original plan. Mr. Beachy said he thought the problems
being faced by the Commission as well as staff are basically that there is a plan that has not been
followed and there are many elements that are not going to happen. The official document does not
reflect what is currently developed in the area.
Commissioner Parker said that he could support either concept because he agrees that the actual is far
from the original plan. He said the key to this is that there is an extremely limited budget and he said
this would require creativity to see how this can be progressed and to have enough amenities to make it
appealing to the public. He said that he felt the lakes were a essential component of the project. He
explained that the marketing aspects of this project are critical. It may be good to complete the project
in stages. He thought that the marketing issue should be the main issue.
City Planner Kee added that she would like to hear discussion on the landuse issues. She said that the
Commission could give Staff the guidance needed to decide what type of development from the private
sector in the area. There are three tracts that are still undeveloped (a large corner across from the hotel,
a tract along Holleman adjacent to Arbors, and frontage along Holleman. She explained that with the
current zoning on these tracts, they could become multi-family developments or big box retail
• developments. There has been conversations that the original vision did not include these types of
developments.
P&ZMinutes May 7, 1998 page 7 01'9
Commissioner Gribou said that his opinion of the original plan was a mixed use development. A place
where you could live, eat and work. He thought that would be the ideal environment in comparison
• with the Arboretum in Austin. He said that he had hoped that development would orient itself with the
natural beauty of the creek. He is against big box retail in this area but is in support of mixed activities.
Ms. Kee said that, at the public meeting, there were questions about whether the zoning ordinance
provides incentives for development oriented to the creek. She said that there are some minor
incentives in the ordinance. She said that everyone agreed that the biggest incentive would be to have
something to orient to and then you would get interest in the area. Mr. Gribou said that there is not
anything to orient new development to the natural beauty.
Chairman Massey asked what has kept the big boxes out of the area and he wanted to know if there is
any interest at this time? Ms. Kee said that Office Max was the first retail development in the area and
it was not what people were expecting from the original vision. There was nothing on the Office Max
tract to orient to when being developed. There was an undeveloped creek and no bikeways or trails
that were originally envisioned. In the past when Staff recommended orientation to the creek,
developers would ask what are they orienting to? Ms. Kee said that maybe there should be additional
incentives for development orienting to the creek and future trail system.
Commissioner Lightfoot said that he remembered the Commission allowing rezoning of property in the
comdor between Harvey Road and Holleman for a shopping center. Ms. Kee said that the property in
question was bound by the creek at the north and it was a large tract of land Chairman Massey
explained that the Commission recommended denial of the rezoning request but Council granted
approval of the request. Ms. Kee said Staffs recommendation of the request was that if it was rezoned
• it was done on the condition that the elements of the master plan be retained. The property is now
zoned C-I General Commercial which means it would not have to be reviewed and approved by the
Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board, but at the time of development, the same dedications or
development of the creek area in compliance with the master plan will take place.
Commissioner Gribou said that he wants to make sure that the presentation to the Council includes the
visionary proposal.
Commissioner Gribou withdrew his original motion because he did not feel comfortable with a final
recommendation to the Council. He would like to include the discussion of the meeting as details for
Council considerations. Commissioner Silvia seconded the withdrawal.
Mr. Beachy explained that Council specifically directed not to include the lakes. One of the Turner
Collie & Braden options was to eliminate the lakes.
Chairman Massey explained that it is not that the Commission does not want to proceed with the plan
and to give the Parks Department the endorsement they need. The Commission wants to execute the
responsibilities the Commission has and to make sure that this is a very important part of the City and
the Commission cares very much about the plan. He said that the Commission does want to endorse the
plan.
Councilmember-elect Hazen suggested attendance from the Commission at the Council meeting when
• this item is presented.
P&Z Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 8 oj9
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9. Update on the Utility Customer Service Center Building to be located
at 310 Krenek Tap Road. (97-716)
• Assistant City Engineer Morgan introduced Mr. Charlie Burris, architect for the project. Mr. Bums
explained that due to budget constraints and difficulties encountered in the bidding process, there were
some changes made to the original project. He explained the specific changes to the Site Development
Plan as follows:
• The building was relocated approximately thirty feet to the northeast. The relocation reduced
the total amount of earthwork, reduced irrigation requirements and shortened the two drives
connecting to William King Cole Drive. Locations of curb cuts were not altered. Although
stacking space at the drive-thru facility was reduced, the total capacity of sixteen cars is
considered to be adequate by the Owner's Representatives.
• The sidewalk adjacent to the front parking area was reduced from a eight foot width to the code
required six foot width.
The connecting drive from the front parking lot to the back parking lot was omitted, This drive,
along with a driveway connection to William King Cole Drive can be added in the future if
desired.
• Landscaping was reduced while remaining in compliance with ordinance requirements,
• Monumental building signage was simplified to be consistent with building signage at the City
Police Station. The signage, flagpoles, and associated site lighting were included as an alternate
bid item that was accepted by the Owner (City) for inclusion in the Contract for Constnaction.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10. Other Business.
• Commissioner Silvia thanked the Commission for all their efforts and said that he would miss the
Commission when he moves on to serve on the City Council. The Commissioners said there good-byes
and best wishes to Mr. Silvia on his new ventures.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11. Adjourn.
Commissioner Silvia moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0).
AST: ~~
~~ qq~~r T~ ~ ~~ '~
~~.,P`Y;r1 ;~ ~ ~`~~~-
Staff Assistant, Debra Charanza
•
P&Z Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 9 oj9
~Cannin~ ~' Zoning Commission
Guest ~,eBister
• Date ~ r~ ~ I ~~ (~..
dame 21 rfrfress
• 11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
1~
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
• 24.
25.
1. ; ~.. 1 ~ ,., c~
2.
4. 'i.~~U~-F" (~i''~-''~-'~ `mil
~~
-~T
~. ~~~,
.,~,,~
-~ ;)j'•~ ~---
i
9. G j - ~_ C~' ~l ~"~~C~ ~~-'.3 r
~-
?~
r
`>Z4:~ J,~~<~kcc~(iic~? Cif'. C.- ~-
;:~ ,
~,
~iv`~,=~~~~~ ,
i~/~~~=' ~~/«~~~_ ~~
~"