Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/2000 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission (2)MINUTES WORKSHOP Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION TEXAS CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS I 10 1 Texas Avenue September 7, 2000 6 - 000 P.M. 1. Northgate Strategic Issue. Kim Foutz, Economic Development Director, made the presentation to the Commission. Tonight's report is to bring you up to speed on the plan and how it impacts the Planning and Zoning Commission along with the Design Review Board Subcommittee. Ms. Foutz explained that the City Council conducted a sunset review of all citizen committees and commissions and, as a result, the Northgate Devitalization Board had jurisdiction over the Northgate area. The board was to provide recommendations to the City Council and to also participate as a subcommittee (Design Review Board) for plan review in that area. The Sunset Review Board was disbanded by the City Council in June 2000 that resulted in a conflict which was created between the existing ordinance and the jurisdiction it provides with the availability of a quorum for the Design Review Board in the Northgate area. The Northgate Board chairman appointed the committee representatives to a one -year term. She stated that this June, the appointments expire and there will not be another format to male those appointments. Ms. Foutz explained that this has also created a potential quorum problem since many of the people serving on the Northgate Devitalization Board have indicated that they do not intend to serve on the board any longer. As a result of those actions, we began the process of examining the Northgate ordinance again to rewrite portions of the ordinance and to readdress other design issues that have been raised she said. Ms. Foutz said that through recent City Council budget workshops there is an indication that funding would be provided for an update of the Northgate Redevelopment Flan. However, it is only partial funding for what is needed for that plan she said. The Northgate district Merchant's Association and other interested parties will be asked to help generate additional funding that is needed. In essence, the Northgate Redevelopment Flan will be updated only if the partners help in contributing toward its funding. Ms. Foutz reported that the Redevel Flan process began in 1993 through a strategic issue by City Council that identified a need for the plan. It was initiated along with several partners, including Texas A &M University which provided funding and assistant with charetts. She stated that a committee was instituted with a number of stare holders, merchants, land owners, staff members, and A &M representation among others. Also, a number of public meetings were held P&Z Workshop Minutes September 7, 2000 Page I of 5 to solicit public input. The plan was adopted in 1996 along with a set of charetts. Another action that occurred at that time was the creation o f the Northgate Devitalization Board. Their purpose was to oversee the plan and to assist with the design review process. Ms. Foutz stated that the redevelopment plan includes three different components; existing conditions, specific plan outlines, and implementation. She explained that the consultants found the area to be primarily residential and rental in deteriorating condition except for a number of apartment complexes. Parking problems were identified, and the infrastructure, being some of the oldest in the city had not been addressed in years. Although some improvements have been made, she said that it still remains significantly deteriorated. Ms. Foutz listed some of the redevelopment goals that were outlined by the consultants. 1 Should be a campus -type neighborhood, mixed use with both commercial and residential with a pedestrian orientation. ( 2 ) Should have an emphasis on owner occupied residential units providing a mix to the rental units. ( 3 ) To have a mixed use type development with retail, commercial and office space. She stated that some of the original plans will not tale place due to some existing structures that were not taken into consideration as well as the assumption that some buildings would remain as institutional use when in fact, they have not. For example, the parting garage that is currently under construction was originally slated as a multi - family residential area and the parting garage was actually planned to go in the mud lot area. Other redevelopment goals that were to provide opportunity for existing business opportunities to expand and relocate in the area and to create a gathering place for both students and other residents in the Northgate area. Ms. Foutz stated that three strategic areas were identified; the mud lot which was one of the few large parcels of land under one ownership, university owned property, what was previously known as Brazos Duplex Property, and the Core area known as the promenade area. One of the Implementation Strategies was to pursue state and federal grants, which has not been done. Ms. Foutz stated that they have however, used significant contributions of community development funds to improve some of the wastewater, water, and roadways in the area. She explained that they were encouraged to pursue a Northgate Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Feasibility Study should be pursued, but City Council opted not to do so. From the Northgate District Association, the Private Merchants Association (already formed) and the Northgate Review Board was established. They encouraged public and private sector cooperation and amixed -use hotel conference center and parking garage. A portion of this has come to fruition in the form of the parking garage near Second and College Main streets. However, Ms. Foutz reported that the significant community development did not come to fruition. More density was encouraged in the area with private dorms and apartments units in the area. The consultants also recommended that there be some joint university and city projects, specifically pointing out the Brazos Duplex Property, suggesting that market housing, such as townhouse and condominiums be sold. Ms. Foutz stated that this has not been pursued to date. One of the largest areas of activity that has resulted from some of the recommendations are core area improvements with pedestrian and parking facilities and additional retail. She explained that funding for Church Avenue sidewalks and street rehabilitation is currently under design at this time. She also said that the promenade is complete and serves as part of the goal for a P&Z Workshop Minutes September 7, 2000 Page 2 of 5 gathering place. She stated that improvements to College Main and University sidewalks are complete. The dorm will consist of 6000 feet of retail space, but additional retail is still lacking somewhat. linear park was also proposed, but is not budgeted funding this year. However, Ms. Foutz explained that some other park resources will be utilized, including park fees that were paid in lieu of dedication. She stated that the consultants also recommended development guidelines and standards be established. She reports that those have been implemented and they are currently undergoing revision and review with Duncan and Associates. Also it was recommended that a pedestrian promenade and plaza be constructed. The promenade has been constructed in a plaza concept on Second Street between the parking garage and dorm and has been approved by City Council. That particular plaza is also proposed to link in, moving in a northerly direction along Second Street to create some type of linear park in the future. Landscaping, stamped concrete and historic lighting projects are proposed in conjunction with the proposed roadway plan she said. It was recommended that two lots containing 250 parking spaces be built in the core area. She stated that the combination of the parting garage and the promenade will provide a maximum of 840 spaces in that area. Also, Ms. Foutz said that a proposal to iden University Drive sidewalks has been completed and that call boxes in the future community oriented policing room located in the parting garage have been installed as a part of the Safe and Secure project goal. Ms. Foutz explained that it was suggested that a number of joint university and city projects be implement but none were identified in the plan. However, a request was initiated by the city and Texas A &M University to the Texas Department of Transportation to install a median on University Drive and a signal at Boyette and University Drive. Ms. Foutz reported that the request was denied. She pointed out some of the strengths of the plan that help to guide the redevelopment process, aiding in the decision mating process, and it has been used to do a number of infrastructure development projects in an effort to try to spur private sector redevelopment in that area. It has been a good guide when submitting capital improvement program projects also. Likewise, some of the weakness of the plan was that it did not tale into accountability that the infrastructure approach can be slow in it's results and it doesn't guarantee that there w ill be results in redevelopment. It also does not clearly outline any of the methods to facilitate the private projects, and it relies exclusively on the city and not the private sector. One of the critical components for some of the weakness is that it did not take into accountability the difficulty to assemble land in the area. It has very fragmented ownership, with numerous 50' wide lots. In that case, there is not a lot of development potential until that issue can be overcome. Another concern was how do we go about increasing retail in that area. If the land is available, developers are interested and there is a huge demand for small retail space in the area. Some opportunities for city revenues are available. An analysis was done showing that the city will net about $200,000 a year from city revenues from the dormitory project. She stated that the city could consider assembling some small tracts and offer them for economic development proposals with specific development guidelines. She also mentioned that some of the market P&Z Workshop Minutes September 7, 2000 Page 3 of 5 forces could be addressed and that the city could update the plan to reflect some of the new current conditions and help redefine the market and develop new programs. 2. Ms. Foutz explained that some threats to the plan are the possibility that the land or building owners are unable or unwilling to sell or redevelop their property. She pointed out that most are income producing. There could be some additional pedestrian, bike, and auto conflict on university drive. Ms. Foutz reported that at this time we are waiting for the Northgate merchants to respond to the funding request. Upon the adoption of the new city budget a. letter will be seat out making the request for partnership for funding the redevelopment plan. Also, there is the current ongoing code review with Duncan and Associates, which includes updating the Northgate zoning ordinance. Commissioner Happ asked about the potential of the redevelopment and the city revenues. He asked if the revenues could be placed back into the infrastructure. Ms. Foutz stated that one of the options was the TIF District, which would provide the avenue to do that. She stated that there are several different ways that it could be accomplished. Ms. Foutz explained that this is an update for the Commission in that the City Council will be looking to the Planning and Zoning Commission to review the Northgate ordinance. Commissioner warren asked how would the Merchants Association and the residents be involved in reviewing the results of the code review by the consultants? Ms. Foutz said that a public meeting would be held for the area as well as a public hearing. Chairman Mooney ached what she saw as the greatest incentive and the biggest obstacle for the merchants and landowners to the redevelopment o f the Northgate area. and the huge demand to meet the needs of the students. The biggest pitfall is going to be the land assemblage issue. Mr. Foutz said the greatest incentive for the property owners is the proximity to the university Discussion of Agenda Items. Commissioner Floyd ached that 2.2 and 2.3 be removed from the consent agenda and moved to the regular agenda. He also suggested that Agenda Item No. 3 be moved to follow Agenda Items No. 4 and No. 5. Sabine Iunzl stated that there were numerous conditions on the rezoning for Sun Park Meadows., Agenda Item No. 4. due to the numerous times it has been presented before the Commission and City Council. She explained that the staff is recommending a condition that will probably not be seen in the future in that with upcoming cases, the infrastructure will be in place or alternate plans will be decided prior to reaching the rezoning stage. Transportation Planner Hard informed the commission of a change regarding Consent Agenda Item Igo. 2.2, the Harley Subdivision, that was removed from the consent agenda to the regular agenda. He explained that the staff is recommending approval with the condition that a note be P&Z Workshop Minutes September 7, 2000 Page 4 of 5 added regarding the Th Plan. He said that since staff report, the applicant has worked with staff on the wording of the note, and have reached an agreement. He read, "For information purposes the City of College Station Thoroughfare Plan shows a collector street extending cast- west, generally through the reserve tracts north of lot ." 3 . Minor and Amending Plats Approved by Staff. None. 4. Subconunittee Reports. Wolf Pen Creep Oversight. No report. 5. Adjourn. Commissioner warren motioned to adj the meeting. mmi s sinner Floyd seconded the motion. The motion passed unopposed, 7-0. U U:11111 DI 0 IN00DW9 Chairman, Karl Moone Staff Assistant, Susan Hazlett P&Z Workshop Minutes September 7, 2000 Page 5 of 5