HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/07/2022 - Agenda Packet - Planning & Zoning CommissionCollege Station, TX
Meeting Agenda
Planning and Zoning Commission
1101 Texas Ave, College Station, TX 77840
Internet: https://zoom.us/j/87206357232
Phone: 888 475 4499 and Webinar ID: 872 0635 7232
The City Council may or may not attend this meeting.
July 7, 2022 6:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers
College Station, TX Page 1
Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the meeting body will be present in the physical
location stated above where citizens may also attend in order to view a member(s) participating
by videoconference call as allowed by 551.127, Texas Government Code. The City uses a
thirdparty vendor to host the virtual portion of the meeting; if virtual access is unavailable,
meeting access and participation will be in-person only.
1.Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, Consider Absence Request.
2.Hear Visitors
At this time, the Chairperson will open the floor to visitors wishing to address the Commission on issues not already scheduled on tonight's agenda. An individual who wishes to address the Commission regarding any item on the agenda shall register with the Commission Secretary prior to 4 p.m. on the day of the meeting. To register, the individual must provide a name and phone number by calling
979.764.3751 or emailing khejny@cstx.gov prior to 4 p.m. To submit written comments to the
Commission, email khejny@cstx.gov and they will be distributed to the Commission. The visitor 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.)
3.Consent Agenda
All matters listed under the Consent Agenda, are considered routine by the 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. Since there will not be separate discussion of these items, citizens wishing to address the Commission regarding one or more items on the Consent Agenda may address
the Commission at this time as well. If any Commissioner desires to discuss an item on the Consent
Agenda it may be moved to the Regular Agenda for further consideration.
3.1.Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes.
Attachments:1.June 16 2022
3.2.Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Final Plat for Southern Pointe Subdivision Sections 103 & 119 on approximately 14.85 acres, generally located north of Peach Creek Cut-Off Road and west of Pipeline Road in the City’s Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). Case #FP2021-000025
Sponsors:Derrick Williams
Attachments:1.Staff Report
Page 1 of 35
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 2 July 7, 2022
2.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map
3.Final Plat
4.Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent
Agenda by Commission action.
5.Regular Agenda
5.1.Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A, "Unified Development Ordinance," Section 5.2 "Residential Dimensional Standards", and Section 8.3.H.4 "Cluster Development" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College
Station, Texas, regarding cluster developments. Case #ORDA2022-000002. (Final action on this
item is scheduled for the July 28, 2022 City Council Meeting - subject to change).
Sponsors:Robin Macias
Attachments:1.Memo
2.Sec. 5.2. Residential Dimensional Standards Redlines
3.Sec. 8.3.H.4 Cluster Developments Redlines
5.2.Presentation, discussion, and possible action on the Plan of Work.
Sponsors:Michael Ostrowski
Attachments:1.Plan of Work - FY2023
6.Informational Agenda
6.1.Discussion of new development applications submitted to the City. New Development Link: www.cstx.gov/newdev
6.2.Discussion of Minor / Amending Plats approved by staff:
Parkway Plaza Phase 7; Lots 3R-1, 3R-2, 4R, and 5R ~ Case #FPCO2022-000002
College Station Medical + Senior Living; Block 1, Lot 1-R ~ Case #FP2022-000006
Sponsors:Jesse Dimeolo, Robin Macias
6.3.Presentation and discussion regarding an update on items heard:
A Comprehensive Plan Amendment of approximately five acres from Residential Suburban to Neighborhood Commercial located at 2354 Barron Road. The Planning & Zoning
Commission heard this item on June 2, 2022 and voted (4-1) to recommend approval. The
City Council heard this item on June 23, 2022 and voted (7-0) to approve the request.
A Rezoning of approximately five acres from Rural to Planned Development District located at 2354 Barron Road. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on June
2, 2022 and voted (5-0) to recommend approval of the request with the conditions that the
front of the building not exceed 28 feet in height and the rear of the building not exceed 16 feet in height. The City Council heard this item on June 23, 2022 and voted (7-0) to approve the request with the Commission's conditions and an additional condition that the buffer must include a minimum 6-foot concrete or brick wall.
An Ordinance Amendment amending the official Park Zones Map, land dedication, and fee amounts. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on May 19, 2022 and voted (7-0) to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on June 23, 2022 and voted
Page 2 of 35
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 3 July 7, 2022
(7-0) to approve the request with an implementation schedule of the proportionate dedication and fee rates of 60% on 10/1/2022, 80% on 10/1/2023, and 100% on 10/1/2024.
6.4.Presentation and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming Meetings:
Thursday, July 14, 2022 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Open Meeting 6:00
p.m. (Liaison - McIlhaney)
Thursday, July 21, 2022 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ 6:00 p.m.
Thursday, July 28, 2022 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Open Meeting 6:00
p.m. (Liaison - Jackson)
Thursday, August 4, 2022 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ 6:00 p.m.
6.5.Discussion and review regarding the following meetings: Design Review Board, BioCorridor Board.
None
7.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.
8.Adjourn.
The Planning and Zoning Commission may adjourn into Executive Session to consider any item listed on the agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion.
I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the website and at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on July 1, 2022 at 5:00 p.m.
City Secretary
This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters, readers, or large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD
at 1-800-735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the
meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification at least two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to provide the necessary accommodations.
Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun.
"Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (Trespass by License Holder with an Openly
Carried Handgun) A Person Licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code (Handgun Licensing Law), may not enter this Property with a
Handgun that is Carried Openly."
Page 3 of 35
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 4 July 7, 2022
Codigo Penal § 30.07. Traspasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia.
“Conforme a la Seccion 30.07 del codigo penal (traspasar portando armas de mano al aire
libre con licencia), personas con licencia bajo del Sub-Capitulo H, Capitulo 411,
Codigo de Gobierno (Ley de licencias de arma de mano), no deben entrar a esta propiedad
portando arma de mano al aire libre.”
Page 4 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 9
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
June 16, 2022 6:00 p.m. Phone: *888 475 4499 and Webinar ID: 856 4571 3093 Internet: https://zoom.us/j/85645713093
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dennis Christiansen, Bobby Mirza, William Wright, Thomas Jackson, Jason Cornelius, Mark Smith, and Melissa McIlhaney (virtually)
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Maloney and Elizabeth Cunha CITY STAFF PRESENT: Michael Ostrowski, Molly Hitchcock, Carol Cotter, Erika Bridges, Jason Schubert, Alyssa Halle-Schramm, Anthony Armstrong, Lucas Harper, Jesse DiMeolo, Robin Macias, Derrick Williams, Parker Mathews, Bekha Wells, Naomi Sing, Katherine Beaman-Jamael, Matthew Ellis, Lindsey Pressler, Leslie Whitten, and Kristen Hejny 1. Call Meeting to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, Consider Absence Request.
Chairperson Christiansen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Hear Visitors
No visitors spoke. 3. Consent Agenda 3.1 Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes.
• June 2, 2022
3.2 Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Final Plat for Winding Creek Estates Phase 5 on approximately 33.86 acres, generally located west of the existing Saddle Creek
Subdivision in the College Station Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. Case #FP2021-000019
Commissioner Cornelius motioned to approve the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Wright seconded the motion, motion passed (6-0).
4. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission Action.
No items were removed. 5. Regular Agenda 5.1 Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4, “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by
changing the zoning district boundary from MF Multi-Family to D Duplex for approximately 0.56 acres located at 301 and 303 Cooner Street, generally located at the intersection of Cooner Street
Page 5 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 9
and Eisenhower Street. Case #REZ2022-000007 (Note: Final action of this item will be considered at the July 14, 2022 City Council Meeting – Subject to change).
Staff Planner Macias presented the Rezoning to the Commission, recommending approval. Commissioner Wright asked for the main driving force for duplexes in a Multi-Family zoning. Staff Planner Macias clarified that duplexes are not allowed in Multi-Family zoning district. Commissioner Mirza asked if there have been any concerns from the neighborhood regarding the detention pond. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong stated that this property zoned as Duplex has
a maximum impervious cover of 65% and if they go over the 65%, they will have to provide detention.
Commissioner Jackson asked if the change from Multi-Family to Duplex zoning would create a lower density.
Staff Planner Macias confirmed that this would create a less intense use with lower density. Chairperson Christiansen opened the public hearing. No visitors spoke. Chairperson Christiansen closed the public hearing. Commissioner Cornelius motioned to recommend approval of the Rezoning. Commissioner Commissioner Wright seconded the motion, the motion passed (6-0).
5.2 Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4, “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by changing the zoning district boundary from R&D Research and Development to PDD Planned Development District on approximately 6.742 acres of land located at 400 Technology Parkway. Case #REZ2022-000008 (Note: Final action of this item will be considered at the July 14,
2022 City Council Meeting – Subject to change). Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong presented the Rezoning to the Commission, recommending approval. Chairperson Christiansen asked for the legal definition of air rights, that if you own a house, what are your air rights. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong clarified that in Texas and College Station that there are no regulations involving air rights.
Attorney Whitten clarified that a landowner owns as much air space above property as they can utilize.
Page 6 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 9
Commissioner Cornelius asked for the four neighborhoods that met with staff.
Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong stated that staff was not able to attend the meeting with Shadowcrest, but that staff met with representatives of the Emerald Forest, Foxfire, Amberlake, and Sandstone homeowner’s associations (HOAs) and that the Sandstone HOA was not in agreement with the proposal while the others were generally supportive. Commissioner Smith expressed concerns with noise and air traffic caused by the drones. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong clarified that the flight height of the drones should alleviate any source of conflict. Commissioner Wright stated that in the proposal it reads that with weather not permitting, deliveries
will still need to be made by other modes of transportation. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong clarified that there will be small passenger
vans to deliver products when needed. Commissioner Mirza asked for clarification on the size of drone, the flight path, and the items to
be delivered. Mr. Mirza also asked for clarification on Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations on the drones. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong clarified that the drones must follow FAA regulations, the drone is no more than 100 pounds, and will deliver up to a five-pound package of permitted consumer items. Mr. Armstrong also clarified that the current Planned Development District (PDD) provides specific restrictions and means for the property. Commissioner Jackson asked for clarification that the FAA regulated the use of air space and that the Commission regulated the land use and if there were other communities where this has been considered. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong confirmed that the use of air space was regulated by the FAA and land use was considered by the Commission.
Commissioner Smith asked for the service area served by this development.
Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong stated that landing and take-off are within one area of the development, and deliveries will take place within a four-mile radius.
Commissioner McIlhaney asked staff to speak to noise concerns and management. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong clarified that the City of College Station does have a noise ordinance that would apply to the drones. Applicant, Kelsey Hendrickson, Prime Air Drone Delivery, provided an overview of the drone delivery service. Commissioner Wright asked if Amazon will be open to community input and feedback.
Page 7 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 9
Ms. Hendrickson stated that Amazon will reach out to the community and welcome community feedback. Ms. Hendrickson stated that they are also planning to host community events.
Commissioner Jackson asked if Buildings A, B, and C will be used to store products. Ms. Hendrickson confirmed that these buildings will be used to store products and be used for drone maintenance. Commissioner McIlhaney asked for the applicant to speak to noise level. Ms. Hendrickson clarified that the drones fly 400 feet in air, are regulated by the FAA, and have noise measurements that are being evaluated by the FAA.
Commissioner McIlhaney asked for clarification on the take-off and landing habits of the drones. Ms. Hendrickson clarified that the drones take off and land vertically.
Commissioner Mirza asked for the thoughts behind what made College Station stand out in Amazon's selection process.
Ms. Hendrickson stated that there was a nationwide search for the perfect community with a functional, flat geography, predictable and mild weather, wind levels within range, the community that supports technology and development, the university, and how the community is dispersed. Chairperson Christiansen asked for the safety record of drones. Ms. Hendrickson stated that they have tested drones to and beyond their operational limits to ensure that drones have an expected output.
Chairperson Christiansen opened the public hearing. Claudia Smith, Sandstone Subdivision, College Station, spoke in opposition to the rezoning citing concerns for disruption, conflicting fly height information, number of truck deliveries, and safety. Cindy Giedraitis, Sandstone Subdivision, College Station, spoke on the rezoning asking staff to
ensure integrity, confirm local helipad regulations, safety, and drone regulations. Ms. Giedraitis also requested police and fire review to approve commercial drone and flight procedures. Monica Williams, spoke in opposition to the rezoning citing concerns for noise, irritation, and frequency. John Sharp, Texas A&M University, spoke in support of the rezoning stating that this will bring College Station to the technology forefront and a leader in delivery systems. Norberto Espitia, Foxfire Subdivision, College Station, spoke in opposition to the rezoning requesting staff conduct research on the drones, requesting information on the size of the drone
fleet. Mr. Espitia also asked for the pathways and operational periods of the drones.
Page 8 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 9
Amina Alikhan, Sandstone Subdivision, College Station, spoke in opposition of the rezoning citing concerns for safety, lack of data and history, trespassing to find broken devices, and device
malfunction. Chairperson Christiansen closed the public hearing. Ms. Hendrickson clarified that the replenishment of inventory will occur up to two times a month by a box truck, drones will only operate during daylight hours and during fair weather, 12-18 drones will service the space, and drones will fly at 400 feet and are allowed up to 500 feet. Ms. Hendrickson further clarified that the drones are equipped with a sense and avoid system and drone traffic is based on customer demand. Commissioner Mirza asked for the decibel level at takeoff.
Ms. Hendrickson stated that the decibel level has been submitted to the FAA for assessment.
Commissioner Mirza asked if in the event of failure, will the drone contain a parachute. Ms. Hendrickson stated that the drones do not contain parachutes and if there is a malfunction while
in flight, the drone will manage itself with software. Commissioner McIlhaney expressed comfort with the activity level being discussed. Ms. McIlhaney asked why there is a discrepancy between truck delivery trip numbers. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong clarified that the five truck deliveries would be limited to sprinter vans if needed. Chairperson Christiansen asked if the City of College Station is comfortable with the level of control and oversight involved.
Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong stated that staff is comfortable with the level of communication and proposal. Commissioner Cornelius asked for clarification on air space and limit above a home. Attorney Whitten clarified that homeowners do not have any ownership in navigable airspace
that is controlled by the FAA. Commissioner Cornelius asked for clarification on the Commission’s charge, does this application fit the use of the PDD. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong confirmed that this is the charge of the Commission. Commissioner Smith asked if the City’s Fire and Police have been involved. Land Development Review Administrator Armstrong clarified that a review of this application
has been assigned to the Fire Department, and they did not present staff with any comments or concerns.
Page 9 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 9
Commissioner Wright motioned to recommend approval of the Rezoning and Concept Plan. Commissioner Cornelius seconded the motion. Commissioner Smith expressed concerns for unknowns and would like to see opportunity for the Commission to be responsive to concerns. Commissioner Mirza stated that while there may be some fear of the unknown, this is new and can change the way we do business and so much can be accomplished. Commissioner Wright stated that this development is an amazing use of existing space. Commissioner Jackson stated that we have to take some risks when we see benefits down the
line. Commissioner McIlhany stated that this is a good opportunity for the city and that staff should
be encouraged to look at drone protocols as this is likely the beginning of drone services. Commissioner Cornelius stated that this is a great opportunity for the city and community. Chairman Christiansen commented that staff should work to with Amazon to ensure concerns are addressed and that he felt this was an opportunity for the City and A&M System to work together in a very meaningful way. The motion passed (7-0). 5.3 Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a waiver request to the Unified Development Ordinance Section 8.3.E.9.a ‘Existing Substandard Street Right-of-Way’ and presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Preliminary Plan for McDonald’s Station Addition Subdivision on approximately two acres of land, generally located at the corner of Holleman Drive and Wellborn Road. Case #PP2021-000010
Staff Planner DiMeolo presented the waiver request and Preliminary Plan to the Commission, recommending denial.
Commissioner Jackson asked for clarification on right-of-way reserve instead of right-of-way. Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert clarified the property would need to be purchased in the future if done as a right-of-way reserve. Commissioner Jackson asked for the ramifications if the Commission did not grant the waiver. Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert stated that this is still private property, but the property owner will not be able to do private improvements in the reserve. Director of Planning & Development Services Ostrowski clarified that if the Commission does not grant the waiver, the preliminary plan is denied, and the applicant cannot plat the property without meeting the requirements.
Page 10 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 9
Chairperson Christiansen stated that this is in the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) plan which is approved and includes the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT).
Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert confirmed that this is part of an approved MPO plan. Mr. Schubert also stated that by federal laws they are required to do a 25-year plan, and this is one of the projects identified for funding. Commissioner Smith asked for the status of the reserve, and its effect on the property values of that strip of reserve. Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert stated that there is a 15-foot-wide public access easement, public utility easement, and landscape easement on the property that already encumbers the property and does not have full value.
Applicant, Veronica Morgan, Mitchell & Morgan Engineers, presented to the Commission on the waiver request.
Developer Representative, Jud Alexander, Seguin Texas, addressed the Commission regarding the history of the project and that he felt the reserve was a compromise.
Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert clarified that the 20-foot right-of-way is conducive to the future projects in this corridor. Chairperson Christiansen clarified that this is the City of College Station asking for dedication of right-of-way and asked if this is routine on TXDOT projects. Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert stated that dedication requirement is based on the City of College Station’s Thoroughfare Plan. Commissioner Jackson asked for the peak hour level of service in this area. Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert clarified that Wellborn Road has a very poor Level of Service F.
Commissioner Smith asked for clarification on how a right-of-way reserve encumbers the property.
Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert explained that right-of-way reserve means that the property is not being used for parking, building, or landscaping. Commissioner Cornelius asked for clarification on if the Commission approves the waiver, it grants them the reserve, but the Commission can also approve the waiver with a condition, could that condition be where the setback starts. Director of Planning & Development Services Ostrowski stated that the item relates to dedication as a requirement of the platting process and as part of the process it allows for waivers to be requested. Mr. Ostrowski also stated that there is a process of appeals from development exactions requirement if the applicant so chooses.
Page 11 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 9
Director of Planning & Development Services Ostrowski stated that if the waiver is denied, the applicant can come back with a different plan that meets the requirements.
Ms. Morgan asked for clarification on an appeal of the Commission’s decision. Director of Planning & Development Services Ostrowski listed the three options the Commission has for the waiver and plat. There was general discussion amongst the Commission and Developer. Commissioner Wright motioned to deny the waiver and approve the preliminary plan with the condition that it be called a right-of-way dedication and not reserve. Commissioner Jackson seconded the motion. There was general discussion amongst the Commission. The motion passed (7-0). 5.4 Presentation, discussion, and possible action on the Plan of Work.
Agenda Item #5.4 was deferred to a future Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. 6. Informational Agenda
6.1 Discussion of new development applications submitted to the City.
New Development Link: www.cstx.gov/newdev
There was no discussion.
6.2 Presentation and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming Meetings:
• Thursday, June 23, 2022 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Open Meeting 5:00 p.m. (Liaison – Commissioner Wright)
• Thursday, July 7, 2022 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers 6:00 p.m.
• Thursday, July 14, 2022 ~ City Council Meeting ~ Council Chambers ~ Open Meeting 5:00 p.m. (Liaison – Commissioner McIlhaney)
• Thursday, July 21, 2022 ~ P&Z Meeting ~ Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. There was no discussion. 6.3 Presentation and discussion regarding an update on items heard:
• A Rezoning of approximately five acres from PDD to PDD located at 404 Harvey Mitchell Parkway South. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on May 5, 2022 and voted (6-1) to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on May 26, 2022 and voted (7-0) to approve the request.
• A Rezoning of approximately nine acres from PDD to PDD located at 1898 Arnold Road. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on May 5, 2022 and voted (7-0) to -
Page 12 of 35
June 16, 2022 P&Z Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 9
recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on May 26, 2022 and voted (7-0) to approve the request.
• A Rezoning of approximately one acre from C3 to GC located at 4180 State Highway 6 South. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on May 19, 2022 and voted
(7-0) to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on June 9, 2022 and voted (7-0) to approve the request.
• An Ordinance Amendment regarding the powers, duties, and processes of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on May 19, 2022 and voted (7-0) to recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on June 9,
2022 and voted (7-0) to approve the request. There was no discussion.
6.4 Discussion and review regarding the following meetings: Design Review Board, BioCorridor Board.
• None
There was no discussion 7. 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. 8. Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Approved: Attest:
______________________________ ________________________________ Dennis Chairperson Christiansen, Chairperson Kristen Hejny, Admin Support Specialist Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Services
Page 13 of 35
Planning & Zoning Commission
July 07, 2022
Scale 84 single-family lots on approximately 14.85 acres.
Location Generally located north of Peach Creek Cut-Off Road and
west of Pipeline Road in the City’s Extra-Territorial
Jurisdiction (ETJ).
Property Owner Southern Pointe, LLC
Applicant Schultz Engineering, LLC
Project Manager Derrick Williams, Staff Planner
dwilliams@cstx.gov
Project Overview This plat will establish lots within the Southern Pointe
Subdivision. This phase of the development is the third
phase and will consist of 84 residential lots located within
the City of College Station’s ETJ. The overall development
includes 2,066 single-family lots, potential multi-family and
commercial, a school and fire station site and parkland on
553 acres located within the City of College Station’s ETJ.
The Preliminary Plan was approved with waivers for UDO
Section 8.3.E.3.a ‘Street Projections’; Section 8.3.G.2.a
‘Block Length’; Section 8.3.G.2.b ‘Block Length’; Section
8.3.G.2.c ‘Block Length’; Section 8.3.G.4.b ‘Block
Perimeter’; Section 8.3.J.2 ‘Access Ways’; Section 8.3.W
‘Single-Family Residential Parking Requirements for
Platting,’ and Section 8.8 ‘Requirements for Parkland
Dedication’.
Preliminary Plan Approved January 2017 with revisions in December 2017,
August 2018, January 2020, January 2021
Public Infrastructure Approximate quantities:
Sewer Lines – 1,981 linear feet
Water Lines – 3,213 linear feet
Storm Sewer – 2,936 linear feet
Streets – 3,162 linear feet
Sidewalks – 5,796 linear feet
Parkland Dedication The Final Plat does not include land dedication for
Community or Neighborhood Parkland. The developer has
opted to dedicate land and construct the park
improvements in lieu of paying parkland development
and dedication fees for the overall development.
Traffic Impact Analysis A TIA was submitted and reviewed for the Southern Pointe
Development. Mitigation does not impact this phase.
Final Plat
for
Southern Pointe Subdivision
Sections 103 & 119
FP2021-000025
Page 14 of 35
Planning & Zoning Commission
July 07, 2022
Compliant with Comprehensive Plan
(including Master Plans) and Unified
Development Ordinance
Yes
Compliant with Subdivision Regulations Yes, with the waivers previously approved with the
preliminary plan.
Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval
Supporting Materials
1.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map
2.Final Plat
Page 15 of 35
Page 16 of 35
Page 17 of 35
Page 18 of 35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1415
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
281
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1415
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
281
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
2 SOUTHERN CROSS DRIVEROCKFORD DRIVEDAYTONA DRIVEPATRIOT DRIVE
19 1 1 25 1 29 1 1
DARLINGTON AVENUE
DAYTONA DRIVEROCKFORD DRIVESOUTHERN CROSS DRIVEPATRIOT DRIVE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
TALLADEGA DRIVESPARTAN DRIVEPHASE 119PHASE 103182019 17
20 19 18 17 17
6 6 5 4
4 3
3 2
LEGEND
A FIELD NOTES DESCRIPTION OF A 14.848 ACRE TRACT OFLAND LOCATED IN THE STERRETT D. SMITH LEAGUE,ABSTRACT NO. 210, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING APORTION OF THE REMAINDER OF A CALLED 178.73 ACRETRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO SOUTHERNPOINTE, LLC RECORDED IN VOLUME 15061, PAGE 220 OFTHE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY,TEXAS (OPRBCT). SAID 14.848 ACRE TRACT BEING MOREPARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS ASFOLLOWS:
BEGINNING at a 5/8 inch iron rod with blue plastic cap stamped“KERR SURVEYING” set in concrete on the northwest line ofDarlington Avenue (60’ right-of-way, 15287/51, OPRBCT) being thenorthwest line of Southern Pointe Section 100 as shown on the platrecorded in volume 15287, page 51 (OPRBCT), from which a 1/2 inchiron rod with cap stamped ‘JONES & CARTER’ found on thenorthwest line of Darlington Avenue and the northeast line of saidremainder of 178.73 acre tract marking the most northerly corner ofsaid Southern Pointe Section 100 bears N 50° 27’ 43” E a distance of1150.00 feet and the City of College Station monument CS94-154bears S 68° 03’ 39” E a distance of 2756.17 feet from same;
THENCE, with the northwest boundary said Southern Pointe Section100 for the following thirteen (13) courses and distances:
1) S 50° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 90.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;2) N 84° 32’ 17” W for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;3) S 50° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 50.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;4) S 05° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;5) S 50° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 180.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;6) N 84° 32’ 17” W for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;7) S 50° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 50.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;8) S 05° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;9) S 50° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 180.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;10) N 84° 32’ 17” W for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;11) S 50° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 50.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;12) S 05° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;13) S 50° 27’ 43” W for a distance of 90.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete, from which a 1/2 inch iron rod with cap stamped ‘JONES &CARTER’ found on the northwest line of Darlington avenue markingthe most westerly corner of Southern Pointe Section 100 bears S 50°27’ 43” W a distance of 2800.01 feet;
THENCE, through said remainder of 178.73 acre tract for thefollowing eleven (11) courses and distances:
1) N 39° 32’ 17” W for a distance of 770.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;2) N 50° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 90.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;3) N 05° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;4) N 50° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 50.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;5) S 84° 32’ 17” E for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;6) N 50° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 180.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;7) N 05° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;8) N 50° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 50.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;9) S 84° 32’ 17” E for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;10) N 50° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 180.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;11) N 05° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;12) N 50° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 50.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;13) S 84° 32’ 17” E for a distance of 35.36 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete;14) N 50° 27’ 43” E for a distance of 90.00 feet to a 5/8 inch ironrod with blue plastic cap stamped “KERR SURVEYING” set inconcrete marking the west corner of the proposed Southern PointeSubdivision, Section 102 (not yet filed of record);15) S 39° 32’ 17” E with the southwest line of said proposedSection 102 for a distance of 770.00 feet to the POINT OFBEGINNING hereof, and containing 14.848 acres, more or less.
The bearing basis for this survey is based on the Texas State PlaneCentral Zone Grid North (NAD83) as established by gps observation.Distances shown hereon are surface distances. To determine griddistances multiply by a combined scale factor of 0.9999059410912;
POINT OF
BEGINNING
NOT TO SCALE
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
ST
A
T
E
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
N
O
.
6
MESA VERDE DRCITY OF COLLEGE STATION CITY LIMITS
PEACH CREEK CUT OFF RDELDORA DRDARLINGTO
N
AVENUE
PI
P
E
L
I
N
E
R
D
FINAL PLAT
SOUTHERN POINTE SUBDIVISION
SECTIONS 103 & 119
14.848 ACRES
STERRETT D. SMITH LEAGUE, A-210
BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
84 LOTS
BLOCK 17, LOTS 15-28
BLOCK 18, LOTS 1-28
BLOCK 19, LOTS 1-28
BLOCK 20, LOTS 1-14
SCALE 1'' = 50'SEPTEMBER, 2021
TBPE NO. 12327911 SOUTHWEST PKWY E.
College Station, Texas 77840
(979) 764-3900
ENGINEER:SURVEYOR:
Nathan Paul Kerr, RPLS No. 6834
Kerr Surveying, LLC
409 N. Texas Ave.
Bryan, TX 77803
(979) 268-3195TBPELS FIRM # 10018500
OWNER/DEVELOPER:SOUTHERN POINTE, LLC.
1645 Greens Prairie Road West, Unit 204
College Station, TX 77845
(713) 705-4525
#P:\21-927 Southern Pointe Ph 103 & 119 - Documents\FINAL PLAT\Southern Pointe 103 & 119.dwg, Final PlatPage 19 of 35
Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, PO Box 9960 College Station, TX 77840
Office 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
MEMORANDUM
July 7, 2022
TO:Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM:Robin Macias
Staff Planner, Planning & Development Services
SUBJECT:UDO amendment regarding cluster developments
Item:
Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending
Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 5.2 “Residential Dimensional Standards”,
and Section 8.3.H.4 “Cluster Development” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College
Station, Texas, regarding cluster developments. Case# ORDA2022-000002. (Final action on this
item is scheduled for the July 28, 2022 City Council Meeting - subject to change).
Summary:
City Council requested that City staff make amendments to the cluster development
requirements to incentivize development of cluster subdivisions. At their August 12, 2021
workshop meeting, Council provided direction that density bonuses would be an appropriate
adjustment.
Staff spoke with several local single-family developers, specifically those that have utilized
College Station’s cluster regulations and those that have not to find what level of density bonus
would be considered an incentive and what may be existing in the ordinance that may hinder its
utilization. Comments from cluster developers were generally that 1) they utilized the cluster
subdivision option because it worked for their business models, 2) that it was good to use when
trying to preserve a natural area and work around geographical challenges, and 3) any incentive
to increase the developability of property would be welcomed. Comments from developers that
have not created cluster subdivisions were that the ordinance was not utilized generally
because 1) there is no economic incentive to develop a cluster subdivision as it would be taking
land from the development and making it non-revenue, 2) it did not fall within their business
models, and 3) that incentives would not create a desire to change the product they offered.
Staff researched the cluster regulations of other Texas communities and spoke to their staff
members about the utilization of their ordinances. Many of the Texas cities researched did not
allow for an increase in density from the underlying zoning district and required a large amount
Page 20 of 35
of open space. Staff researched developments within the City of College Station that have
utilized the clustering option and those that have not and determined that the current density
requirements are not being met with either option. By removing lot size minimums, developers
could be given a better opportunity to achieve the current density maximums. This in a way
provides a density bonus for developing a cluster subdivision because they can yield more lots
per acre of usable land. Removing the minimum lot size for properties within the GS General
Suburban zoning district for cluster developments will allow the developer opportunity to create
lot sizes that fit their business model while also increasing the overall density closer to the
maximum allowed. In order to maintain the character of the Wellborn and Restricted Suburban
zoned areas, Staff chose to only remove the minimum lot size for properties zoned GS General
Suburban. To be more in line with other communities, staff has increased the minimum amount
of open space from 10% to 25% and required that the minimum open space area be 5,000 sq.
ft. to provide a more usable space.
In summary, this item proposes that properties zoned GS General Suburban will have no lot
size minimums to better achieve the maximum density for the zoning district. This item also
increases the minimum amount of open space required from 10% to 25% and requires that the
minimum open space area be 5,000 sq ft. for all zoning districts.
Supporting Materials:
1. Section 5.2 Residential Dimensional Standards redlines
2. Section 8.3.H.4 Cluster Development redlines
Page 21 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:17 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 1 of 4
Sec. 5.2. Residential Dimensional Standards.
The following table establishes dimensional standards that shall be applied within the Residential Zoning Districts,
unless otherwise identified in this UDO.
Click here to access a PDF version of the Residential Zoning Districts table.
Residential Zoning Districts
R WE E(N)(P)WRS RS(J)GS(J)(P)T D MHP MF MU
AccessoryStructuresNon-Clustered Residential Zoning Districts
Min.
Average Lot
Area per
Dwelling
Unit (DU)
3 acres
Average
2
acres
1 Acre 20,000
SF
10,000
SF
Average
5,000
SF
2,000
SF
3,500 SF None None
Absolute
Min. Lot
Area per
Dwelling
Unit (DU)
2 Acres 2
acres
1 Acre 20,000
SF
6,500
SF
5,000
SF
2,000
SF
3,500 SF None None
Min. Lot
Width
None 100
(M)
100'(M) 70' 70' 50' None 35'/DU(E) None None
Min. Lot
Depth
None None None None None 100' None 100' None None
Min. Front
Setback (H)
50' 30' 30' 25' 25' 25'(D) 25'(D) 25'(D) 15' None
Max. Front
Setback
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15'(O)
Min. Side
Setback
20' 10' 10' 7.5'
(Q)
7.5' (Q) 7.5' (Q) (A) 7.5'(C) (A)
(B)
None
Min. Side
Street
Setback
15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' None
Max. Side
Street
Setback
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15'(O)
Min. Side
Setback
between
Structures(B)
N/A 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 7.5' 15' 7.5' None
Min. Rear
Setback (L)
50' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20'(F) 20' 20'
Max.
Impervious
Cover(R)
30% 30% 30% 40% 50% 55% 75% 65% (S) (S)
Max. Height 35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K)(L) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K)(L) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) >(L) (G) (L) (G) (L) Refer to
Section
6.5,
Accessory
Uses(L)
Page 22 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:17 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 2 of 4
Minimum
Number of
Stories
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2
Stories
Max.
Dwelling
Units/Acre
(Subdivision
Gross)
0.33 0.5 1.0 2.0 4.00 8.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 30.0 N/A
Min.
Dwelling
Units/Acre
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A
N/A
R WE E(N)(P)WRS RS(J)GS(J)(P)T D MHP MF MU
AccessoryStructuresClustered Residential Zoning Districts
Min.
Average Lot
Area per
Dwelling
Unit (DU)
1
Acre
20,000
SF
Average
8,000
SF
8,000
SF
Average
3,750
SF (P)
None
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Absolute
Min. Lot
Area per
Dwelling
Unit (DU)
1
Acre
10,000
SF
8,000
SF
6,500
SF
3,750
SF
None
Min. Lot
Width
100'
(M)
100'(M) None None None
Min. Lot
Depth
None None None None None
Min. Front
Setback (H)
Min. Side
Setback
Min. Street
Side Setback
Min. Side
Setback
between
Structures(B)
Min. Rear
Setback (L)
Refer to Section 8.3.H.4, Cluster Development,
Specific District Standards
Max.
Impervious
Cover(R)
30% 30% 40% 50% 55%
Max. Height 35'(G)
(K)
35'(G)
(K)
35'(G)
(K)
35'(G)
(K)
2.5
Stories/
35'(G)
(K)(L)
Max.
Dwelling
Units/Acre
(Subdivision
Gross)
N/A
0.5 1.0 2.0 4.00 8.0
Page 23 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:17 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 3 of 4
Notes:
(A) A minimum side setback of seven and one-half (7.5) feet is required for each building or group of
contiguous buildings.
(B) Lot line construction on interior lots with no side yard or setback is allowed only where the building is
covered by fire protection on the site or by dedicated right-of-way or easement.
(C) Zero lot line construction of a residence is allowed where property on both sides of a lot line is owned
and/or developed simultaneously by single party. Development under lot line construction requires
prior approval by the Zoning Official. In no case shall a single-family residence or duplex be built within
fifteen (15) feet of another primary structure. See Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements, for
more information.
(D) Minimum front setback may be reduced to fifteen (15) feet when approved rear access is provided, or
when side yard or rear yard parking is provided.
(E) The minimum lot width for a duplex dwelling may be reduced to thirty (30) feet per dwelling unit when
all required off-street parking is provided in the rear or side yard.
(F) Minimum rear setback may be reduced to fifteen (15) feet when parking is provided in the front yard
or side yard.
(G) Shall abide by Section 7.2 H., Height.
(H) Reference Section 7.2 D.1.e for lots created by plat prior to July 15, 1970 and designated as
Neighborhood Conservation in the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map.
(I) Reference Section 7.2 D.1.b for lots with approved rear access.
(J) For areas within a Single-Family Overlay District, reference the Neighborhood Prevailing Standards
Overlay Districts Section in Article 5 or the Ordinance authorizing the rezoning for Neighborhood
Conservation Overlay Districts.
(K) Public, civic, and institutional structures shall have a maximum building height of fifty (50) feet in these
districts.
(L) Reference Easterwood Field Airport Zoning Ordinance regarding height limitations.
(M) In subdivisions built to rural street standards, lots shall be a minimum of one hundred (100) feet in
width. There is no minimum lot width in cluster subdivisions built to urban street standards.
(N) Estate lots that are part of a subdivision existing on or before September 12, 2013 are not permitted to
use Cluster Development Standards without rezoning approval, which incorporates the entire
subdivision.
(O) For MU zoned properties, maximum side street and front setbacks may be measured from the edge of
a public easement when it is in excess of the maximum setback. Maximum setbacks may be increased
to up to eighty-five (85) feet to accommodate a parking lot between the structure and the street.
Maximum setback requirements may be fulfilled through the use of plazas, outdoor dining, and bicycle
parking.
(P) Reference Section 8.3 H.4.e when using the cluster option in the Wellborn Community Plan area.
(Q) Minimum side setback may be reduced to five (5) feet where property on both sides of a lot line is
owned and/or developed simultaneously by a single party. Development under reduced side setbacks
requires prior approval by the Zoning Official, and must be established by plat. In no case shall a single-
family residence be built within fifteen (15) feet of another primary structure. When reduced side
Page 24 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:17 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 4 of 4
setbacks are approved, sills, belt courses, cornices, buttresses, chimneys, flues, eaves, and other
architectural features are prohibited from extending into the required side yard setback
(R) Maximum impervious cover is to be defined by the applicable zoning district designation unless
otherwise mitigated by an on-site or regional drainage facility and associated drainage study as
approved by the City Engineer or his/her designee.
Work being performed by the homeowner and/or resident that does not require a building permit,
that is less than 120 square feet, and that does not cause the lot to exceed the applicable maximum
impervious cover, does not require an Impervious Coverage Permit.
(S) Maximum impervious cover for MF and MU zoning districts shall be determined by an engineered
drainage analysis performed in conjunction with the BCS Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines and as
approved by the City Engineer or his/her designee.
(Ord. No. 2012-3449 , Pt. 1(Exh. M), 9-27-2012; Ord. No. 2012-3458 , Pt. 1(Exh. A), 11-8-2012; Ord. No. 2013-3471 ,
Pt. 1(Exh. B), 1-10-2013; Ord. No. 2013-3521 , Pt. 1(Exh. E), 9-12-2013; Ord. No. 2014-3624 , Pt. 1(Exh. D), 12-18-
2014; Ord. No. 2016-3792 , Pt. 1(Exh. C), 7-28-2016; Ord. No. 1(Exh. A), 8-23-2018; Ord. No. 2020-4150 , Pt. 1(Exh.
A), 1-23-2020; Ord. No. 2020-4162 , § 1(Exh. A), 3-9-2020)
Page 25 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:20 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 1 of 4
Sec. 8.3. General Requirements and Minimum Standards of Design for Subdivisions within the
City Limits.
H.Lots.
4.Cluster Development.
a.General Purpose.
A cluster development is intended to provide open space, preserve unique environmental
features, or protect the character of rural areas. It is a residential subdivision in which the lots
are allowed to be smaller (in area and width) than otherwise required for the underlying, base
zoning district, but in which the overall density of all the lots collectively do not exceed the
maximum density limit for the underlying zoning district. Through the cluster development
option, a subdivision can contain no more lots than would otherwise be allowed for a
conventional subdivision in the zoning district, though the individual lots within the development
can be smaller than required in a conventional subdivision. The average lot size in a cluster
development must be less than the minimum lot size of the base zoning district. Smaller lot sizes
within a cluster development are required to be offset by the provision of open space as set forth
below.
b.Conflict with Other Regulations.
If there is a conflict between the cluster development standards of this Section and any other
requirement of this UDO, the standards of this Section control. Where no conflict exists, a cluster
development is subject to all other applicable requirements of this UDO.
c.Where Allowed.
Cluster developments are allowed in residential WE Wellborn Estate, E Estate, RS Restricted
Suburban, WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban, and GS General Suburban zoning districts.
d.Approval Procedure.
Cluster Developments are subject to the subdivision procedures set forth in this UDO. A note
shall be provided on the plat that states the subdivision is a cluster development with additional
descriptions as necessary.
e.Specific District Standards.
1.Wellborn Estate -
a.Lot Size. The minimum lot size is one (1) acre as long as individual lot sizes are
adequate to meet all other required density, district, and development
standards. There is no set minimum lot width or depth requirement within a
cluster development, except as noted below. Subdivisions with all lots over one
acre and lot widths of one hundred (100) feet may use rural character roads.
b.Setbacks and Building Separations. The minimum setback standards of the
base zoning district apply along the perimeter of a cluster development. All
detached structures within a cluster development must be separated by a
minimum distance of ten (10) feet.
2.Estate -
a.Lot Size. The minimum average lot size is twenty thousand (20,000) square feet
with an absolute minimum lot size of ten thousand (10,000) square feet as long
Page 26 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:20 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 2 of 4
as individual lot sizes are adequate to meet all other required density, district,
and development standards. There is no set minimum lot width or depth
requirement within a cluster development, except as noted below. Subdivisions
with all lots over twenty thousand (20,000) square feet and lot widths of one
hundred (100) feet may use rural character roads. Subdivisions containing any
lots below twenty thousand (20,000) square feet must use urban street
standards.
b.Setbacks and Building Separations. The minimum setback standards of the
base zoning district apply along the perimeter of a cluster development. All
detached structures within a cluster development must be separated by a
minimum distance of ten (10) feet.
c. In the Wellborn Community Plan area, the cluster option may be used only in
the area designated Wellborn Preserve-Open on the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use and Character Map.
3.Wellborn Restricted Suburban
a.Lot Size. The minimum average lot size is eight thousand (8,000) square feet as
long as individual lot sizes are adequate to meet all other required density,
district, and development standards. There is no set minimum lot width or
depth requirement within a cluster development.
b.Setbacks and Building Separations. The minimum setback standards of the
base zoning district apply along the perimeter of a cluster development. All
detached structures within a cluster development must be separated by a
minimum distance of ten (10) feet.
4.Restricted Suburban -
a.Lot Size. The minimum average lot size is eight thousand (8,000) square feet
with an absolute minimum lot size of six thousand five hundred (6,500) square
feet as long as individual lot sizes are adequate to meet all other required
density, district, and development standards. There is no set minimum lot
width or depth requirement within a cluster development.
b.Setbacks and Building Separations. The minimum setback standards of the
base zoning district apply along the perimeter of a cluster development. All
detached structures within a cluster development must be separated by a
minimum distance of ten (10) feet.
5.General Suburban -
a.Lot Size. The minimum lot size is three thousand seven hundred fifty (3,750)
square feet There is no minimum lot size as long as individual lot sizes are
adequate to meet all other required density, district, and development
standards. There is no set minimum lot width or depth requirement within a
cluster development.
b.Setbacks and Building Separations.
The minimum setback standards of the base zoning district apply along the
perimeter of a cluster development. All detached structures within a cluster
development must be separated by a minimum distance of ten (10) feet.
Page 27 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:20 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 3 of 4
c. In the Wellborn Community Plan area as designated on the Comprehensive
Plan Future Land Use and Character Map, the cluster option is not permitted.
f.Open Space.
1.Description of Open Space.
Any parcel or parcels of land or an area of water, or a combination of land and water within
a development site provided and made legally available for the use and enjoyment of all
residents of a proposed project. Open space may include amenities such as private outdoor
recreation facilities, natural areas, trails, agricultural lands, or stormwater management
facilities designed as a neighborhood amenity. Areas encumbered by right-of-way,
easements, or utilized as parking may not be counted towards the Open space
requirements. Open spaces must be privately owned and maintained by a Home Owners
Association (HOA).
Common open space must be set aside and designated as an area where no development
will occur, other than project-related recreational amenities or passive open space areas.
The Commission may require that up to fifty (50) percent of required common open space
be useable recreational space, if deemed necessary by the Commission to ensure adequate
recreational amenities for residents of the development.
2.Common Open Space Required for Cluster Developments.
a.Minimum Requirement.
1. Common open space is required within a cluster development to ensure
that the overall density within the development does not exceed the
maximum density allowed by the underlying zoning district.
2. Common open space must be provided in an amount of at least ten (10)
twenty-five (25) percent of the gross area of the development., or fifteen
(15) percent of the gross area if the development is located in a Growth
Area.
3. All proposed lots shall have direct access to the common open space, via
access easement, sidewalk, or street. Common open space may be
located at the rear of lots only when the space is designed for active
recreation or a design concept is submitted to staff for approval.
Examples of active recreation areas may include amenities such as sports
fields, hike or bike trails, parks, amenity centers, and golf courses.
4. All open space areas shall be part of a larger continuous and integrated
open space system within the parcel being developed. The required
common open space must be arranged to provide at least thirty (30)
percent of the space in at least one (1) contiguous area. The minimum
dimensions of such space must be at least twenty-five (25) feet in depth
and width. twenty-five (25) feet by twenty-five (25) feet. The remaining
required common usable open space may be distributed throughout the
building site proposed subdivision, or subdivision phase if applicable, and
need not be in one (1) such area; provided, however, no area containing
less than one five thousand (1,000) (5,000) square feet will be considered
common usable open space. If the required open space totals less than
ten thousand (10,000) square feet all required open space shall be in one
(1) contiguous area.
Page 28 of 35
Created: 2022-05-24 10:30:20 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6, Update 5)
Page 4 of 4
5. The minimum common open space area must be at least equal to the
difference between:
a. The actual, average lot area per dwelling unit within the cluster
development; and
b. The required lot area per dwelling unit for conventional
development within the underlying base zoning district.
5. The common open space requirement shall not be credited toward the
parkland dedication requirements specified in the City subdivision
ordinance.
Per Ordinance No. 2011-3308 (January 13, 2011)
(Ord. No. 2012-3435 , Pt. 1(Exh. A), 8-9-2012; Ord. No. 2012-3449 , Pt. 1(Exh. K), 9-27-2012; Ord. No. 2012-3458 ,
Pt. 1(Exh. C), 11-8-2012; Ord. No. 2013-3518 , Pt 1(Exh. A), 9-12-2013; Ord. No. 2013-3521 , Pt. 1(Exh. M), 9-12-
2013; Ord. No. 2013-3522 , Pt. 1(Exh. E), 9-12-2013; Ord. No. 2016-3792 , Pt. 1(Exh. F), 7-28-2016; Ord. No. 2015-
3699 , Pt. 1(Exh. A), 9-21-2015; Ord. No. 2017-3886 , Pt. 1(Exh. A), 5-11-2017; Ord. No. 2017-3930 , Pt. 1(Exh. A), 9-
11-2017; Ord. No. 2018-4034 , Pt. 1(Exh. A), 8-23-2018; Ord. No. 2019-4078 , Pt. 1(Exh. A), 3-14-2019; Ord. No.
2019-4086 , Pt. 1(Exh. A, Exh. B, Exh. C), 3-28-2019; Ord. No. 2020-4161 , § 1(Exh. E), 3-9-2020; Ord. No. 2020-
4187, Pt. 1(Exh. A), 6-11-2020 )
Page 29 of 35
July 7, 2022
Item No. 5.2.
Plan of Work
Sponsor:Michael Ostrowski, Director of Planning and Development
Reviewed By CBC:N/A
Agenda Caption:Presentation, discussion, and possible action on the Plan of Work.
Relationship to Strategic Goals:
Good Governance
Financial Sustainability
Core Services & Infrastructure
Neighborhood Integrity
DIverse & Growing Economy
Improving Mobility
Sustainable City
Recommendation(s): Review the proposed Plan of Work and provide a recommendation.
Summary: Historically, the Planning and Zoning Commission has adopted a plan of work relating to initiatives that they want to work on for the upcoming year. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Commission did not adopt a plan of work for 2020. For 2021, staff presented a list of initiatives that
staff was or would be working on during the year and the Commission provided comments and direction on those initiatives.
While the Planning and Zoning Commission has historically adopted a standalone plan of work, staff would recommend a common plan of work, similar to what was done last year. By creating a
common plan of work amongst staff and the Commission, it creates a more effective use of staff resources, as the plan of work identifies all of the major initiatives that staff would be working on during the year. Furthermore, staff would recommend that the plan of work coincide with the fiscal year for the City to better align with resources.
Enclosed in the packet is a listing of the current initiatives that the department recently completed, is currently working on, or plans to work on this upcoming year. The document is organized by
Title: Name of the initiative
Summary: A high level summary of what the initiative entails
Priority: The priority level of the initiative
Status: The current status of the initiative
Plan of Work Year: The year that the initiative is anticipated to be in progress. This could include being as part of the plan of work setting for the particular year, or being added as an additional project throughout the year.
Anticipated Completion Date: When staff anticipates the initiative to be completed.
Completion Date: When the initiative was completed.
Page 30 of 35
Update: An update on the initiative since the last discussion. New initiatives will not have an
update.
Origin: Where the initiative originated from.
During the meeting, staff will give an overview of each of the initiatives to get the Commission's
feedback and direction on them. The Commission will also have the opportunity to request additional initiatives as well.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1.Plan of Work - FY2023
Page 31 of 35
TitleSummaryPriority Status Plan of Work YearAnticipated Completion Date Completion Date UpdateOriginBike Lane and Improvements AnalysisAnalyze roadways to determine prime candidates for the addition of bike lanes and/or improvements such as separated bike lanes. Normal Delayed FY2022;FY20239/30/2023This item has not been started, and will be moved to a FY2023 item. Staff;Comprehensive PlanBryan / College Station Unified Design Guidelines UpdateThese guidelines serve as a technical resource for the design and construction of activities in the rights‐of‐way or easements. This project involves updates to various portions of the guidelines.NormalIn‐Progress FY2022;FY20239/30/2023Based on response from initial proposed revisions, the project was divided into 3 phases. Phase 1 was approved and implemented in early 2021. Phase 2 should be wrapping up in Q4 of FY22. Phase 3 will begin shortly thereafter. StaffCensus 2020 Follow UpMonitor Census 2020 data releases from the US Census Bureau. Once data is available, update population figures and projections, identify data trends and conduct analysis.NormalDelayed FY2022;FY202312/31/2023The U.S. Census Bureau recently delayed the next releases of 2020 Census data products. The data releases are significantly later than the releases from the 2010 Census due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The Demographic Profile and Demographic and Housing Characteristics (DHC) data will be released by May 31, 2023. The Detailed Demographic and Housing Characteristics File (Detailed DHC) will be released in three installments beginning in August 2023. Following the data releases in 2023, staff will begin data analysis and will compile a demographics report. StaffCluster Subdivision Ordinance AmendmentCity Council directed staff to amend the cluster subdivision ordinance to encourage its use in subdivision design.NormalIn‐Progress FY2022 ‐ Additional 8/31/2022Staff presented at a City Council workshop where the City Council gave direction to staff to look at coming up with amendments or incentives to encourage the increased use of the cluster subdivision option. Staff has been working on ordinance amendments and anticipates to present those amendments shortly.City Council;Comprehensive PlanComprehensive Plan UpdateFinalize the Comprehensive Plan update and associated maps (Future Land Use & Character Map, Thoroughfare Plan, etc.), host public engagement efforts, and take forward the plan update for possible adoption.Critical Completed FY202210/14/2021The updated Comprehensive Plan was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission on 9/16/21 and was approved by the City Council on 10/14/21. The update included changes to text, graphics, and maps ‐ including the Future Land Use & Character Map and Thoroughfare Plan ‐ along with associated map updates within the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan, the Water System Master Plan, and the Wastewater System Master Plan. Staff are now implementing the updated plan.Staff;Comprehensive PlanCreation of Middle Housing Zoning DistrictAdopt an ordinance to create a "middle housing" zoning district, following the Comprehensive Plan update, to implement the new Mixed Residential land use category.Normal In‐Progress FY2022;FY202312/31/2022Staff are currently in the research phase. Next steps will include focus group meetings with the development community, neighborhoods, and a Workshop item with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council (anticipated in August 2022).Staff;Comprehensive PlanDemonstration Project for Revitalization in Residential AreasCity Council directed staff to develop a demonstration project for revitalizing residential areas by creating home ownership opportunities for individuals of low to moderate income.NormalCompleted FY2022 ‐ Additional5/26/2022Staff from both Planning and Development Services and Community Services developed three program proposals and presented them to the City Council at their 5/26/22 meeting. Council provided direction to move forward with other initiatives aimed at revitalization and affordable housing.City CouncilPage 1 of 4Page 32 of 35
TitleSummaryPriority Status Plan of Work YearAnticipated Completion Date Completion Date UpdateOriginDockless Bikeshare Ordinance AmendmentThe City Council adopted an ordinance in 2018 to regulate and permit bike share operators in the city in response to Texas A&M University’s introduction of a bike share program. The ordinance currently excludes scooters and other electric modes of transportation but since that time, electric modes have been introduced. Staff received direction in October 2021 to make several amendments to the ordinance, including renaming the ordinance to Shared Micromobility; allowing electric micromobility devices (bicycles and scooters); including an abandonment fee if an operator leaves without taking their devices; further defining the geofence zones; and requiring ‘lock‐to’ parking, rebalancing, parking hubs, cycle liability insurance, and a 15‐mph speed limit.NormalCompleted FY2022 ‐ Additional6/9/2022The ordinance amendment was approved by the City Council on June 9, 2022.City CouncilEvaluation of Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) RegulationsContinue the review of UDO requirements that add minimal value as identified by staff and consider opportunities to reduce regulations and streamline processes.NormalCompleted FY20223/3/2022Numerous amendments were identified. Priority is being given to housekeeping amendments, amendments that provide clarity to existing regulation, those that need updating to align with current state statues and building materials, and those directed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Planning and Zoning CommissionImpact Fee 5‐Year UpdateLocal Government Code Chapter 395 requires impact fees be updated every 5 years, or sooner if major changes occur in the Land Use Assumptions or Capital Improvement Plans that were adopted as part of the original study.CriticalCompleted FY202211/22/2021Water, wastewater and roadway impact fees were adopted at maximum assessable rates with collection rates being increased from existing rates by 10% for residential permits. Non‐residential collections rates remained the same. StaffImplement Complete Street and Context Sensitive DesignAmend the street cross sections and update the Unified Development Ordinance, the Bryan‐College Station Unified Design Guidelines, and the City’s capital improvement process to implement context sensitive and complete streetdesign such as prioritized mode corridors, reconstruction projects in established neighborhoods, and in areas where right‐of‐way is constrained.NormalNew Project FY20239/30/2023Comprehensive PlanInter Local Agreement with Grimes CountyExecute an inter local agreement with Grimes County to determine platting authority in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) of the county.NormalIn‐Progress FY2022 ‐ Additional 9/30/2022The City Council provided direction to maintain platting authority in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) of Grimes County. Staff will work with Grimes County to bring back an agreement reflecting that direction.StaffLand Use and Fiscal AnalysisPrepare a land use and fiscal analysis based on the Comprehensive Plan to determine the needed amount of specific land uses and whether that amount matches the Future Land Use & Character Map. From there, conduct a fiscal analysis based on the amount of land uses, and the cost to serve those land uses compared to the anticipated revenue generated from them.ImportantNew Project FY20239/30/2023City Council;Comprehensive PlanLot‐by‐Lot Grading RequirementsDetermine whether the City should require a grading plan for individual lot developments.Normal In‐Progress FY2022;FY20233/31/2023This item will be scheduled for a future City Council workshop to determine direction.Planning and Zoning Commission;City CouncilMixed‐Use Zoning District Ordinance AmendmentRevise the Mixed‐Use zoning district, following the Comprehensive Plan update, to implement the new Neighborhood Center land use category.NormalIn‐Progress FY202211/10/2022Staff are currently in the research phase. Next steps include bringing an ordinance amendment forward for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.Staff;Comprehensive PlanNeighborhood Plan AuditAudit the neighborhood plans that are beyond their planning horizon to identify actions that were implemented and those that were not.ImportantIn‐Progress FY20229/30/2022This project is nearing the end of the data collection process. Staff will then create a report and present the findings to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.Staff;Comprehensive PlanPage 2 of 4Page 33 of 35
TitleSummaryPriority Status Plan of Work YearAnticipated Completion Date Completion Date UpdateOriginOff‐Street Parking Ordinance AmendmentExplore the option of reducing or eliminating off‐street parking requirements for certain uses and/or areas.Important In‐Progress FY2022;FY20233/31/2023Staff are currently reviewing data and options for the reduction of minimum off‐street parking requirements. A workshop presentation was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission on 5/19/22 and the City Council on 6/9/22, where each body provided direction.Planning and Zoning Commission;Staff;Comprehensive PlanOptions to Preserve Integrity of NeighborhoodsIdentify and analyze options that are intended to preserve the integrity of neighborhoods.ImportantIn‐Progress FY2022;FY202312/31/2022Staff presented options to the City Council in April 2022, where direction was given. Staff is in the process of doing further analysis on some of those options and will present those to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council when complete.City CouncilParkland Dedication Ordinance AmendmentAmend the Parkland Dedication Ordinance based on recommendations from the 2019 audit, along with amendments relating to zones, appeals, credits, and fees.ImportantCompleted FY20226/23/2022This ordinance amendment reduced the number of park zones, created an appeals process, added a private park credit, and modified the dedication and fee section and amounts. City Council approved the ordinance amendment at their 6/23/2022 meeting, while phasing in the dedication and fee amounts over three years. City Council;StaffPresentation ‐ Economic Development UpdatesPresent on current economic development initiatives and projects. Normal In‐Progress FY20227/31/2022Economic Development staff will provide a presentation on economic development updates in July.StaffPresentation ‐ Impact Fee Semi‐Annual ReportingProvide a semi‐annual update on impact fees, to include impact fee collections and planned projects.Normal Completed FY20225/26/2022The semi‐annual reports were acknowledged and placed on file in November 2021 and May 2022.StaffPresentation ‐ Legislative UpdatesPresent on legislative updates that affect planning and development.Normal Completed FY20225/6/2022The Legislature of the State of Texas operates under a biennial system. The Legislature convenes its regular sessions in January of odd‐numbered years. Therefore, there are no updates at this time.StaffPresentation ‐ Planning and Zoning Commissioner Responsibility and Process QuestionsAllow Commissioners the ability to ask questions about responsibilities and processes.Normal Completed FY20221/26/2022The roles and responsibilities item was presented to members of the Planning and Zoning Commission at the Planning and Zoning Orientation.StaffPresentation ‐ Platting ProcessPresent on the current platting requirements.Normal Completed FY20221/26/2022The platting process was presented to members of the Planning and Zoning Commission at the orientation.StaffPublic Notification RequirementsIdentify all Local Government Code notification requirements for actions impacting Planning and Development Services. Compare how the required notification requirements differ from current City requirements and whether changes are needed.Important Completed FY202211/22/2021Council directed staff to update the notification requirements for Comprehensive Plan Amendments. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission on 11/4/21 and approved by City Council on 11/22/21. Changes include requiring a Project Proposal Meeting for nearby property owners for all amendments to the Future Land Use & Character Map, along with the City mailing notifications to all properties within a 200‐foot boundary of the subject property.City Council;StaffReduction in Sidewalk ZonesDetermine if the existing number and location of sidewalk zones are appropriate.Normal In‐Progress FY20229/30/2022Staff are currently evaluating changes to current ordinance. This amendment will go to the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board, Planning and Zoning Commission, and City Council. It is anticipated that the sidewalk zones will match the updated park zones.StaffSign Ordinance AmendmentReview and update the City’s sign ordinance in light of the recent Supreme Court decisions regarding sign regulations based upon content and off‐premise.Important Delayed FY2022;FY202312/31/2022The Supreme Court ruling was delivered early, supporting the ability to differentiate between commercial and non‐commercial signage. Template sign ordinances will soon be released by professional organizations. Staff are waiting to review these ordinances before proceeding with amending the Unified Development Ordinance.StaffSingle‐Family Landscaping RequirementsExplore requiring new single‐family homes to plant a landscape buffer along property lines shared with existing single‐family homes in older neighborhoods.NormalCompleted FY20224/14/2022This item will be discussed and considered in combination with the options to preserve neighborhood character. Specifically, looking at options for landscape buffers between single‐family uses and other uses such as detached shared housing.City CouncilPage 3 of 4Page 34 of 35
TitleSummaryPriority Status Plan of Work YearAnticipated Completion Date Completion Date UpdateOriginSmall Area Plan ‐ University and TexasFrom the 10‐Year Update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, this project is to create a small area / redevelopment plan for the general area surrounding University Drive / Texas Avenue. Important Delayed FY2022;FY20239/30/2023This project was delayed for the first two quarters of FY22 while determining if the timing was ripe for a small area planning effort in another area of the City. The decision has been made to focus the small area planning efforts on the University Drive and Texas Avenue intersection area, including the former City Hall property. A request for proposals (RFP) for consulting services will be issued in Q4 of FY22.Comprehensive PlanSustainable Landscaping / YardsAnalyze and make modifications to landscaping requirements within City ordinances to ensure that sustainable practices are allowed and encouraged.Normal New Project FY20239/30/2023Comprehensive PlanThoroughfare Plan UpdateUpdate the City's Thoroughfare Plan based on new land use assumptions and modeling.Critical Completed FY202210/14/2021The updated Comprehensive Plan was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission on 9/16/21 and was approved by the City Council on 10/14/21. The update included changes to text, graphics, and maps ‐ including the Future Land Use & Character Map and Thoroughfare Plan ‐ along with associated map updates within the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan, the Water System Master Plan, and the Wastewater System Master Plan. Staff are now implementing the updated plan.Comprehensive PlanTraffic Congestion PlanIdentify current congestion levels in the community and establish key benchmarks. Then, identify actions that can help the City achieve the key benchmarks.Important In‐Progress FY2022;FY20239/30/2023Creation of plan includes a consultant to analyze congestion data and trends. A service level adjustment (SLA) has been submitted for additional professional services funds for the FY23 budget.City CouncilUrban Heat Island Mitigation PlanDevelop a five‐year planting plan to mitigate some of the effects of the urban heat island.Important In‐ProgressFY2022 ‐ Additional;FY20239/30/2023Staff developed an initial five year planting plan on both City controlled properites as well as a residential program. This plan was presented to the City Council on 4/14/22. City Council directed staff to determine what resources would be needed to increase the scope of the plan by two to three times.City Council;Comprehensive PlanWellborn Community Plan UpdateThe Wellborn Community Plan was adopted by City Council on April 25, 2013. The planning area is located in the southwestern portion of the City and includes much of the remaining historic Wellborn Community. Since 2013, several changes have occurred, as well as market conditions. Upon the completion of the Neighborhood Plan Audit project, staff will update this plan.ImportantNew Project FY20239/30/2023City Council;StaffPage 4 of 4Page 35 of 35