Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_P&Z_03.07.2000Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Tuesday, March 7, 2000 Chair, Patrick Walsh, called the March 7, 2000, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at 6:02 p.m., and explained the meeting process. Other Commissioners present were Charles Parker, Gabe Sansing, Sarah Milburn, Jack Noble, Marjorie Herbert and Don Nadon. Staff members present were Ed Barry, Director, Donna Stump, Legal Counsel, Clyde von Rosenberg, Chief Long Range Planner, Scott Ingalls, Chief Development Planner, David Munk, Development Engineer, Wendy Walsh, Development Planner, Tom Bolt, Development Planner, Carla Benton, Development Technician, Jim Babcock, Development Technician, and Janis Russell, Recording Secretary. 1. Action from Executive Session Consent Agenda 2. Consideration and possible action on the Minutes of the February 1, 2000, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. 3. Variance to the Subdivision Regulations for Riverview Estates, Block A, Lot 6, located at 100 Oakmont Court. Agenda Item #4 was pulled from the Consent Agenda to be considered individually by the Commission. Gabe Sansing made a motion to approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda. Charles Parker seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0. Regular Agenda 4. Third Revised Concept Plan of 1029.12 acres in the Joseph Fish, Mary Ann Lewis, Leroy Lord and William Roberts Surveys, known as Georgetown Village Planned Unit Development, located 1.5 mile east of Williams Drive on Shell Road. Wendy Walsh gave the staff report and recommendation. Patrick Walsh and Marjorie Herbert asked questions regarding the PUD and plat approval process. Ed Barry responded that this request would enable the applicant to ask for Variances to the Subdivision Regulations for collector streets only, such as right-of-way width, pavement cross section and radii curvature. Jim Mills, developer, addressed the Commission and responded to questions. After the discussion, Charles Parker made a motion to approve a Third Revised Concept Plan of Georgetown Village Planned Unit Development, to remove the PUD standard which requires that collector streets are built to the design standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, with the appropriateness of variances to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis at the subdivision plat stage. Sarah Milburn seconded the motion. Don Nadon asked about the comments from surrounding property owners in the packet. Ed Barry clarified that the comments from surrounding property owners in packet were sent in, but most have to do with Agenda Item 7. The motion passed by a vote of 7-0. 5. Presentation and discussion on the Century Plan Development Plan Element and the City of Georgetown Traffic Impact Analysis. Clyde von Rosenberg gave a presentation to the Commission regarding the Century Plan and the Traffic Impact Analysis currently underway and P&Z Meeting March 7, 2000 Page 2 explained that the traffic study is not for a specific development, but for the City as a whole. 6a. Consideration and possible action on a Century Plan Amendment of River Hills, Section 4 and The Rivery, Lots 1, 2 and 3, from Intensity Levels 3, 4 5 and 6 to Intensity Level 5, to be known as The Rivery, Phase 1, located on IH35 and Rivery Boulevard. Consideration and possible action on a Rezoning of River Hills, Section 4, from RM-3, Residential-Office and Service District to C-1, Local Commercial; and a 43.99 acre portion of The Rivery, Lot 1, from C-2A, Commercial First Height Restricted, to C-2A, Commercial First Height, removing the prohibition against residential use, or any more restrictive district. Consideration and possible action on a Concept Plan of Rivery Subdivision, Lot 1 and River Hills, Section 4, to be known as The Rivery, Phase 1, located on IH35 and Rivery Boulevard. Scott Ingalls gave the staff report and recommendation. Sarah Milburn asked if there were changes in the application since last month. Scott Ingalls responded that the applicant has met with property owners and applicant is prepared to offer additional im provements to be addressed at the plat and DDP stages such as buffering, landscaping, berming and privacy fencing. Don Nadon asked about the connectivity to the River Hills subdivision. Scott Ingalls stated that staff is going forward with requiring the connectivity per City Council policy. Sarah Milburn restated that she does not see why this was being applied in this case. Ms. Milburn asked for clarification regarding the intensity level run that Scott Ingalls handed out. Mr. Ingalls explained the exhibit. Charles Parker asked how an overall Intensity Level 5 would reduce the demand. Scott Ingalls explained that by eliminating Intensity Level 6, it would reduce the demand overall. Sarah Milburn asked if studies had been done to show that Rivery Boulevar d can handle traffic from Williams Drive and 1,311 apartments units proposed for The Rivery and Rivery Park. Ed Barry responded that what the developer is proposing to do, and the upgrade and construction of Rivery Boulevard and construction of the bridge which the City is participating in, will meet the demand for the Rivery project. There will be City-wide improvements that will have to be made, because of growth, that are not attributable to this development. He stated that the City is working closely with TXDoT because IH35, Williams Drive, Leander Road, Austin Avenue and FM971, are all State roadways and while the City can assist them and try to work with them to provide funding, TXDoT makes the decisions. The City is working with TXDoT now to provide a free loop or turn-around from the north bound to the south bound lanes which should provide significant relief for that part of town. However, because Williams Drive has been chosen to be the main traffic arterial, this has put more pressure on Williams Drive. Patrick Walsh clarified that the City Council has a policy that new development that abuts existing developments, will connect. The Commission can recommend differently, but the staff brings applications forward with City Council direction. Don Nadon asked if there is flexibility on when the road is opened to through-traffic. Scott Ingalls said that there is flexibility. Gabe Sansing stated again that transportation is his biggest concern. He asked what the City’s progress is toward connectivity to SH29 from Williams Drive. Ed Barry stated that very general, preliminary discussions have taken place, but the addition of the third lane on the frontage road and the Rivery Boulevard crossing should address the needs for the Rivery project. In terms of relief system-wide, the City is working in conjunction with the County to upgrade D.B. Wood Road, continue the Inner Loop and ultimately get it from Williams Drive, south to Leander Road on the west side of town. The County is optimistic that within the next 2 years we will be able to see significant progress. John Weber, the applicant, stated P&Z Meeting March 7, 2000 Page 3 that he has had two meetings with homeowners and agrees with homeowners on the connectivity issue. He stated that they discussed buffering, landscaping, berming, lighting levels and tree preservation with the property owners. The developer agrees that River Hills Drive has a limited level of sight at the “T” with IH35 and will work with TXDoT to alleviate this problem. He stated that they are in agreement with t he proposal to put in a third lane on the Interstate and agree that special studies need to be done on how that lane is striped, how it’s marked, as you leave the River Hills Subdivision. Patrick Walsh asked what’s different this month from last month. Mr. Weber stated that buffering, screening, berming and landscaping areas can be looked upon differently, the third lane on the frontage road, safety from the River Hills subdivision and connectivity agreement that construction traffic will not go through River Hills. Jimmy Redwine - 108 Hillview - handed out a radar survey done in 1999 and showed pictures of traffic on the frontage road leading to River Hills subdivision and asked the Commission to postpone action on this development until Rivery Boulevard and the bridge are under construction. Maura Crichton - 201 River Hills Drive - Read a memo from the River Hills residents who are opposed to project. Density is unsafe. Major factor is the impact the density will have on the traffic in Georgetown. A TIA should be done expressly for this site. Until Williams Dr. connects to SH29, no development with this density should be allowed. Dick Seemann - 211 River Hills Drive- Stated that the biggest problem is not being able to get any information from TXDoT. Discussed the proposed free “U” and asked how it would accommodate this new site’s traffic with the existing traffic. Richard Winter - 203 North Oak Hollow - Stated objection to placement of road shown on the Concept Plan and the buffering behind his lot. Showed excerpts from the Century Plan and what it showed for The Rivery when he first moved to Georgetown, stating that what is being planned now is dramatically more intensive. Recommended to defer or table this item. Mary Faith Sterk - 109 North Oak Hollow Road - Stated that she was appreciative of the meetings with developers but the main issue is what Georgetown will become in the next 3 -5 years and that the traffic needs to be addressed now, not later. Renee Hanson - 1252 Austin Avenue - Stated her concern for the prospect of creating another 1325. Pointed out that the approval of the Concept Plan constitutes acceptance of the type, density and intensity indicated on the plan. She stated that the traffic from the multi-family is going to be generated at the worst time of day. She also asked who is going to pay for the third lane on the frontage road. John Weber responded to the speakers, stating that they will attempt to get 150' of buffer area behind Mr. Winter’s home. Mike McInturff, traffic consultant for the project, addressed the traffic concerns, stating that the additional lane on the frontage road will be beneficial. He stated that the increase in trip generation will be gradual, as the project build out will take years an d will give time for road system improvements to be designed and constructed. He explained the benefits of a multi-use project and how it relates to traffic flow. Don Nadon asked Mr. McInturff his opinion of connectivity to the River Hills subdivision. He responded that the residents in River Hills will want to shop at the proposed development and connectivity would be beneficial for them and there will also be an opportunity for pedestrian connectivity. Gabe Sansing asked if there was ever an instance to ask TXDoT to change the on-ramp back to the way it was. Mr. McInturff stated that spacing is not enough between Williams Drive and SH29, to have three ramps and that the river restricts this also. Patrick Walsh asked about the third lane on the frontage road. Mr. McInturff stated that the developer will pay for the third lane on the frontage road along The Rivery frontage as well as the River Hills frontage, which will provide for P&Z Meeting March 7, 2000 Page 4 movement in and out of both subdivisions, and will make the ones currently being made much more safe, with less friction and conflict for new traffic that would be generated along the west side. He stated that the site distance improvement is a long term and more costly issue, but they will continue to work with TXDoT to identify those sorts of needs and see if they can correct those issues. Patrick Walsh asked how important the bridge and Rivery Boulevard are. Mike McInturff responded that they were important features as part of the ultimate network plan for the City and will help ease the Williams Drive intersection for those going to the Rivery. John Noell, of the Urban Design Group, addressed the Commission and stated that this plan reduces traffic intensity by what is approved there now by 30%. Based on what was approved in the original plan, plus River Hills, there would be an allowable allotment of 800 units: 400 in the Rivery and 400 in River Hills. The developer is proposing to move the residential units off the IH35 frontage road and put them to the back of the property. Locating residential units on Interstate frontage is a troublesome thing to do. He stated that the developer has proposed to extend his cooperation to the point of constructing improvements to the frontage road, not just in front of his property but extending it in front of the River Hills property, to improve safety. The City staff is working with TXDoT to improve the frontage road sight distance problems. John Weber closed with a statement on the timing of the project. The current projections are July 2002 for the opening for Phase I of the shopping center. First apartment development will be 325-350 units depending on market demand at that time. Over time the north/south connection to SH29 will happen. Gabe Sansing asked about changing the on and of f ramps of the Interstate again. Extensive discussion followed regarding possible arrangements of the on and off ramps on IH35. Patrick Walsh recessed the meeting at 8:20 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:34 p.m. Sarah Milburn stated that she was okay with the Century Plan Amendment. She stated that she did have a problem with the large number of multi-family units and the number of trips, but did like the proposed third lane on the frontage road. She stated that she can’t support the Concept Plan with connectivity to River Hills. Don Nadon - Stated that the sight distance problem is an existing one. He stated that he supports the proposal but is opposed to connectivity. Jack Noble -Problem with the overall intensity of the project. Marjorie Herbert - Concerned about infrastructure having to support the development including the traffic and roadway. Not convinced that this is a really good plan for this area. Charles Parker - Opposed to connectivity to River Hills. Stated that the developers are doing their best to work with the neighbors, City and TXDoT, but not sure if all questions were answered tonight. Gabe Sansing - Problem with the traffic, not the development. Polled the property owners about connectivity after development is built out. Patrick Walsh - Problem with timing of development. Century Plan Amendment seems to be okay. Rezoning would be fine if infrastructure was in place. He stated that connectivity is important and should be included in the Concept Plan. Sarah Milburn made a motion to approve the Century Plan Amendment from Intensity Levels 3, 4, 5 and 6 to Intensity Level 5 and the allocation of utility capacity for River Hills, Section 4 an d for the Rivery, Lots 1, 2 and 3. Don Nadon seconded the motion. Jack Noble stated that he will vote opposed until traffic studies are complete. Motion passed by a vote of 5-2 (Marjorie Herbert and Jack Noble opposed). P&Z Meeting March 7, 2000 Page 5 Sarah Milburn made a motion to approve the rezoning for River Hills, Section 4 from RM -3, Residential-Office Service District to C-1, Local Commercial; and a 43.99 acre portion of The Rivery, Lot 1 from C-2A, Commercial First Height Restricted to C-2A, Commercial First Height Unrestricted to allow multi-family residential and exclude all other residential uses and to be tied to this specific Concept Plan. Charles Parker seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 5-2. (Marjorie Herbert and Jack Noble voted opposed). Sarah Milburn made a motion to approve the concept plan for River Hills, Section 4 and Th e Rivery, Lot 1 to be known as The Rivery, Phase 1, provided the connecting street between the existing Hillview Drive and the proposed road, Hillview Drive, is deleted from the Concept Plan. Charles Parker seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 4-3. (Marjorie Herbert, Jack Noble and Gabe Sansing voted opposed). Sarah Milburn made a motion to move on to agenda item #7. Jack Noble seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0. 7. Rezoning from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned, or any more restrictive district for 20.188 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey, to be known as Georgetown Village Planned Unit Development, Section Three-B, located along Shell Road, Village Commons Boulevard, Greenside Lane and Hickory Lane. Public Review Final Plat of 20.188 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey, to be known as Georgetown Village Planned Unit Development, Section Three-B, located along Shell Road, Village Commons Boulevard, Greenside Lane and Hickory Lane, with Variances to the Subdivision Regulations. Wendy Walsh gave the staff report and recommendation. Patrick Walsh asked why reduce ROW from 60-56 feet. Wendy Walsh responded that it would match the existing section of Village Commons Boulevard and would be consistent with that and they are able to provide the utilities within that ROW to the City’s satisfaction. Sarah Milburn asked about reducing the front setback from 25 feet to 15 feet. She asked if the reason for that was that the garages were to the rear and the houses had alleys behind them. Wendy stated that that was one of the reasons and another reason was to provide the houses closer to the street. Sarah Milburn asked if the lots were the same size. Wendy Walsh stated that these lots were smaller than in other sections of the subdivision. Jim Mills, the developer, addressed the Commission. He stated that he had met with the residents of the subdivision and identified the major concerns of the property owners: lack of the alley system and proposed to put an alley system back in the subdivision, similar to subdivisions in the Dallas area, with 20' ROW and 10' paving section (amending the proposed plat) instead of 15' paving and 25' ROW, on a portion of the lots. Another concern of the residents is that there is less park land in this section than others. He stated that he thought that they were going to have more parks than required, as a whole. Under the park dedication requirements, they would be required to have .55 acres for the proposed 82 lots. The park shown is .22 acres and they have a bank of park land that they will draw on to meet the requirement. He also proposed to dedicate some land as green space or park land, which was originally part of the lot count. Patrick Walsh asked if the Commission can take action on the Public Review Final Plat with the proposed changes. Ed Barry responded that staff would need to review the proposed changes, and if there is a provision on the concept plan for the alley width, that would need to be chang ed as well. Mr. Mills stated that he is P&Z Meeting March 7, 2000 Page 6 willing to work with the staff on the proposed changes to the plat, including the reduced alley widths. The following people addressed the Commission: Mark Weibel - 205 Westbury Lane - There has been a constant erosion of what he purchased: the size of the pool, no sport court, approximately 3.3 acres in green space, for the 59 existing homes and this current plan has 82 homes and .50 acres. He stated that they are regressing from neighborhood concept. Kent James - 223 Westbury Lane - Residents pay an assessment of .20, in addition to the existing tax rate, to maintain alley-ways and pocket parks. The residents have concerns because of all the variances requested for this plat. He hopes that P&Z will work with the developer on the alley-ways, and asked the Commission to take a look at the park land on this plat. The banking concept of trading park land here for park land there, does not do anything for what he thought was the intent, which was to try to place green space and parkland close to residents. William Knodle - 110 Summers Green - Residents feel misled by what was proposed when they purchased their homes. He handed out a list of proposals signed by property owners. Some of the proposals were the preference of side setbacks of 7.5 feet, increasing green space and alternatives for alley size to keep with the alley-way concept. Suggested tabling action on this item tonight. Patrick Walsh made a motion, with the concurrence of the applicant, to table this item until the April 4th P&Z meeting. Marjorie Herbert seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0. 6b. Rezoning of Rivery Subdivision, Lots 2 and 3, from C-2A-Restricted, Commercial First Height, to C-2A-Restricted, Commercial First Height to allow multifamily uses, and C-2B, Commercial Second Height, or any more restrictive district, to be known as The Rivery Park, located on South IH35 along the proposed Rivery Blvd. Concept Plan of Rivery Subdivision, Lots 2 and 3, to be known as The Rivery Park, located on South IH35 along the proposed Rivery Blvd. Scott Ingalls gave the staff recommendation. Bruce Barton, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. Apartments on the 25 acres at the rear, overlooking the golf course. At the front of the property there will be offices and retail in buildings and the developers will participate in the frontage road improvements. Renee Hanson - 1252 Austin Avenue, had a concern for the 60' tall, 5-6 story building and how it relates to the view corridors of Georgetown. Ed Barry responded that there are no standards for view corridors at this time and the original plan showed a 70' building. He also stated that there would be only 2 buildings with that height. Sarah Milburn voiced her concern for setting precedence for future buildings on this tract. Charles Parker disagreed and said that they would handle each on its own. Discussion followed regarding setting a precedence. Bruce Barton spoke again and stated that there would only be one 60' tall building on this site and will be out of the view corridor. The rest of the site will be 40' tall office/retail buildings. After the discussion, Sarah Milburn made a motion to approve the rezoning of a 25.05 acre portion of The Rivery, Lot 2 f rom C-2A, Commercial, First Height Restricted to C-2A, Commercial, First Height Unrestricted to allow multi-family residential and exclude all other residential uses; and approval of the rezoning request for a 9.91 acre portion of The Rivery, Lot 3 from C-2A, Commercial, First Height Restricted to C-2B, Commercial, Second Height Restricted to allow a maximum building height P&Z Meeting March 7, 2000 Page 7 of 60 feet and to be tied to this specific Concept Plan; and approval of the Concept Plan for The Rivery, Lots 2 and 3 to be known as Rivery Park. Charles Parker seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0. Don Nadon made a motion to proceed with item #8. Jack Noble seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0. Commissioners Sarah Milburn and Marjorie Herbert left at 10:20 p.m. 8. Century Plan Amendment from Intensity Level 1 to Intensity Level 4, or any more restrictive Intensity Level, for 144 acres in the A. Manchaca Survey, to be known as North Interstate Commercial Park, located at the northeast corner of the IH35 frontage road and FM972. Concept Plan of 144 acres in the A. Manchaca Survey, to be known as North Interstate Commercial Park, located at the northeast corner of the IH35 frontage road and FM972. Carla Benton gave the staff report and recommendation. Charles Parker asked how they get access to IH35. Carla Benton responded that they will work with TXDoT on access along the frontage road. Hunter Shadburne, the applicant, was present and concurred w ith staff. Don Nadon made a motion to approve a Century Plan Amendment for a change from Intensity Level One to Level Four, or any more restricted classification for 144 acres in the A. Manchaca Survey, to be known as North Interstate Commercial Park; and to approve of a Concept Plan of 144 acres in the A. Manchaca Survey, to be known as North Interstate Commercial Park, with 1) a Detailed Development Plan required at the time of development for each lot, 2) that mini-storage facilities be placed at least 500 feet off both IH35 and FM 972 and, 3) that a right-of-way survey be provided to establish an estimated right-of-way dedication, provided the Technical Issue is addressed prior to City Council consideration. Charles Parker seconded the motion which passed by a motion of 5-0. 9. Staff comments and reports. a. Council action update. Commission will be updated at the workshop. b. Discuss topics for March 22nd P&Z Training Workshop. Ed Barry said that staff would put together a workshop for the 22nd and they will decide on topics for workshops in the future. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. /jmr