SL Logo

Planning & Zoning Commission

Agenda Request

Agenda Of:

12-08-09

Agenda Request No:

iii-a

Initiated By:

Nelda McGee,

Executive Secretary

Responsible Department:

City Secretary

Presented By:

Glenda Gundermann,

City Secretary

Department Head:

Glenda Gundermann,

City SecretaryINITIAL

 

 

Additional Department. Head (s):

N/A

Subject / Proceeding:

Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting November 10, 2009

Approve Minutes

Exhibits:

Minutes November 10, 2009

Clearances

Approval

Legal:

N/A

planning Director:

sabine somers-kuenzel

Recommended Action

 

Approve the minutes of the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting November 10, 2009.

 

Exhibits

 

STATE OF TEXAS

§

COUNTY OF FORT BEND

§

CITY OF SUGAR LAND

§

 

CITY OF SUGAR LAND

Sugar Land Planning and Zoning Commission MEETING

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

 

REGULAR MEETING

 

The City of Sugar Land Planning and Zoning Commission convened in a regular meeting open to the public and pursuant to notice thereof duly given in accordance with Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, as amended, in Sugar Land City Hall within said City on Tuesday, November 10, 2009, at 5:30 o'clock P.M. and the roll was called of the members; to wit:

 

Bridget R. Yeung, Chairman

Carl Stephens, Vice Chairman

Farha Ahmed

Marlena Berger

Sandy Hellums

Harish Jajoo

Nancy Porter

James Shaw

Paula Stansell

 

QUORUM PRESENT

 

All of said members were present, with the exception of Commissioner Hellums, who arrived at 5:43 o’clock P.M.

 

Also present were:

Regina Morales, Director of Economic Development

Doug Schomburg, Assistant Planning Director

Pat Walsh, Transportation Director

Chris Steubing, City Engineer

Aaron Dobbs, Assistant City Attorney

Nelda McGee, Executive Secretary and

A Number of Visitors and Staff

 

CONVENE MEETING

 

Chairman Yeung convened the session, open to the public, to order at 5:32 o’clock P.M.

 

workshop

 

Conceptual Plan 300 Acres U.S. 59 and University Boulevard

 

Chairman Yeung introduced discussion on the conceptual plan for development of 300 acres U.S. 59 and University Boulevard.

 

Key Concepts of Community Visioning Process

 

Ms. Regina Morales, Director of Economic Development stated the city vision is to develop 1,000 acres near University Boulevard and U.S. 59 as a future destination location within the City that expands shopping and restaurants and introduces entertainment and cultural arts components to the community.

 

In July 2007, the task force created by the City Council recommended the development be a unified and integrated mixed-use urban destination, featuring opportunities and amenities that would attract residents and others throughout the region; “amenities” was defined as five components incorporated into the conceptual plan:

 

·         Festival Site

·         Indoor Concert Venue

·         Baseball Park

·         Hotel and Convention Center

·         Cultural/Performing Arts Center

 

300-Acre Conceptual Planning Efforts

 

The City Council adopted the conceptual plan in April 2008; funding propositions for future revenue streams were approved by voters in November 2008; and the City entered a Memorandum of Understanding with Newland Communities and Means-Knaus Partners to develop a conceptual plan for 300 acres University Boulevard and U.S. 59, including a 95-acre option tract.  City staff and Newland have been working together since January 2009, to create the current draft plan.

 

The plan incorporates the Visioning document adopted by City Council; existing and proposed plans for thoroughfare, transit, hike and bike; and possible locations for concert venue and hotel/convention center which will serve as a catalyst for new development.  The objective is a coordinated multi-use environment that attracts corporate investment and job creation; project goals include:

 

 

The framework statement for the plan is to “create a walkable development with an integrated street network, access to parks, trails, and open spaces, connections to future transit systems, and a flexible development pattern to allow infill over time.”

 

Six development areas are proposed for corporate, entertainment, and cultural arts components:

 

 

The Corporate District forms a ring around the dense, mixed uses of the High Street and Sugar Land Arts Districts and accommodates the corporate campus and/or infill commercial office sites necessary to support retail and activities. 

 

The proximity of the Telfair Business District to the Telfair community provides an opportunity to create a business district of low-scale buildings for office, commercial, and retail. 

 

Easy accessibility from U.S. 59 to Telfair Center District is conducive to in-line support service retail tenants and a large format retailer, such as Costco. 

 

Lakefront District views of the lake and proximity to Telfair community support development of restaurant pad sites, office, and more dense residential communities. 

 

The High Street District is located in the heart of the southeast corner development and focuses on streetscape, enclosure, and walkability.  A large urban park at the center will anchor the District on the southern end and a calming of the Lexington Boulevard traffic pattern is incorporated in the design. The High Street District provides hotel and convention center opportunities, smaller entertainment venues, and access to the Lexington trail system.

 

The Sugar Land Arts District is located south of the High Street District and will benefit from the mixed uses of the district.  Possible civic components include an indoor concert venue, theater, performing arts center, and academy for Sugar Land residents.

 

Commissioner Porter asked what the vision was for the corporate area.  Ms. Morales stated it depends on development and the amount of densities; staff envisions it as a Class A, corporate office. 

 

The conceptual plan includes transportation, thoroughfare, open space, and public space components.  Goals for transportation and thoroughfare include interconnectivity, variety in transportation modes, and transit readiness; future area transit sites are based on walkability and accessibility to structured parking in the area.  Open spaces connect to the Regional Trail Network and high-quality outdoor public spaces such as pocket parks, small plazas, and public green space with amenity features.

 

Ms. Morales discussed the current trail system, future Ditch H trail system, and proposed trail systems such as those shown for the southeast quadrant that follow the waterways and circle the higher density development. 

 

Commissioner Stephens asked for clarification concerning the 95-acre City option.  Ms. Morales stated the commercial reserve, not the residential, is on the south side of Lexington.  Commissioner Stephens commented that the plan does not follow the option, unless the City was going into the development business.  Ms. Morales stated that the entire conceptual plan is the result of a partnership between Newland and the City; all parties must agree before development begins.  The City is concerned with preserving future opportunity for a performing arts center, concert venue, or other structure; there is a 52-acre lease for the ball field at the University of Houston site.

 

Commissioner Stephens expressed concern that the community expectation was for all venues together in one location.  Ms. Morales stated that the original conceptual plan incorporated all components within the 1,000 acres, but did not specify location. 

 

Chairman Yeung asked what the proposed location is for the hotel and convention center.  Ms. Morales stated that would be located in the High Street District.

 

Commissioner Ahmed asked if development west of University Boulevard was included in the conceptual plan.  Ms. Morales stated it was not included; that development is controlled by the University of Houston System, Board of Regents with the exception of the 52 acres leased by the City.

 

Commissioner Hellums asked how the University of Houston would be incorporated in the development.  Ms. Morales stated the University will participate in the proposed TIRZ 4; the conceptual plan is the foundation of the TIRZ 4 project plan and plan of finance.  The University is partnering with the City in the economic development plan through design and construction of the fourth building on campus, determination of future educational programs, and development of a work force for targeted industries such as Health and Human Performance; the City will incorporate University efforts by developing office space specific to the targeted industries in the southeast quadrant of the corporate area.  The University is working with the City to incorporate way finding and branding for the development area and to determine appropriate monument components for the four corners.

 

Ms. Morales stated the next step for the 300 acres is the PD process, which Ms. Somers-Kuenzel will address at the next meeting. 

 

Commissioner Stephens expressed concern that there was no representative from Newland at the meeting to answer questions.  Ms. Morales stated that the conceptual plan was the result of partnership with Newland; the cost was split between the City and Newland and Newland will be involved in the PD process. The purpose of the presentation is for the Commission to understand the City participation to this point.

 

Chairman Yeung asked if there would be a visual arts center.  Ms. Morales stated there would be a performing arts center, based on the recommendation of the task force.  Chairman Yeung commented there were early discussions about having one large and one small indoor concert venue, rather than two performing art venues.  Ms. Morales stated a third option being explored is a multi-functional arena that will be a flexible venue and provide as many uses as possible.

 

Commissioner Shaw stated concern over the “non-friendly” environment of walling-off areas of the development and constructing buildings out to the street.  He expressed concern that traffic issues similar to those with Town Square and other developments could not be successfully addressed.  Ms. Morales stated that development is a lengthy process with challenges that will require in-depth studies and analyses; staff is approaching the development differently than Town Square by considering it in its entirety rather than each tract separately.

 

Commissioner Stephens commented that he was reluctant to set a PD on 300 acres without specific requirements for development.  Chairman Yeung said the development would be broken down into multiple PDs.  Ms. Morales clarified that the PD was a two phase process; a preliminary PD on the 300 acres, and then a final PD when each section is ready to develop. 

 

Commissioner Stephens stated the developer should be present to discuss their goals for the 300 acres. Ms. Morales stated that utilizing a partnership concept had allowed the City to incorporate goals and vision into the development.  Newland will not be the vertical developer; Means-Knaus participated in the conceptual plan and is a potential developer on some sites. 

 

Commissioner Jajoo asked what the schedule was for moving forward.  Mr. Doug Schomburg, Assistant Planning Director stated that the schedule was not set.

 

workshop (continued)

 

ROLE OF COMMISSION Liaison

 

Chairman Yeung introduced discussion on the role of Planning and Zoning Commission Liaison for City Council meetings.

 

Chairman Yeung stated the role of the Liaison for the City Council meetings was to serve between the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council; to answer questions asked by City Council; and to ensure that information regarding discussions and actions by the Planning and Zoning Commission is conveyed.   A different Commissioner will be designated to attend City Council meetings each month. 

 

At issue is whether or not the Liaison should attend the entire meeting or only that portion of the meeting relevant to Planning and Zoning Commission.  Chairman Yeung stated that Russell Jones, City Council Liaison to Planning and Zoning, sent an email regarding this issue to each Council Member; respondents felt it was only necessary to attend the part of the meeting directly related to Planning and Zoning issues. 

 

City Council Liaison

 

Chairman Yeung stated the City Secretary could be contacted to determine the approximate time the item would be discussed, if the Liaison did not want to stay for the entire meeting.

 

Commissioner Stansell asked for clarification on what items should be reported, since some items might not be a consideration for Planning and Zoning, but still be of interest.

 

Chairman Yeung stated the Liaison needs to report agenda items that relate to issues that might come before the Commission or have been a consideration in the past;   Commissioners should be prepared to answer Council questions on items related to Planning and Zoning.

 

Chairman Yeung commented that in the past the Liaison had received a complete agenda packet prior to the Council meeting and suggested it would be more economical and time efficient for the City if the Commission Liaison printed the agenda and pertinent items directly from the website.  Commissioner Stephens, Commissioner Hellums, Commissioner Ahmed, and Commissioner Stansell stated they would prefer to receive the packet from the City.  Mr. Schomburg stated the Commissioners could contact staff member Christy Rankin for a packet when it was their rotation. 

 

recess

 

Chairman Yeung recessed the Regular Meeting, time 6:30 o’clock P.M.

 

reconvene

 

Chairman Yeung reconvened the Regular Meeting, time 6:39 o’clock P.M. and stated that item 8a, amendments to the Development Code, was pulled from the agenda and would be considered in December, 2009.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

 

Chairman Yeung introduced Public Comment stating that citizens desiring to address the Planning and Zoning Commission with regard to matters on the agenda would be received at this time.

 

There were no public comments.

 

Minutes

 

Chairman Yeung introduced consideration on approval of the minutes of the regular City of Sugar Land Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held October 22, 2009.

 

Following a full and complete discussion, Commissioner Jajoo seconded by Commissioner Berger, made a motion to approve the minutes of the regular City of Sugar Land Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held October 22, 2009.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

public hearing

 

Permanent zoning 124.206 Acres Telfair Tract Five

 

Chairman Yeung convened the public hearing to receive and hear all persons desiring to be heard on rezoning of 124.206 acres Telfair Tract Five from Interim Standard Single-Family Residential (R-1) to Permanent Single-Family Residential (R-1). 

 

Ms. Lisa Kocich-Meyer, Senior Planner stated the acreage is located south of U.S. 59 and west of Ditch H.  The request is in compliance with Telfair General Plan Amendment No. 4, currently pending City Council approval; if the request is approved, compliance with District R-1 regulations is required. 

 

All notification requirements for the Public Hearing have been met; no inquiries were received.  Staff anticipates action on the December 08, 2009.

 

Chairman Yeung entertained comments from the public.  Hearing none, Chairman Yeung closed the public hearing.

 

Chairman Yeung introduced discussion and direction on rezoning of 124.206 acres Telfair Tract Five to Permanent Single-Family Residential (R-1). 

 

Commissioner Stephens asked if Telfair General Plan Amendment No. 4 had to be approved by Council before the Commission could take action.  Ms. Kocich-Meyer answered no; the request complies with the current Amendment No. 3.

 

Commissioner Berger asked for clarification regarding location; Ms. Kocich-Meyer confirmed the property was located south of the Sugar Land Cultural Arts District.

 

fact finding and recommendation

 

29.943 Acres Telfair section 10 and fire station no. 7

 

Chairman Yeung introduced consideration on a recommendation to the Mayor and members of City Council for rezoning of 29.943 acres Telfair Section 10 from Interim Standard Single-Family Residential (R-1) to Permanent Single Family Residential (R-1).

 

Ms. Lisa Kocich-Meyer, Senior Planner stated the 29.943 acres consists of the proposed Telfair Section 10 and site for Fire Station No. 7.  The property is located north of New Territory Boulevard and east of Chatham Avenue.

 

The Public Hearing was held October 22, 2009; there were no public speakers, and the Commission had no issues with the request.  Staff recommends that the Commission make a recommendation to City Council to approve Permanent R-1 zoning.

 

Commissioner Shaw commented the fire station property is staked and asked if the property is titled to the City.  Ms. Kocich-Meyer stated the property has been purchased and is in the basic survey/platting process; the Commission should see a plat soon. 

 

Commissioner Stephens asked if Telfair General Plan Amendment No. 4 needed to be approved by Council before the Commission makes the recommendation.  Ms. Kocich-Meyer stated that Fire Station No. 7 was shown further west on New Territory Boulevard in Amendment No. 3 and has been moved to the correct site; the area was shown in the potential PD district, and that the boundary has been moved, it is all standard single family.  Approval of Amendment No. 4 is moving forward with Council; by the time the recommendation is presented, it should be approved. 

 

Doug Schomburg, Assistant Planning Director stated the Commission could place a condition on the recommendation to City Council.  Commissioner Porter asked what would be the exact wording of that condition.  Ms. Kocich-Meyer suggested “Amendment No. 4 must be approved by Council prior to approval of permanent zoning.”

 

Following a full and complete discussion, Commissioner Stephens, seconded by Commissioner Shaw, made a motion to approve a recommendation to the Mayor and members of City Council for rezoning of 29.943 acres Telfair Section 10 from Interim Standard Single-Family Residential (R-1) to Permanent Single Family Residential (R-1) subject to the proposed Telfair General Plan No. 4 having been approved by the City Council.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

Subdivision Plats

 

Silver Grove at Riverstone section 1 preliminary plat

 

Chairman Yeung introduced consideration on approval of Silver Grove at Riverstone Section 1 Preliminary Plat.

 

Mr. Harold Ellis, Planner II stated the Preliminary Plat consists of 11.4 acres, 20 lots and 5 reserves, and includes the portion of LJ Parkway needed for access to the subdivision.  The plat is in general compliance with the approved Riverstone General Plan which shows the area as single family patio homes; a revised General Plan showing the area as single family residential, patio or standard has been submitted and is being processed.  The Planning Department does not feel this is a significant change and recommends approval, with a condition requiring City Council approval of the revised Riverstone General Plan.

 

Commissioner Shaw asked if there were any legal ramifications to approving the plat without the General Plan Amendment.  Mr. Ellis responded staff considers the plat in conformance with the current General Plan, the condition of prior amendment approval is not necessary.

 

Commissioner Ahmed asked for clarification of the text “patio or standard as an option for the new proposed General Plan.”  Mr. Schomburg stated the City has no zoning in the area; the applicant is proposing to simplify future single family, whether zero lot line or standard, through single family identification.

 

Mr. Tom Wilcox, Riverstone Development clarified that in the General Plan, if there is not a difference in the density or number of units, everything is single family for both conditions standard or patio; there is not a significant difference between the two uses, the new General Plan will show everything as single family.  The applicant is requesting approval of the plats without condition of approval of the new General Plan. 

 

Commissioner Stephens asked why a new General Plan is being submitted if the plats were in compliance with the current General Plan.  Mr. Wilcox stated it is to simplify the General Plan; patio will be changed to single family, but commercial and multi-family areas will remain the same.  The new General Plan should come before the Commission during the December 08, 2009 meeting.

 

Commissioner Stephens asked why the plat has 14-foot utility easements shown in the ETJ, but 16-foot UEs in the City.  Mr. Ellis stated it is his understanding there is no set standard for the actual width of the UE.  Mr. Richard Mancilla, Engineer II confirmed there is no minimum standard for a 16-foot UE; 16 feet was the old standard, but that has now changed to whatever minimum CenterPoint requires.

 

Commissioner Stephens stated the plat had no dashed lines indicating the 10-foot sanitary sewer easement as mentioned in the notes; Mr. Ellis confirmed that would be added to the plat.  

 

Following a full and complete discussion, Commissioner Stephens, seconded by Commissioner Shaw, made a motion to approve the Preliminary Plat for Silver Grove at Riverstone Section 1.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

Shadow RIDGE AT Riverstone section 1 preliminary plat

 

Chairman Yeung introduced consideration on approval of Shadow Ridge at Riverstone Section 1 Preliminary Plat.

 

Mr. Harold Ellis, Planner II stated the Preliminary Plat consists of 26.9 acres, 40 lots and 5 reserves, and includes a portion of Lake Riverstone Drive needed for access to the subdivision.  This Preliminary Plat has a 35-foot buffer along the southern portion of the subdivision; the 65-foot buffer shown for the same area in the General Plan is a typo and will be corrected in the amendment.  Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with the possible condition of Council approval of the revised Riverstone General Plan.

 

Commissioner Stephens asked if Lake Riverstone Drive is platted past Wilshire Springs.  Mr. Ellis confirmed it is platted and part of Vintage Trails. 

 

Commissioner Stephens commented that the reserve notes list Reserve D as landscape open space, but Reserve D has a 30-foot drainage easement around it inside the back property line.  Mr. Trey Reichert, Riverstone Development stated that Reserve D indicates a small landscape reserve at the edge of the cul-de-sac outside the detention area on the plat.  The 30-foot drainage easement is for the detention of the lake; it starts from the bulkhead and goes up thirty feet.  The easement wraps along Reserve C and overlaps Reserve D, but the use of Reserve D is a landscape reserve between two lots.

 

Mr. Wilcox clarified that Reserve D is like a lot, except the Homeowners Association will maintain; the 30-foot easement is the detention area on that portion of the landscape reserve and is just like an easement on the back portion of any lot.  The detention area is not separated from the lot and listed as a detention area; it is shown as a drainage easement.

 

Commissioner Stephens stated the 30-foot drainage easement is within the property line at the back of the lots and asked if there would be restrictions against fencing.  Mr. Wilcox replied that there is no restriction against fencing at the bulkhead; however, the fence must be a 4-foot wrought iron fence.

 

Following a full and complete discussion, Commissioner Stephens, seconded by Commissioner Berger, made a motion to approve the Preliminary Plat for Shadow Ridge at Riverstone Section 1.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

Sugar Land Development Code

 

Agenda Item VIII-A, amendments to Sugar Land Development Code Chapter Two and Chapter Ten was removed from the agenda by Staff and not considered.

 

REPORTS

 

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION LIAISON REPORTS

 

Commissioner Stansell, Planning and Zoning Commission Liaison commented on the City Council meeting held November 03, 2009, stating the main items of interest for the Planning and Zoning Commission were contracts for the Recreation Center and the workshop held on variance for distance requirements for sale of alcoholic beverages. 

 

Chairman Yeung, Planning and Zoning Commission Liaison commented on the City Council meeting held October 27, 2009, stating the main items of interest were the discussions regarding proposed design for the Dulles Avenue improvement project and the design and construction of Fire Station Number 7. 

 

CITY STAFF REPORT

 

Mr. Doug Schomburg, Assistant Planning Director provided the Planning and Zoning Liaison schedules and commented there may be changes to 2010 Development Committee appointments.

 

ADJOURN

 

There, being no further business to come before the Commission, Commissioner Stansell, seconded by Commissioner Jajoo moved that the meeting adjourn.  The motion carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned, time at 7:12 o'clock P.M.

 

 

 

                                                           

Bridget Yeung, Chairman

 

 

 

 

(SEAL)