Loading...
00071504.0 Sourcenet Solutions Development Services Timeline 1-7-02 3pm Monday - Siteplan Submittal Received Did not meet loam deadline, yet was reviewed this week. 1-8-02 Tuesday - Distributed to staff at regular staff meeting 1-14-02 Monday - Review Completed, was determined to be a stop review. Significant Elements were missing that could affect site layout. 1-16-02 Wednesday - Development Permit Issued for clearing and grading only. 1-18-02 Friday - Comments Returned to applicant from first review. 1-22-02 2pm Tuesday - Screening wall details submitted. Mett the loam 1-28 deadline for distribution and review. Copies forwarded to Kim. 1-29-02 Tuesday - Distributed to staff a regular staff meeting. 2-1-02 Friday - Siteplan Resubmittal Received Met the I Oam deadline. 2-4-02 Monday - 1. Review of screenwall detail by DS staff. Nothing can be determined unless reviewed in conjunction with site plan, and the Board will need to approve the aesthetics of the wall. 2. Fax received from applicant changing a portion at the rear of the property. 2-5-02 Tuesday - Plans Distributed to staff at regular staff meeting. 2-7-02 Thursday - Neighbors raised concerns at hear visitors portion of the P&Z meeting. Chairman requested that staff place an item on the agenda at the next P&Z meeting fFf to report to the Commission on the facts of the situation. This is not intended to be a public hearing. 2-8-02 Friday - Meeting scheduled between the DS staff, ED staff and the applicant. 2/4-8/02 Week of - Multiple occasions of feedback and inquiry received from neighbors. 2-12-02 Tuesday - Meeting scheduled by ED staff with neighbors. 2-21-02 Thursday - Report to P&Z Scheduled. y v-` rz 46-1 ok'r Pte-` 9s- 3 - P 9 4- .5 V,cws 0~- 9-1 u~ ~ 1 ~ f \ ~ t ~ - s~ ,f fy> ~ ~ ! ~ ~V,_ z Yl< \ INFORMATIONAL MEETING FOR PEBBLE CREEK RESIDENTS ON SOURCENET DEVELOPMENT IN BUSINESS PARK FEBRUARY 12, 2002 'If r dxx AICE W-D ~y ame Address Telephone E-mail address u.LA !7. o~ ~~q~(.t ~~I o -2t t ~c v C S. *W, is rad ?9 l~~ C+ Goo- rb9 G l~r.~ lti.m It CILP~ V`/~t+n VCS coL Lc! ~ld~ ~/tS~'ru/~ 1 F?A bWZA e/~ ~~d GPi y4 -662 Al 0 A z - -71 . 2 cl t4 . I v . . G 4o ( - 6 9 , - . r 0 /_7 l 5002-C hrfr W.11s rf l.`(0 -543$ (-s coch@cb•••pKs~r~• + Roc G Woe ,oti Pte' Co~x•t 610-Z654 <Pd 9~y at~n.Qt . /V4v ViS l ff ~lO"7S2Z y S ~C 610-015 r$2~ mod. 0441L (010 -03 at -Acti<i m s B t "u. 7dl Puy Coe, r- 650 - a r, t,An0 c 44qv- 2b~ 2 ~wwwcr@ bcsed►c _ <~~Zc~+.f ~ FM o -~.2J ~ 690 a/ s IDo N Cs / ~(SDa a L~~K Luc C(0• D t `P~O~ PQ ~ ~ctr. ti1LZ I 4Sb0 ~ ~LA Cs~k 61b-09 M @ ~ 11 p - VOV Pie\ 4q ~ 0 v P4 q ovot v n Ce"Z c u i 6k INFORMATIONAL MEETING MEETING BUSINESS CENTER QUALITY CIRCLE DEVELOPMENT City of College Station Public Utilities Department Training Room 1601 Graham Road, Tuesday, February 12, 2002 6:00 p.m. Attendance: See attached residents sign in sheet Robert Payne, R.L. Payne & Associates City Staff: Kim Foutz, Director of Economic Development Glenn Brown, Assistant City Manager/Acting Director of Development Services Natalie Ruiz, Development Manager Jessica Jimmerson, Staff Planner Spencer Thompson, Graduate Civil Engineer An informational meeting was held on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 to provide adjacent property owners with information regarding the SourceNet/UCS development on Quality Circle in the Business Center. Kim Foutz, Director of Economic Development called the meeting to order. Mrs. Foutz discussed the attached presentation which includes information on the following: • Business Park including history, zoning, platting, tenants, and vacant parcels • The site plan and it's current status as submitted by R.L. Payne & Associates on behalf of UCS - The site plan is still under review and will have to be amended to meet parking and buffering ordinances. • Discussion with UCS regarding staff requested revisions to the site plan including relocation of a protected area and preservation of trees for additional buffering, lighting, and parking lot location • Zoning history for the business park and adjacent properties - the Business Center was zoned M-1 in 1992, adjacent property was rezoned in 1996 from townhomes and agricultural to single family residential. • Buffer Ordinance requirements - all buffering requirements will be met • Responses to resident's questions that were submitted prior to the meeting The business park was master planned to be adjacent to the neighborhood, the park and the elementary school as a "live, work, and play" environment. Additionally, the City originally exchanged property with Pebble Creek Development for the purpose of developing the Business Center. Robert Payne, the architect for the project discussed the site plan layout including location of buffer areas, preserve areas, and parking. Mr. Payne also discussed the size and layout of the facility and the possibility of future expansion. The residents at the meeting then asked questions regarding the development. Primary issues that were of concern to residents included the following: • Review and permitting process and level of public input • Rear parking lot • Buffering issues • Lighting issues • Loss of trees • Safety and buffering as related to the adjacency with the park and elementary school • Size of trees installed in the Buffer area • Possible future expansion of building Staff is currently working with the architect to minimize the impact of the development on the adjacent properties. Developer has agreed to relocate the protected area along the property line to supplement the requirements of the buffer ordinance. In addition, the architect has indicated that he will attempt to utilize the landscaping budget to further buffer the northeast parking lot from adjacent properties. Additional comments to Staff Review-Business Center: • Elevation drawings should include color and material samples • Need lighting plan and specifications • Need specifications for trees and bushes in the buffer areas i.e. looking for fast growing trees and fast growing bushes that grow in excess of 6' in height • Need to review revised protected area as discussed - newly submitted does not reflect discussions with UCS • Need clarification on location and design of sidewalks - newly submitted does not meet intent for sidewalks • Move parking lot 15 feet to the south (based on newly submitted) • Building setback and LAUE line have not been changed to reflect discussions (ie to push parking and building forward through variance) Clarify that buffer fence must wrap around small corner of the lot with the iron fence