TITLE
HOLD a public hearing and consider an ordinance requested by Payton E. Duncan (FLUM#17-26) to amend the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM) from ‘Estate’ to a ‘General Residential’ designated area for approximately 54.226 acres, being part of the W. H. Cole Survey, Abstract No. 200. The subject property is addressed as 405 Tower Hill Lane, Killeen, Texas.
SUMMARY
DATE: December 5, 2017
TO: Ronald L. Olson, City Manager
FROM: Dr. Ray Shanaa, Executive Director of Planning and Development Services
SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP (FLUM) AMENDMENT: ‘ESTATE’ TO ‘GENERAL RESIDENTIAL’
BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS:
Payton E. Duncan is requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to change an area currently designated as ‘Estate’ to a ‘General Residential’ designated area for approximately 54.226 acres, being part of the W. H. Cole Survey, Abstract No. 200. The subject property is addressed as 405 Tower Hill Lane, Killeen, Texas.
Land Use Plan: The property is designated as ‘Estate’ on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Comprehensive Plan.
The ‘Estate’ designation encourages the following development types:
§ Detached residential dwellings
§ Public/ institutional
§ Parks and public spaces
If approved, the ‘General Residential’ designation encourages the following development types:
§ Detached residential dwellings as a primary focus
§ Attached housing types subject to compatibility and open space standards (e.g. duplexes, townhomes, patio homes)
§ Planned developments, potentially with a mix of housing types and varying densities, subject to compatibility and open space standards
§ Public/ institutional
§ Parks and public spaces
THE ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
Which alternative is recommended? Why?
The items below should be reviewed and addressed when a Future Land Use Map amendment is being considered:
§ Scope of Amendment: Is the proposed map change limited to one or a few parcels, or would it affect a much larger area? The amendment request would affect approximately 54.226 acres and should be considered a major amendment that is specific to the applicant’s request.
§ Change in Circumstances: What specific conditions (e.g., population size and/or characteristics, area character and building form, property/structure conditions, infrastructure or public services, market factors including need for more land in a particular designation, etc.) have changed sufficiently to render the current map designation(s) inappropriate or out-of-date? The current FLUM designations have been in place for this property since the Map’s inception. Since that time, both residential and commercial development has occurred near or adjacent to the subject tract of land. The owner would like to change the designation to ‘General Residential’ in order to entice developer interest for his property and to zone the property to allow for a range of varying lot sizes.
§ Consistency with Other Plans: In addition to the Comprehensive Plan, is the proposed map change consistent with the intent and policy direction of any applicable small area plans, utility or drainage plans, or other City plans? The proposed map change is not inconsistent with other City planning efforts (Water and Wastewater Master Plan, Thoroughfare Plan, Parks Master Plan).
§ Adequate Information: Do City staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and/or City Council have enough and appropriate information to move ahead with a decision (e.g., utility capacity, potential traffic impacts, other public service implications, resident/stakeholder concerns, and input)? Staff has sufficient information regarding existing utility capacity and roadway level of service for this area.
§ Stakeholder Input: What points, concerns, and insights have been raised by area residents, property owners, business owners, or others? With the exception of listing this action as a public hearing item on the Planning and Zoning Commission’s agenda, there is no public notice requirement for this amendment action.
CONFORMITY TO CITY POLICY:
This FLUM amendment request conforms to the city’s policy as detailed in the Comprehensive Plan.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
What is the amount of the expenditure in the current fiscal year?
None
For future years?
The proposed FLUM amendment does not involve the expenditure of city funds; however, subsequent development and dedication of public infrastructure will involve the expenditure of maintenance funds over the life cycle of future development.
Is this a one-time or recurring expenditure?
This is not applicable.
Is this expenditure budgeted?
This is not applicable.
If not, where will the money come from?
This is not applicable.
Is there a sufficient amount in the budgeted line-item for this expenditure?
This is not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested FLUM amendment by a vote of 5 to 2, with Commissioners Cooper and Harkin in opposition. Ms. Harkin expressed concerns over public safety and the unquantified public cost over providing services to the area. The requested FLUM amendment is consistent with historic development trends in this corridor and is not out of character with the adjacent single-family development.
DEPARTMENTAL CLEARANCES:
This item has been reviewed by Departmental administration and the Legal Department.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Exhibits
2. Minutes
3. Ordinance