HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes
P&Z Minutes
12-15-83
page 2
~
wIth Mr. Bailey making a motion to approve this plat and Mr. Martyn seconding the motion.
Motion carried unanimously (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.7: 83-315: Prel iminary Plat - Reconsideration of Regency Square (12/1/83
denied by P&Z; 12/8/83 approved by City Council)
Mr. Mayo explained the reason the CommissIon had den.ied this plat was due to Planning
Department interpretation of the front lot depths and that before the plat went to Council
the legal staff had handed down a different interpretation which resulted in the Council
approving the plat. He IndIcated that staff is now in the process of preparing a new
ordinance which would clarIfy thIs type of problem, and staff now recommends approval due
to the interpretation given by the legal department which indicates the lots in question
are in compl iance. Discussion followed concerning a drainage easement and Mr. Mayo said
the lot In questIon still allows a build-able area. Mr. Martyn asked Mr. Pullen if he cou
answer the question concerning the easement, and Mr. Pullen said that he could not. Mr.
Mayo pointed out that the lot is excessively deep. Mr. Hill then asked for a written memo
from the legal department in the near future to explain the interpretation given. Mr.
Bailey asked that a representative from the legal staff to be present in the future to
explain this type of question. Mr. Miller then made a motion to approve the plat as shown
Mr. Kelly asked about the drainage channel, and wondered if it Is bridgeable and still lea'
room to build a house. Mr. Pullen answered that it is and it would. Mr. Kelly then se-
conded the motion to approve which carried by a vote of 4-2 with Martyn & Hill voting
against.
The Commission as a whole requested a written opinion from the Legal Department prior to
approval of a Final Plat on this land.
AGENDA ITEM NO.8: 83-316: Master Prel iminary Plat - Nantucket (595.35 acres in the ETJ)
Mr. Mayo briefly explained this plat stating that all Presubmission Conference require-
ments had been met and that staff recommends approval of the plat as shown. Mr. Martyn asl
about streets being built to ETJ standards, and expressed bel ief that this is in the newly
annexed area and now within the City Limits. Mr. Mayo explained that this subdivision is
not in the City Limits, but is within the ETJ, and he knows
of no immediate plans for annexation. Mr. Martyn asked if streets built to ETJ or County
standards could cause a problem for the City if the subdivision is annexed, and Mr. Mayo
referred the question to Mr. Pullen. Mr. Bailey pointed out that if the subdivision is sut
standard, it would not have to be annexed. Mr. Hill pointed out that construction standar(
are not a part of the platting process. Mr. Martyn said he is still bothered. Mr. Kelly
said the County would have to approve the plat, and the County has made some changes in
standards recently. Mr. Miller asked about the depth of Reserve Tract 2 from Nantucket to
the lake, and Mr. Mayo explained that the area is still in excess of 300 feet at its nar-
rowest part. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve with Presubmission Conference require-
ments. Mr. Kelly seconded. Motion carried unanimously (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.9: 83-317: Prel iminary Plat - Glenhaven Estates - Phase I I I (2.401 acres:
Mr. Mayo explaIned that all changes requested in the Presubmission Conference report have
not yet been made, but further explained that the appl icant is will ing to make them before
the Final Plat; therefore, staff recommends approval with Presubmission Conference recom-
mendations. Mr. Bailey requested that a vicinity map is included on the Final Plat. Mr.
Miller spoke of information to be included on a Final Plat, and asked that a careful check
is made before bringing the Final before the Commission for approval. Mr. Mayo explained
that the Planning Department compares the Final Plat to the Prel iminary Plat and all repor1
to make sure the Final is in compl iance with the Prel iminary, but the Commission could
P&Z Minutes
12-15-83
page 3
.
request that all of this information is shown in the future if it desires. Mr. Bailey
made a motion to approve this plat with Presubmission Conference recommendations with
Mr. Kelly seconding. Motion carried unanimously (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: 83-517: Site Plan Permit - Sturbridge Condominiums - Lot lA Blk C
Eastmark Phase I I
Mr. Mayo located this plan on a map, pointing out that the project is at the edge of the
floodplaIn and there have been many difficulties in site development to overcome. He
explained that all of the PRC recommendations have been met with exception of item #6
which has been handled by a note on the plan concerning emergency vehicle access, and
further that the Fire Marshal has not had a chance to review this plan. He further indi-
cated that staff has no problem with the note if the Commission doesn't. Mr. Miller asked
about the landscaping plan, and requested clarification. Mr. Mayo explained that there
is much native vegetation along the creek. Mr. Kenelpp, the architect of the project came
forward to explain that the tally shown on the plan of shrubs and trees is incorrect,
and saId that there are actually 7 crape myrtles and 25 trees planned, as well as grass
to be planted in the easements. He also said that most of the site would remain largely
undisturbed. Mr. Hill said that he is assuming that there is going to be jasmine and
honeysuckle everywhere there is not a tree or a building and Mr. Keneipp explained that
there will be honeysuckle around the entrance, the dumpster and the circular parking area,
and the rest of the project will have seeded Bermuda grass. Mr. Miller asked that a note
to that effect is included on the plan. Mr. Hill requested a minimum number of jasmine
and honeysuckle to be Indicated and Mr. Keniepp responded that there would be approximate-
ly. 100 one-gallon plants around the circular drive. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve
the site plan with PRC recommendations and the inclusion of 25 post oak trees, 7 crape
myrtle shrubs and the groundcover around the circular drive to be a minimum of 100 one-
gallon jasmine and honeysuckle plants with the balance of the site to be seeded with
Bermuda grass. Mr. Martyn seconded the motion which carried 5-1 (Kaiser against).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11: Other Business
Mr. Miller saId the Commission has been advised by the Legal Department to be very speci-
fic in making the motions themselves, as the discussion which takes place prior to the
actual motion has nothing to do wIth governing projects.
Mr. Hill asked what happens if a plat is approved, and later the City finds it needs addi-
tional easements. Mr. Mayo explained that most of the time, easements are added by Separ-
ate Instrument, and the plats do not come back to the Commission or Council for approval.
Mr. Martyn mentioned that a large number of live oak trees had been planted on 2 rather
large residential lots along Southwest Parkway and Glade Streets, and that most of these
trees have died. Discussion followed, and it was finally determined that this was done on
private property. Mr. Kaiser asked If that property was platted, and Mr. Mayo explail
ed that part is platted, but not all of it is.
Mr. Hill mentioned the "Golden Triangle" report and further that there is a proposed site
plan which may soon be considered, and wondered if this report could be made again to
bring all new commissioners up to date. Mr. Bailey said that some time in the past a
committee had recommended that the land on which there is a proposed site plan pending,
be rezoned to residential, and Mr. Mayo said this would be an untimely thing to do now, bu
that should this proposed project not materialize, he would recommend that the land get
rezoned to residential. Mr. Kaiser and Mr. Hill both requested that the report concerning
the "Golden Triangle" be presented again to the Commission when this proposed project come~
before the Commission for review.
~
P&Z Minutes
1-5-84
page 3
AGENDA ITEM NO.5: 84-201: Final Plat - Allen Honda Subdivision - Resubdivision of Lots
6&7 Block B Eastmark Phase I I .
Mr. Callaway located tne land, explaining that staff recommends approval of this plat,
although City Council will have to address the location of the al ignment of Southwest
Parkway prior to filing the plat. Mr. Kelly asked what would happen to this property if
Southwest Parkway Is located to the south and Mr. Callaway replied that he is unable to
answer the question until the overpass is designed. More general discussion followed con
cerning what mIght happen. Mr. Hansen asked about the note on this plat concerning the
number of signs which will be permitted and Mr. Callaway explained that the note is left
over from the original platting of this land. Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve this
plat with Mr. Miller seconding. Motion carried unanimously (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM No.6: 84-202: Final Plat - Resubdivision of Lots 10&11 Block U University
Park I J .
Mr. Callaway explained the purpose of this plat is to consol idate 2 lots, adding that
staff recommends approval with Presubmission Conference recommendations and an adjust-
ment In the width of the Private Parking & Access Easement, which has been reflected on
this plat. Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve with Presubmission Conference recommenda-
tions and the required adjustment in the PPAE, with Mr. Hansen seconding. Motion carried
unanimously (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.7: 84-203: Final Plat - Glenhaven Estates Phase I I I.
Mr. Callaway explained that this final plat is consistent with the Preliminary Plat,
and staff recommends approval with the Prel iminary Plat recommendations, and also with
the understanding that the City Engineer has final approval of access. Discussion fol-
lowed concerning street names, with Mr. Kelly making the motion to approve with staff'5
recommendations and the understanding concerning access. Mr. Hansen seconded the motion
which carried unanimously (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.8: 83-452: Parking Lot Plan - College Station Retail (Texas Avenue &
Park Place).
Mr. Bailey made a motion to table this item at the request of the appl icant with Mr.
Kelly seconding. Motion carried unanimously (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.9: 83-453: Parking Lot Plan - Columbia Park (presently KOA development)
Mrs. Kee explained that most of the PRC recommendations are reflected on this revised
plan, but that some dimensions requested are missing. She further explained that those
which are missing can be taken care of prior to issuance of a building permit, therefore
staff recommends approval with PRC recommendations. Mr. Kelly asked why there are 5 fire
hydrants on this plan in addition to sprinkler systems in the building and Mrs. Kee
explained that these are two separate requirements: The size of the buildings governs
the sprinkler system requirement, and fire hydrants must be located within 300 feet of al
parts of the building as the hoses lay. Mr. Hill referred to Items #1 & #14 on the PRC
report, stating he could not see how these items had been compl ied with. He explained th
the legend and the landscaping stamps on the plan are difficult to read and he is unable
to ascertain just what landscaping is being proposed. Mr. Bailey asked about the Texas
Mountain Laurels included on this plan, but Mr. Martyn could not answer his question.
Mr. Hill asked Mr. Pullen if the applicant had met with him concerning the location of th
water. 1 ine and the trees in that setback area and Mr. Pullen replied that he had not, but
\. .
..
I
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THURSDAY, JANUARY 14, 1982
7:00 P.M.
PAGE 4
Councilman Boughton seconded the motion which passed as follows:
FOR: Mayor Halter, Councilmen Boughton, Jones, Prause
AGAINST: Councilmen Dozier, Runnels
Agenda Item No. 10 - Consideration of ordinance closing hearing and levying assessments
for a part of the cost of improving portions of MacArthur and Poplar St.
Mayor Halter opened the public hearing.
Ed Harris stated that he would like to see the business who is at fault for the damage
to the street be assessed for construction of its improvements.
Joe Templeton stated that he lived on the corner of Cooner St. and MacArthur. He felt the
a street paving project should not be started until after the final public hearing is
held.
Tony Caporina stated that he agreed to the project and believes it will improve the area.
W:D. Fitch stated that he agreed to the construction. He stated that he felt the city
policies for assessing corner lots for front footage and side footage should be revised.
He suggested changing this policy so that side lots not be assessed.
Councilman Runnels moved to table this item and requested that the city staff review
city policies relating to lot assessments for street improvements. He asked that this
matter be brought back to council by the first meeting in February.
Councilman Prause seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Agenda Item No. 11 - CONSENT AGENDA:
BIDS:
Consideration of bids on the following:
One 50 ton Motor Truck Scale
One Portable Steam Cleaner
One 12 to 16 Horsepower Diesel Tract with Box Scraper
325 Quartz Lamps and 50 Replacement Lens
One FM Radio Test Set
One ~ Ton Pickup
Traffic Supplies
Traffic Signal Heads
Signal Wire and Conduit
Traffic Signal Poles
Consideration of bid for labor construction on Souths ide substation.
PLATS: Preliminary plats of Glenhaven Estates Phases I, II, and III.
A final plat - Parkway Circle Addition.
A final Plat - a resubdivision of Southwood Section 26.
A final plat -
resubdivision of a portion of the D.A. Smith Subdivision.
003 L, 1 7 ~
,
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THURSDAY, JANUARY 14, 1982
7:00 P.M.
PAGE 5
PLATS CONTINUED
A final plat - Treehouse Place - Southwood Valley Section 4B.
Councilman Prause asked how a FM Radio test is used.
Public Works Director Ford replied that this test set is used to test the radios in
city vehicles.
Councilman Runnels requested that the Glenhaven Estates Phases I, II, and III be
removed from the Consent Agenda.
Councilman Boughton asked that Parkway Circle Addition be removed.
City Engineer Ash asked that the Traffic Signal Poles bid be removed for further
discusstion on another agenda item.
GLENHAVEN
City Planner Mayo explained that these plats basically conform to the approved master
preliminary plat except that lots have been enlarged and now there are fewer lots. The
P&Z approved these plats as recommended.
After further discussion, Councilman Boughton moved to approve the Glenhaven preliminary
plat.
Councilman Jones seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
PARKWAY CIRCLE
City Planner Mayo stated that this proposal subdivides an apartment tract (Oakwood
Apartments) into an additional tract to allow for construction on another project.
P&Z approved this plat 7-0.
Councilman Runnels moved to approve the Parkway Circle plat.
Councilman Boughton seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
The bids and plats were approved by common consent.
Agenda Item No. 12 - Discussion of new city voting precincts.
City Secretary Jones presented to the Council the map of precinct changes initiated by
the Commissioners Court of Brazos County. She stated that this action gives College
Station 11 county voting precincts instead of the previous 7. She stated that the
council needed to consider aligning city voting precincts with the new county precincts.
She suggested that the council consider combining county precincts 20, 21, and 35 into
one voting precinct for city elections. She stated that the city still had an agreement
with the College Station Independent School District to combine the school board election
with the city council election. She said that the designated polling places will be part
of the ordinance calling for election. She suggested that the council consider paying
election workers $4.00 per hour.
003418
Page 2
Jim Callaway explained this tract is part of the northwest
corner of the Ramparts Subdivision, adjacent to Ramparts Condominiums,
on east side of Nagle, approximately 400 feet north of the intersection
of Church and Nagle Streets. This area is reflected as High Density
Residential on the current Land Use Plan. This request is in compliance
with the plan. Adequate water and sewer and service can be provided
for the zoning requested. Off-site water and sewer extensions will
be necessary to provide service to the tract. Access to the Ramparts
Subdivision is 1 imited to Nagle and Church Streets. Traffic generated
by the requested use should be similar to or less than the current C-1
zoning. The current zoning does have greater potential for developing
as a major traffic generator. An adjacent lot in the Ramparts Sub-
division is now zoned and developed as High Density Residential (North
Ramparts Condominiums). The Ramparts Subdivision was presented as a
plat for High Density Development with the first section rezoned R-6
in May, 1980. The requested R-6 zoning is more compatible with the
existing R-6 tract and other adjacent residential uses than is the
current C-1 zoning. R-6 zoning does not have specific maximum density.
Den sit y i s est a b lis he d by co un c i 1 a p pro val. Be for e; 's t e pis t a ken by f /~ ,r-
council, a site plan must be approved by Planning and Zoning Commission,
and that is a separate item not under consideration at this time.
The public hearing was opened.
John Temple Ligon, developer with Texas Development Group, stated they
have worked with local professionals in city on feasibility of site.
O.ther sites have been looked into, but they feel this is the ideal site
most appropriate for student housing for their market. Plans for the
site include student housing with very small units. Ex: One student
per bedroom and two automobiles per unit. Each unit will be approxi-
mately 640 square feet for two people. There will be 56 units per acre.
The site was chosen because people will not need their automobiles.
They live where they work and shop, and there will not be a peak hour
traffic load.
Commissioner Hall asked how many stories the project would be.
Mr. Ligon informed the commission it would consist of three stories
with below grade parking. The units will be spacially more open
because parking is underneath building. Parking will be half under-
ground with access ramps.
Commissioner Hall asked if there would be drainage problems and was
informed there would not be.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Gardner stated he felt this was a good location for work
and education, but is has the problem of being in a congested area.
Commissioner Gardner moved to recommend approval. Second was given by
Commissioner Hal I. Motion carried with Commissioner Hazen abstaining.
AGENDA I TEM NO.4:
Phase I.
(81-325)
A prel iminary plat of Glenhaven Estates
Al Mayo reviewed this preliminary plat by presenting the following
information. The R-1 area i? designed as approved on the master pre-
1 iminary plat, except that it has seven fewer lots. Drainage easements
need to be designated as 'Iprivate." Lot 1 ines need to be shown between
Page 3
Lots 7 & 8 and Lots 3 & 4, Block 7. The engineer and/or surveyor needs
to add his name on the plat. We have contacted the developers and
recommended to them and will recommend to the Planning & Zoning
Commission and City Council that when final plats come in, Phases 1 & 2
be done at the same time, or at least the parts of 1 & 2 that include
Glenhaven Drive all the way to University Drive thru to Dominik. The
reason for this is to make sure there is the best possible construction
access; entrance to the subdivision can be gained from University Drive
rather than Francis, Dominik, or Carol. The staff recommends approval.
James Connor Smith, developer with Glenhaven Estates, stated there was
another alternative. This would be the possible extension of the street
that goes to the Bypass which is not on either of the plats.
Commissioner Behling asked if there would be any problems in doing
Phases 1 & 2 at the same time.
Mr. Smith stated it was their intention and desire to complete Phases
1 & 2 simultaneously. He also stated there is a major development
cost consideration their engineers are studying. Phase 1 can get into
existing sewer system, and Phases 1 & 2 would have to go back north
to the Carter Creek Outfall.
Mr. Ash pointed out there would not be the necessity to build 1st and
2nd Phases at once just to get the access. The first phase could be
constructed as long as the right-of-way for Glenhaven was platted all
the way to University Drive and that section of street built. (Much
1 ike Southwood Drive and Southwood Section I.) This would not involve
the sewer situation that is going to be encountered in Phases 2 & 3.
Simply build Phase I.
Commissioner Behl ing stated the third alternate would provide access
off east Bypass; completion of this simultaneously with Phase I, would
achieve the same thing; it would direct accessibil ity to second alter-
nate other than coming up Francis. ~
Mr. Smith stated this is their least desirable option, but
taken into consideration if economics were not quite right
2 & 3.
it would be
on Phases
Commissioner Kelly made motion to approve Phase I of Prel iminary Plat
of Glenhaven Estates with staff recommendations. Second was given by
Commissioner Hazen, and the motion was unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM NO 5:
Phase I I .
(81-326)
A prel iminary plat of Glenhaven Estates
Al Mayo presented the prel iminary plat stating that the same basic notes
for Phase I apply to Phase I I. There are four fewer lots than shown on
the master. The cul-de-sacs opposite each other need to have the same
names due to requests made by pol ice, fire departments, and post office,
because of problems in Raintree Subdivision. The staff recommends
approval.
Commissioner Bai ley moved for approval with staff recommendations.
Second by Commissioner Hall. Motion was approved by the fol lowing vote:
In favor:
Commissioners Behling, Bailey, Kelly, Fleming, Hazen, Hall
Opposed:
Commissioner Gardner
age 4
AGENDA I TEM NO.6:
Phase I I I .
(81-327)
A prel iminary plat of Glenhaven Estates
Al Mayo reported that Phase I I I is a patio home area identical to master
prel iminary plat. The staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Kelly moved for approval with staff recommendations; second
was given by Commissioner Bailey, and the motion was unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM NO.7:
(81-258)
A final plat of the Parkway Circle Addition.
Al Mayo stated that the Planning & Zoning Commission recently approved an
apartment site plan for Tony Caporina on Lot 1. The Oakwood Apartments
exist on Lot 2. This plat subdivides Lot 1 for Mr. Caporina's cl ient.
The staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Kelly moved to approve final plat; seconded by Commissioner
Gardner; motion was carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO.8:
Other business.
Commissioner Kelly stated he wanted to clarify a statement made by him-
self on December 3, 1981 concerning Edsel Jones. The statement made was:
'IThat I knew Mr. Edsel Jones and lid been that route before with him.
It seems to be that people took it with the intent that I was question-
ing Mr. Jones' credibility in the community. Since then, Mr. Jones and
I. have had a private meeting and I assured him that was not the intent
of the remark, and I apologized to him privately, and at this time, I
would 1 ike it in the record that I apologized publ icly and to the
commission for the remark made.'1
Commissioner Hall asked about parking lot access and landscaping at
Culpepper Plaza.
Commissioner Behl ing stated that CO was given to Safeway and parking
lot was finished per plans. Commissioner Behl ing also stated he had
noticed one or two islands were still not finished with landscaping
and that he would verify this with the plans and report.
Commissioner Hall stated he thought the entrance by Schlotzskyls and
3-C Bar-B-Q was going to be a right turn only leaving the shopping center.
Commissioner Kelly stated it was requested only. Action on this would
be up to the Highway Department, and they would probably put in a median.
Commissioner Bailey stated that entrance at Safeway had been widened,
but exit had not. People turning left back up traffic. This should
have had width for two cars.
Al Mayo stated the entrance was widened because people were physically
having trouble making the turn into Safeway.
A visitor to the meeting asked who carried the extra expense for all
the growth going on.
Mr. Ash explained the developer is responsible for water, sewer, and
all the streets. The Single Family lot owners wi 1 be assessed that
cost for those developments in the payment they would put out for their
individual lots. Mr. Ash further stated this development is not a
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 6
~'~~r '
() ./),j /
I' ('" ,'11 II.: ~-rd.
i J,yI I //.
JIJ-1" t-f,..'{, I;','
/V\ v, I j
8.332 Acre A-P tract: Commissioner Watson moved that approval be recommended.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved by the following vote:
For: Commissioners Hazen, Sears, Watson, Livingston, Behling
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioner Gardner
'\
/f
\-
Commission /
~:/.
/'
!';'/)_J
i
i
./
I /
I . ,/
/, l./
. //;,
I',' f
,
/
11.013 Acre R-5 tract on University Dr: Commissioner Hazen moved that denial be
recommended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Livingston and approved with
Commissioner Behling voting against.
8.687 Acre R-3 tract on University Dr: Commissioner Hazen moved that denial be
recommended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gardner and failed by the
following vote:
For: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Hazen, Gardner
Against: Commissioners Sears, Watson, Behling, Livingston
Commissioner Wtason moved that this R-3 tract be recommended for approval.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved by the following vote:
For: Commissioners Sears, Watson, Livingston, Behling
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Gardner, Hazen
AGENDA ITEM NO.5
Consideration of a preliminary plat - Glenhaven Estates.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be tabled so that an alternate alignment
of the streets could be worked out.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved.
The Commission held a lenghty discussion with Mr. Ardan concerning the possible
alternate alignment of the streets.
AGENDA ITEM NO.6 -- Consideration of a preliminary plat - K.F.O. Phase 3.
Mr. Callaway pointed out that the developer had supplied three copies of a revised
plat which took care of the density problems which Mr. Mayo had:outlined in his
memo. He also advised that an additional 10 foot utility easement would be needed
along the adjacent property line and that the developer had agreed to this.
Commissioner Gardner suggested that, due to the distance between Crest Street and
Cornell, an additional "stub" street might be included to the property to the south.
Mr. Charles Johnson, applicant, pointed out that Crest Street and Cornell Street
already extended to the property to the south and that he had given up two lots in
order to meet density requirements.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved with the provision that necessary
utility easements be added as recommended by the staff.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioners Gardner
and Hazen voting against.
~\' ?JOiJ
/
./
! I I
{{"J
~-~
I J.
! \.
~ ,
I <: V I
\\ '.--
.
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 19, 1981
7:00 P.N.
Page 7
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Livingston and approved by the following vote:
For: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Livingston, Gardner
Against: Commissioners Watson, Behling
Abstaining: Commissioner Sears
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10 -- Consideration of a revised master preliminary plat - Glenhaven
Estates.
Commissioner Behling moved that the item be removed from the table.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gardner and unan~mously approved.
Mr. Mayo showed the revised plat which indicated the changes in zoning districts made
by the developer. He pointed out that the R-3 zone had been extended to a point
beyond the intersection of Francis Drive and the proposed north-south street in the
subject development. He then went over a memorandum prepared by the City Engineer
and the Traffic Engineer which recommended against placing any 900 turns in the
extension of Francis. The report included results of a 48 hour traffic count made
on Francis, Munson, Ashburn, Williams, and Walton Streets and indicated that if all
of the traffic generated by Glenhaven Estates were to use only Francis as an access,
the traffic volume on Francis would increase by about 6%.
Dr. John Painter, 1119 Merry Oaks, said that the two objections of the neighborhood
to the first plat had been the increased traffic of the commercial area and the di-
rect access from Francis to the Bypass. He said that, if the C-l area remained R-l,
one of the objections would be removed. He said that the revised plat, although
somewhat revised, still contained a more-or-less direct connection of Francis to the
Bypass.
Commissioner Watson said that, although he felt he was still under the obligation of
the promises he had made to the residents, the memo from the City Engineer should
be considered.
Commissioner Gardner suggested that the report from the Engineer did not take into
account the external influences on the traffic that would use Francis. He also
pointed out that, although the Comprehensive Plan showed Francis connecting to
University Drive, the Plan also showed the area as low density residential.
Commissioner Livingston asked if placing two 900 jogs in Francis was really a feasible
idea.
Mr. Mayo said that two 900 jogs would only serve to make the street inconvenient and
unsafe. He suggested that the City should not create its own traffic problems by
taking such action.
Mr. Steve Ardan, developer, spoke in favor of the plat. He pointed out other ex-
amples of poor street design in the City which had been the result of "pressure"
from neighborhood groups on the Commission or City Council. He said that Francis
would be less likely to be used as a route to bypass University Drive traffic when
the extension of Licoln to University was undertaken. He noted that Lincoln would
present a much more direct route to Texas Avenue that would Francis. He said that
a number of alternate routes for Francis were considered, but that these were found
to create land use problems or problems of traffic safety due to topognaphy in the
area.
r
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 19, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 8
Mr. Ardan stated that the main traffic generator the University, and that traffic
would use Francis to go there no matter how the street was aligned. He said that
the proposed plat represented sound planning practice and traffic safety.
Mr. Stephen Miller, 1201 Francis, spoke in opposition to the plat. He suggested that
the Engineer's report did not take the integrity of the neighborhood into account and
did not respond to the wishes of the existing residents.
Mrs. Janet Natowitz, 1503 Francis, spoke in opposition to the plat. She said that
she did not feel the traffic study was valid because it covered only a 48 hour time
period.
Mr. Gary Anderson, 1105 Dominik, spoke in favor of the plat.
City staff was doing its job in making a recommendation such
said that he felt the proposed zoning would be attractive to
of the neighborhood.
He suggested that the
as had been made. He
the wishes and purposes
Dr. Painter spoke to the Commission again. He said that the residents had not been
able to meet and consider the new plat, so his comments would be his own. Dr. Painter
said that he would make some professional judgements on the professional conduct of
the City Planner.
Chairman Maher warned Dr. Painter to keep his comments directed toward the question
at hand.
Dr. Painter suggested that the Commission's previous action on the plat had left
the residents feeling that Francis Street would be realigned. He said that no serious
consideration had been given to any alternatives. He said that the residents did not
wish to see the development killed, but only to see the traffic volume on Francis
held to a minimum. He said that he would offer some reasons why the City Planner's
recommendations varied from the wishes of the area residents.
Chairman Maher told Dr. Painter that supposition would not be acceptable.
Commissioners Watson, Livingston, Sears, and Behling left the Council Room.
Dr. Painter said that the traffic study had shown that Francis was not a major street
and that that was how the residents wanted it to remain. He said that it should be
made inconvenient to use. He suggested that the only purpose of the City Planner's
recommendation was to increase the traffic volume on Francis. He suggested that this
was being done only to relieve traffic on University Drive and Highway 30. Dr. Painter
asked that a recess be called until a quorem of the Commission was present.
Chariman Maher directed him to continue with his presentation.
Dr. Painter suggested that the problem was the way in which the City Planner viewed
his duty to the City.
Mr. Bob Arbuckle, 1502 Dominik, spoke in favor of the plat. He said that he was very
pleased with the proposed subdivision and that the proposed street pattern was in the
best intrest of the City.
Commissioners Watson, Livingston, Sears and Behling returned to the Commission table.
/
r
f
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 19, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 9
Commissioner Gardner moved that the plat be denied.
The moiton failed for lack of a second.
Commissioner Behling moved that the plat be approved.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Commissioner Behling said that the main reason for the realignment of Francis was
that it was directly across from a C-l zone and that the revised request showing
R-3 in this area would negate the need for the 900 jogs in the street. He also
pointed out that the area originally designated for R-5 had been reduced to a
request for R-4 and R-3 and that the configuration of the proposed park had been
changed. He suggested that the revised plat was superior to the first proposal.
Chairman Maher stated that the best compromise would be to change the C-l request
to an R-l zone.
Commissioner Behling again moved that the plat be approved.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Livingston.
Commissioner Watson asked Mr. Ardan how the R-3 area along the extension of Francis
be developed.
Mr. Ardan said that the area would be developed as rear-access townhomes.
Commissioner Behling's motion was approved by the following vote:
For: Commissioners Livingston, Behling, Sears, Watson
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioner Gardner
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11 - Consideration of a final plat - Resubdivision of Lot 35, Block
16, Southwood Valley Section 3.
Mr. Mayo said that the subdivision would plat the existing Longmire Park and set
aside the remainder of the property for residnetial development.
Commissioner Gardner suggested that the park would serve no purpose.
Mr. Mayo advised that the park had allready been accepted by the Parks Committee and
that it could serve the adjacent apartment developments.
Commissioner Behling moved that the plat be approved.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioner Gardner
voting against.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 12 -- Revision of parking plan for the addition of a Fox-Photo
facility at Woodstone.
Mr. Mayo explained the proposal. He pointed out that the island would remain and that
any landscaping removed would be replaced. He noted that only one parking space might
be lost.
".
MINUTES
Regular City Council Meeting
Thursday, March 12, 1981
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Ringer, Runnels, Kelly, Boughton, Jones, Dozier,
Student Government Liaison Herring
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Halter
STAFF PRESENT: Traffic Engineer Black, City Secretary/Tax Assessor-Col-
lector Schroeder, City Engineer Ash, City Planner Mayor,
City Attorney Denton, Assistant City Manager/Director of
Finance Van Dever, Building Official Perry, Purchasing Agent
Weddle, Fire Chief Landua
VISITORS PRESENT: See guest register
Agenda Item'No. l-Approval of minutes from the Workshop City Council Meeting of Feb-
ruary 25, 1981 and the Regular City Council Meeting of February 26, 1981.
Councilman Ringer announced there was not a public hearing on the sale of beer at Cen-
tral Park on this meeting's agenda as a local newspaper article had implied. He stat-
ed that this public hearing would be held at a later date.
Councilman Ringer then announced that Mayor Halter and City Manager Bardell were in
San Antonio on City Business and would not be present at this meeting.
Councilman Ringer was sitting in Mayor Halter's place, acting as Mayor Protem, and
Assistant City Manager Van Dever was sitting in City Manager Bardell's place.
Councilman Boughton moved approval of the minutes.
Councilman Kelly seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Agenda Item No. 2-A public hearing on the question of rezoning the following six
tracts located between University Drive, the East Bypass and Dominik Drive:
TRACT 1:
TRACT 2:
TRACT 3:
TRACT 4:
TRACT 5 :
TRACT 6 :
17.499 acres from Single Family District R-l to General Commercial
District C-1.
7.199 acr~s from Single Family District R-l to Apartment District R-4.
13.955 acres from Single Family District R-l to Townhouse District R-3.
2.333 acres fronl Single Family District R-1 to Administrative/Profes-
sional District A-P.
4.457 acres from Single Family District R-l to Townhouse District R-3.
The application is in the name of Brazosland Properties.
4.982 acres from Single Family District R-1 to Single Family District R-1A.
03150
MINUTES
Regular City Council Meeting
Thursday, March 12, 1981
7:00 P.M.
page 2
Councilman Ringer requested that the Glenhaven Plat be removed from the Consent Agenda
so that it may be discussed along with the Glenhaven rezoning. He asked the City
staff to report on their considerations and recommendations and the basis for those
recommendations.
City Planner Mayo presented and explained the rezoning. He stated the staff and P&Z
recommended approval of the proposed rezoning request.
City Engineer Ash presented the results of a traffic study done at the Council's re-
quest.
Councilman Ringer opened the public hearing asking to hear from those in favor of the
proposed rezoning first.
Steve Ardan, representative of Brazosland Properties, spoke in favor of the rezoning
request. He stated the reasons behind this rezoning request.
Gary Anderson, of 1105 Dominik, spoke in favor of the rezoning.
Bob Arbuckle, of 1502 Dominik, spoke in favor of the rezon~ng.
When no one else spoke in favor of the rezoning request, Councilman Ringer asked to
here from those oppossed.
Peter Hugill, of 1100 Westover stated he was speaking on behalf of the College Hills/
Carters Grove Homeowner's Association. He spoke in opposition to the rezoning request
and the proposed extension of Francis Street. Mr. Hugill stated that any rezoning
other than R-l would lead to a considerable increase in traffic. He thought this
would endanger the safety of children walking or cycling to the College Hills School
and devalue the property on thru streets. He stated that 500 questionaires were
circulated in the College Grove/College Hills area. Approximately 25% of these were
returned. The majority of the rquestionaires returned (88.9%) felt that Glenhaven
Estates would increase traffic on Francis.
Councilman Ringer questioned the validity of the questionaires.
Mr. Hugill stated that he did not have enough time to do a thorough questionaire.
Councilman Runnels asked Mr. Hugill what he would suggest as an alternative street
plan.
Mr. Hugill stated that he did not want a street plan that attracted traffic other
than that of the neighborhood. His plan was to see Francis make two right angle
turns.
Councilman Jones asked Mr. Hugill if a vote had been taken at the first meeting in
favor of extending Francis, Carol and Dominik.
Mr. Hugill stated that the result was not in favor of extending these streets.
03151
,
MINUTES
Regular City Council Meeting
Thursday, March 12, 1981
7:00 P.M.
page 3
Councilman Kelly asked Mr. Hugill what his major objection was.
Mr. Hugill stated that his major objection was the traffic generated by a Commercial
zone.
George Bass, of 1612 Dominik, spoke in opposition to the extension of Francis Street.
He pointed out that irresponsible drivers were those that were not residents of the
neighborhood. Mr. Bass stated this rezoning is inconsiderate to the residents of
the area.
Councilman Jones pointed out that the C-l area was at one time larger than the present
C-l area.
Steven Miller, of 1201 Francis, agreed with Mr. Hugill and Mr. Bass. He stated that
he did not want to see his neighborhood change since it is a successful one.
Councilman Dozier told Mr. Miller of the many changes in his neighborhood and that he
has accepted them. He pointed out that neighborhoods can accept change and still be
succesfull.
Norman Guinasso, of 1112 Marstellar,spoke on the validity of the poll. He stated
that he carried the poll on both blocks of Marstellar. Most of the people he talked
to did not speak in favor of the rezoning. He did not think the plat should be approved
without a park. He stated that most of the residents major objection to the plat is the
extension of Francis.
Councilman Ringer stated that the reason he questioned the validity of the questionaire
was that he could not obtain one himself. He stated that he had been told by the res-
idents that the questionaire was bias. He then explained the Parkland Dedication re-
quirement and the process involved.
Councilman Dozier asked Mr. Guinasso if he thought that every time a request to rezone
land is made a pubic hearing should be held and the people should decide how the land
should be rezoned.
Mr. Guinasso answered yes. He stated that this was the proceedure in every Community
he has lived in, one of these being Palo Alto, California.
Nancy Thornberry, of 1006 Francis, spoke in opposition on the basis of the traffic
increase the extension of Francis would cause and the C-l area. She suggested putting
two 900 turns on Francis.
Councilman Kelly informed Ms. Thornberry that this plan was in violation of city
ordinance since it has two 900 turns.
Fred Thornberry, of 1006 Francis and resident
get with the citizens to reach an agreement.
of the school children walking to school. He
of 22 years, suggested that the Council
He stated his concern for the safety
suggested that another survey be taken.
0315Z
,
MINUTES
Regular City Council Meeting
Thursday, March 12, 1981
7:00 P.M.
page 4
Rudy Freund, of 1508 Dominik, spoke in favor of the rezoning and the extension of
Francis.
Mrs. Reinke, of 1034 Rose Circle, asked the Council questions on the type of business
proposed for the C-l area and the type of control the city would have over this.
City Planner Mayo stated that any type of business in the general commercial zone
is allowed, but the site plan had to be approved by Planning and Zoning.
Ms. Reinke asked what order would the developement occur.
Mr. Ardan stated that the residential would be first and the commercial last.
Dick Edwards, of 1214 Mary Oaks, spoke in opposition to the rezoning.
Mr. Pennington, of 900 Francis, spoke against the extension of Francis Street.
Dr. Elmquist, a resident of Post Oak Forest, expressed her concern ~br the increased
traffic problem the plan might bring about.
Bill Wasson, of 1608 Austin, expressed his concern for the effect this would have on
the school districts.
Cliff Young, a resident on the other side of town, asked the Council if West Dexter
and East Dexter were still separated.
Councilman Ringer stated that they were.
Steven Miller, of 1201 Francis, stated that he thought the people in the area should
be the primary concern and that a poll should be taken.
When no one else spoke, Councilman Ringer closed the public hearing.
Councilman Jones questioned the consideration of the Park area.
Councilman Ringer stated that negotiations would be made with the developer.
Councilman Runnels moved to send this rezoning issue back to P&Z to develop a better
plan.
Councilman Ringer asked for a second.
No one spoke.
He again asked for a second.
When no one spoke Councilman Ringer stated that the motion died.
Councilman Jones moved to table the rezoning until after the plat had been discussed.
Councilman Kelly seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
001~
I
MINUTES
Regular City Council Meeting
Thursday, March 12, 1981
7:00 P.M.
page 5
Councilman Ringer stated that the next item, by consent of the Council, would be the
item removed from the Consent Agenda;
Consideration of a master prliminary plat - Glenhaven Estates located between Univer-
sity Drive, the East Bypass and Dominik Dr.
City Planner Mayor presented the plat and stated the reasons why the plat provides the
extension of Francis. Mr. Mayo stated that without the extension of Francis it would
become a collector-street not going through.
Councilman Ringer asked Mr. Mayo to address the suggestion of the two right angle turns.
City Planner Mayo stated that this was illegal and would violate city ordinance. He
stated that this would cause a safety hazard and decrease the efficiency of the street
moving traffic through.
He also stated that he did not think traffic from the bypass would be using Francis.
He then explained why.
Councilman Ringer stated that there was no requirement to hold a public hearing on plat
approval, but that it was Council Policy to hear the public whenever they had some-
thing to say to the Council. He then stated that many of the citizens present had
already addressed the plat issue and requested that citizens speak only if they had
something to add to these previous comments.
Mr. Ardan spoke in favor of the plat.
Dick Edwards, of 1214 Merry Oaks, stated that the City Planner should work with the
developer and the citizens.
When no one else spoke Councilman Ringer asked for discussion or a motion from the
Council.
Councilman Runnels asked if there was any other plan that could be developed.
Councilman Kelly explained the many problems encountered in developing this plat. He
then presented a rivised street plan for the Council to consider.
Councilman Ringer explained how the plat was derived and the problems involved.
John Painter, of 1119 Merry Oaks, asked Mr. Kelly why he did not explain these problems
sooner. He then asked if a dip would be put in Francis.
Fred Thornberry requested the Council table this matter.
Councilman Runnels moved to return the plat to P&Z.
Councilman Ringer asked for a second.
He again asked for a second. Hearing none the motion died for lack of second.
Councilman Boughton commended the staff and the council members involved on their hard
03154
HINUTES
Regular City Council Meeting
Thursday, March 12, 1981
7:00 P.M.
page 6
work they contributed on this issue.
Councilman Boughton moved approval of the plat with the changes suggested by Mr. Kelly
Councilman Kelly seconded the motion.
Councilman Ringer asked for discussion.
ing this plat would accomplish anything.
into consideration and that this was the
He then explained that he did not think tabl-
He stated that all alternatives had been taken
best plan.
Councilman Runnels stated that he did not think this was the best plan.
Councilman Dozier explained the process of city government. He stated that all of the
people cannot possibly be involved in every decision made by the city.
Councilman Kelly called for the question.
Voting For: Councilmen Boughton, Kelly, Jone, and Ringer.
Voting Against: Councilmen Runnels and Dozier.
Councilman Jones moved to take agenda item no. 3 off of table.
Councilman Boughton seconded the motion.
Voting For: Councilmen Ringer, Kelly, Jones, and Dozier.
Voting Against: Councilman Runnels.
_.._-~ (,
Councilman Jones moved to rezone tracts 1,2,4,5, and 6 as requested and that Tract 3
remain R-l until consideration be made on a park.
Councilman Kelly seconded the motion.
City Planner Mayo stated that Tract 3 is not just park area.
Councilman Kelly withdrew his second.
Councilman Ringer asked for a second.
He again asked for a second. Hearing none the motion died.
Councilman Ringer then asked for another motion.
Councilman Boughton moved approval of the proposed rezoning as requested.
Councilman Kelly seconded the motion which passed unanimously making it Ordinance #1273
03155