Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes /' '~" REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1983 PAGE 4 '"~: . Councilman Runnels requested that the bid be removed from the consent agenda. The plats were approved by common consent. Parks Director Beachy presented the item. He stated that the low bid of $411,000.00 was submitted by Acklam Construction Company of College Station and stated that. they will. be negotiating with the company to try to bring the bid in line with the original estimate. He stated that it is an acceptable practice to negotiate with the bidder to increase or decrease the bid by ten percent and explained that contingency funds are available within the project to cover the additional costs. Councilman Runnels moved to approve the bid for the Southwood Athletic Park Facilities. Councilman Reinke seconded the motion which was approved unanimously, 7-0. Agenda Item No.6 -DonDal~toaddress the Council ona building permit problem. City Manager Bardell presented the item. He stated'that Mr. Dale asked to present to the Counci.la problem h.e 'has pertaining to a building permit. Don Dale, owner/operator of Pooh's Park, stated that in September he decided to construct abuilding on Holleman to provide secure 'st.orage for ~.i.s materials andequiplJ}:I1t;- .". He statedtna.t.1tehad been informed that an a~>ea of approximatelST' ];cn) ; x250' nlustbe paved befor.,e a building permit would be..issued.for his proposed building. Di:r"'ect.or ofCap,ital Improvements Ash stated that the Project Review S9111.tr;l.~/ttee.met ()n September 21st to consider Mr. Dale's proposal and that Dale nor anyone representing him carne. He further stated that M.r ~Dalelisted seven items that had been addressed to his had reques<t.,ed that he submitfo.ur copies of his pr,oposed si te :W it an. to the Planning and Zoning office. He.noted that appeals of this kind are d.irected to thePlal'"l.I1i<n~'al~d Zoning ComrnissioDl" Mr. Dale st,ated that'fled.t.i.~€iI1<Dt.~-,i~_cei ve the 'le,tt'er t1rttil after', t.'he rneeting- had .been h'eld 0 Halter asked the city staff to work with a solutiori(to the problem. Agenda' Item No. 7,~R.eport onSoutheastHighe~. Educatio.n Authori ty. R.M. 'Logan, President of'the Southeast Higher Educatio'rl Authority, .,presented anannl.laI report to the. Council. He explained that the organizationpl.1rchases loans made by eligible financiers. He listed the Board membe:rsof the Authority and explained that the Authori typurchased its first batch of loans in January 1983. He' further stated that the Authority had recently been audited and that they had received a good P&Z Minutes 1-5-84 page 4 ( explained that at the PRe review he (Pullen) had stated there can be no canopy trees withIn 10 feet of a water line. Mr. Martyn made a motion to deny this plan because the PRC recommendatIons have not been met. Mr,Hansen seconded the motion. Mr. Kelly sug- gestedapprovalof the plan with PRC recommendations, and Mr. HIll disagreed, stating that thIs Is a large project,and there is too much difficulty In reading the detail con- cerninglandscaping. Mr. Martyn agreed, stating in addition to this, heis concerned with the large canopy trees whJchmaybe too close to the water line4t The number of available parking spaces and thepossibll ityofshlfti ng the project was discussed be- fore votes were cast. When votIng took place, the motion to deny carried unanimously (~-O). AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: 8'3-455: Parking Lot Plan - Revised plan for Southwest Place. Mr. Bailey made a motion to table this item at the request of the applicant with Mr. Hansen seconding. Motion to table carrledunantmously (6-0). AGENDA ITEM NO.' 11: 83-456: ParkIn Lot Plan - Universlt Lot 10&11,. Bl oc,kU UnIversity Parkll. ( Mrs. Kee explained this plan, statIng that staff recommends approval ,with PRC recommenda- tions, and further, that this plan reflects those changes. Mr. Martyn asked Robin Bruno, the proJect architect with Wood Associates forward to answer some questions concerning landscaping, but Mr. Bruno could not answer the question regarding wHat type of ornamental pear tree ,is being planned. Mr. Martyn recommended the Bradford pear (Pyrus Calleryana) as a good choice, and further mentioned that the Arizona Ash which is planned isa beautiful, fast growing tree 'for 10-15 years" but would be dead, in 25 years. Mr. Hansen made a motion to approve this plan with PRC recommendations ~nd the inclusion of the Bradford pear, (Pyrus Callery'ana) as the ornamental. pear tree. Mr. Martyn seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0}. AGENDA ITEM NO. 12: 83-440: Appeal ofaPRC denial of thls ParkIng Lot Plan by Don'Dale. Mrs.Kee explained that thePRC had reviewed this small project,which normally wo'uld not come before the Commission, and referred to the PRC report which lists the recommended changes to be made. She further explained that the 2 recommendations which Mr. Dale wishes to appeal are Items #5&#6 on the report, and read aloud those items, referring any questions to Mr. Pullen, the CIty Engineer and Mr. Kelly, the P&Z representative at the meeting. Mr. Martyn stated that those items reflect requirements which ate standard in' a commerclal zone, and wondered why they are being questioned. Mr. Kelly stated that City oroinancegoverns these things, but addressed a "storage building parking lot" and asked Mr. Pullen where .it is shown that curbing and pavlng are required on such a project. Mr. Miller referred to al1parktng lot requirements In the ZonIng Ordinance. Mr. Pullen said thIs project Is inclose proximity to other projects where this was required, but concurred that this project may fall into an industrIal-type, low traffic generating business. Mr. Kelly saId that in the past, we have not made these requirements on other "parking, storageareas". Mr. Pullen cited several instances of storage-type lots where crushed stone had been allowed, but stated that this project would not be compatible with the project recently completed just to the west, but also concurred that this is a private, and not a public lot, and further that the building and lot are to be used for storage of equipment and material, and not for public use. Mr. Martyn said that any project in a C-l zone should have curbing and pavement, and pointed out that although this use might be unique, the use of the lot could change. Mr. Pullen said there are no plumbing faci- 1 itles In this buildIng, which would preclude any other type of occupa'ncy. Mr. Martyn again pointed out that allowing these variances would be inconsistent with established pol ictes and also would not be compatible with adjacent development. r-6L rllnULeS 1-5-84 page 5 ( Further discussion followedconce'rnJngthe possibil i'ty of the stone washing into the streets and sewers, and the allowance of variances for particular uses being inconsistent. Mr. BaIley made amotIon to deny this appeal of the PRC dental of the project. Mr.Pul- len asked iflt would be po.ssible to hear from the applicant, and Mr. Hill pointed out that objections could be verballzedat.the PRC rev'lew, and also In writing prior to a P&Z meeting to be Included in the packets or to be handed to. the Commissioners, but un- less the Commissioners specIfically asked the applicant questions, the applicant would not be invited to speak. The appl tcant disagreed with thtsruling from the floor. Mr. Miller asked staff if the a'pplicant had been notified of the PRC meeting, and Mrs. Kee replied' that he.hadbeen 'notIfied, and further that 'there had 'been still a second meetIng with much !of the staff and department heads durIng which the applicant had voiced .his objections and staff had explained ihe requirements. Mr. Martyn seconded Mr. Bailey's motton to deny this appeal. Mr. Kelly asked Mr. Pullen If the applicant can have a curb cut on thi,s lot and Mr. Pullen replIed that a driveway access will be'allowed. Votes were cast, and the mot.lontodeny the appeal carried unanimously (6-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 13: Other Business. Mr. Miller reported that the landscape ordinance Is almost 'complete and hppefully will be ready by the end of the mo~th. ,Mr. Bailey as,ked about the IIGolden Triangle" report, and Mr. Callaway repl ied that staff has located one map for the southern portion of the area and also that minutes of meetings were befngcompiled. Mr. HIll requested that staff put this report on the agenda at the next meeting as a regular agenda item, and include information In the packets for the Commissioners. ( Mr. Bailey then asked what the status of the Northgate Implementation Plan is, with regard to CouncIl action. Mrs. Kee stated that the Implementation Plan had been presented and Council had instructed staff to prepare an ordinance for consideration, and further that the ordinance should be presented in Ma.rch, 1984. Mr. Martyn requested that the landscape ordinan~e requIre both the botanical and the common names of trees and shrubs to be designated. He also asked if there would be a meeting held to discuss the upcoming bond election issues. Mr. Pullen referred the bond election question to Mr. Ash, the Director of Capital Improvements. Mr. Hansen asked the status of the sign ordinance, and Mr. Callaway replied that ther'e will be a meeting on January 9th to further discuss it. Mr. Hill requested more of an explanation regarding staff not requiring slats in a screen fence as ruled by the P&ZCommission. Mrs. Kee, the Zoning Official stated that ordinance does not give the Commission the authority to require a privacy fence in a C-l zone except to separate a commercial project from an adjacent res'idential project. Mr. Hill replied that this decision not to enforce would change some impositions previously handed down. Mrs. Kee replied that perhaps this should be addressed in the new ordinance, but that the current ordinance does not give the Commission that authority. Mr. Callaway asked t~1r. Hill if he was requestl ng a report wh j ch refers to speci f ic examp les of fences wh i ch have been required in the past, and Mr. Hill said that would help clarify the reasons behind this rul ing. Mr. Callaway then referred to a memo which had been handed out regarding lot widths and stated this r:nemo cites establ ished policy. He then addressed the approved Land Use Plan, stating that the A-Q zoning in the newly annexed area is temporary in nature, and problems could arise under this temporary type zoning, suggesting that perh~ps the City should'