The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes MINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission August 2, 1984 7:00P.M. MEMBERS ...PRES ENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Vice Chairman Martyn, Members Brochu, Stallings and MacGilvray Chairman H~nsen,Members Tongco and Kaiser Director of Planning Mayo, Ass't. Director of Planning Callaway, City Engine~r Pullen, Ass't. Zoning Official Johnson and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA'iTEM'NO.1: Approval of Minutes -meeting of July 19,' 1984 Mrs. Stallings made amotion to approve the minutes with Mr. MacGllvray seconding. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: HearVi~itors No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM NO.3: 84-114: A ublichearing on'the uestlon of rezonin a 2.99 acre tract ..1" the Thomas Caruther~League Abstract No. 9 located on the ~uth si de of. Rock Pral ri e ....Roa.d .a.pproxlmately200 .....feet . west... of..' Carter Lake Dr lve from. Agriculture Open DistrictA-Oto~lngleFamfly Residential District R-l. Application 15 in the name of Lynne Hunt . and '..8JJ 1.Cari ker Mr., Callaway explained that the tract Is located in the newly annexed area of the City, and that most of the area zoning isA-Owlth scattered residential uses. He added that staff recommends: approval of this request. Mr. MacGilvray asked about construction on the slte and Mr. Callaway explaIned that a house has been moved to the site, but has not been, and will not be, set permanently until the land is rezoned. The public hearing was opened. Bill Carfker cameforward,ldentlfied himself as an applicant of the request, offered to answer any quest ionsthe>Cornrnission may have , and requestedapprova 1 of this request 0 Mr. 'MacGllvrayasked about h Jsp 1 ans and heexplai nedthatat the time he had purchased the land he thought ltwasout of the City and had only found out itis in the newly annexed area recently, He stated that all City codes will be met after rezoning of the land, but that the house Is not yet permanently set. No one else spoke. Public hearing was closed. Mr. Brochu made a motion to approve this rezoning reques.t with Mrs. Stall i ngs seconding. Motion carried unanImously (4-0J. AGENDAJTEM NO.4: 84-115: Apubllc hea'ringonthe question of rezoning part of a 32.28 ac retract 1 ocatedsouthofthe Woods tock . Subdlvi sian. andeas t.' of theR i cha rds SubdJvisionfromSlnte Famll Residential DistrictR-l to General Commercial. District C-l 23.28 acres andAdmlnlstrative~ProfessionalDistrict A-P 6.32 acres. Application is in. the name ofSypcon Construct i on Corporation . ; Mr. Callaway located the tract6f land, pointed out area zonJngand land uses, and explained that the extensions of Dartmouth and Holl'emanstreets will intersect on this tract, He then stated that staff cannot support this request for the following three reasons: (l)The request does not comply with the Land Use Plan,as high dens'ity resi- dential uses are reflected for -most of this area with lowdensJty residential uses ""pt-z Hi nu tes 8-2-84 page 2 .( reflected on the southwestern portion, (2)Theprop0sedC-lzoni 9 would not be compa- tible with the existing and planned residential uses to the sou h and west of this tract, and (3)The'quantltyofexistlng and plannedC-l zoning exceeds projected need for com- mercial land uses without suchdev<iations from the approvedtand Use Plan. He went on to point out the fol1owlngchangeshaveoccurred in this area since adoption of the City's plan: (l}The proposed Holleman Street extension width has been increased to hand 1 eaddi tionaltraffic loads, and' (2) A 1 arge C-l andA-P area hasbeenes tab 1 i shed west of the subject tract. Mrs. StallIngs asked the widths of the proposed streets and City Engineer Pullen replied that Holleman Street wlllbe 47 feetlnwidth and Dartmouth Street will b~ 56 feet in width. Mr. Callaway added that this tract wi'll have a large amount ()f frontage on Holle- man. Mr., MacGilvray asked what wasplannedi'n the area which is in the flood plain and Mr. Callaway said the flood plain will affect any type of developmen;t, but it can be used if all restrIctions are followed. He added that parking can pe aeveloped in the flood plain or that area could be used to offset density should the tract be used for residential development. The public hearing was opened. Larry Wells ofB ishop&Assoclates came forward as a representat ive .of the app 1 i cant and stated that the applicant has requested thi,srezoning as he bel Teves the conditions have changed 'In this part of the>Cltyenough to warrant changing the LandUse/Comprehensive Plan. He askedifhe could put a conceptual planon'the wall and did so after permi.ssion was granted. He also passed around a letter from the City Manager to: the appl icant. He went on to state that the Comprehensive Plan i sj ust that; a plan whl eh 9louldbe used as a guideline but which should be subject to change as conditions change. He said that commercial development atthislocatlon could mean a reduction in the demand on the lnfrastructure(sewer&water)and added that the street extensions are being designed for commercial use in this area. He indicated that the impact on the: streets would probably be less with commercial 'development here than it w0uld be with hIgh density residen- tial development (as the land Use Plan shows). He stated that commercial zoning in this locatlon,added to land<which has already been rezoned to commercial, could create a definable businessdlstrlctfor the City, adding that the-flood plain could be developed as greenbeltsthroughoutthlsarea~ He then stated that although, as staff has indicated, therei san abundant amount of vacantcommerci ally zoned .1 and in the Ci ty, there i s a 1 so an overload of hIgh density; residential land. Mrs. Stallings asked how the division into speclficzoningdlstricts.wasmade and Mr. Wells answered that an attempt has been'made to continue the blend .of tbe A-P district (recently begun) , adding tb~t A-P zoning! is more compatible with, and. can be better developed in a flood plain area than commercial. zoning. He .added that he and hi sappll cant are request ingapprova 1 of this r!e~uest as subm:i tted as they can see no detriment to the City, and also because this type of development may even causeless impact than that indicated on the ComprehensivePlar:t. Mr. Martyn asked what the blue color on the conceptual plan represents and,M'r. Wells explained that it represents water-scaplng which would be inthefofmof ponds, pools and fountains" and would represent a natural Implementation of additional amenltieswhich is already taking place in larger cities. Mr. .MacGilvrayaskedthesquare< footage of development which is planned and Mr. Wells said that, at this time, is unknown, but pointed out that although the p ]an presentedi,sonl yconceptua 1 in nature, every effort has been made to draw it to a scale to represent what could be developed In square footage, and includes the required parklngforthebulldlngareashown.Headded that he-has done this type of drawing to exemplify the highest density possible, adding that reclaiming \land with so much flood plain would be financially prohibitive for low density residential use. Jerry Bishop of Jerry Bishop & Associates came forward to speak as a representative of theapplicantandexplatnedthath s firm's experIence in working on projects in this area dates back to the early 1970' ; then poi nted out that the Comprehensi ve Pl ani s a plan only andshouldserveasagu del ine topla,nningdevelopment, streets and infra- structure whIch mIght be necessary inan area. He stated emphatically that it is his ( ""P'&'Z'M i nut e 5 8-2-84 page 3 belief that the.ownerofland should be able todevelop his land as he desires as long as that development fs not detrImental 'to the health, welfare or safety of the citizens of the City. He pot ntedoutthatcommercial zon i ng Inth is area which i sadj acent to the already developed RegIonal Mall and high density apartments would not be detrimental to the area, addIng that Dartmouth and Holleman Streets,. when completed, will be' very busy streets and have been desIgned to carry heavy traffic. He added that this request representscommerclalzonlngforverylargetracts and does not represent strip commercial zoning ,which is frowned on, by the City. He stated that the currentR-l zoning is the result of h0w Jandwas brought into the City at the time of annexation, adding that staff's statement that there is already ample commercially zoned land in the City is superfluous as the area is clearly an area for commercial zoning. No one else spoke. The public hearIng. was closed. Mrs. Stal1ingsstated that residential development along this major intersection would be very unusual, Mr. Br'ochuasked If thi s landi s R-lorR-6 and Mr . Martynexpla ined that it is currentlyzonedR-l ,butts reflected as R-60r high densityresldential on the Comprehensive Plan. M.r.Brochu asked Mr. Mayo If this area would be' devreloped as resi dentialandMr.Mayo saldthat the recentrezon ings in this area andther changesi n the width of Holleman creat ingamajor intersection atDartmouthrepresentclhanges made to the ComprehensJvePlanandhave made this a favorable locatlonfQr commencialdevelop- rnent. He stated that he has no argument with the request except that itvi~lates the development pol icleswhichwere established to give guidance, adding that t.hese policies call for a landusebufferbetweenC-l zonlngand R-lzonlng, therefore the 'tracts abut- ting established R-I development probably should be A-P. He suggested this!~ould be ac~omp llshedby reversing the proposedA-P t rac ton the northwest a rea of thei.ntersec t ion with the proposed C-l tract on the southwest area. of the intersection, or if. this does not meet wlt'h Commts'slonapproval, then he would request that conditions beiset requiring either abrlc~wall , as has been used in the past, or larger setbacks to pro:videa buffer betweencommercl aldevelopmentandexlstingresi dentlaldevelopment. . Di scusis ionfo 11 owed rega rdlng theposs t blllty ofestabl ishi nga down town type area in thi s \ a real 'and Mr. Mayo saId that this has not been addressed, but Lfany area'were developed' into aisort of central buslnessdlstrictln the City, this would probably be the location f:or it. He added that such adevelopmentwoul.dbe unlike tradttionaldowntownar'eas in! pther, older cities, but would be moreof...a central commercial area. Mr. MacGilvray stat'ed.thatas he sees 'what has been happening lnthis area, perhaps 40r5 areas of a downltowndistrict mi ght be developed , but added that he sees noway these separate areaswill' be connected, and wondered if perhaps the City could help develop some kind of plan so people could move from one development to another and present that plan to the,developersiin the area. Mr, Mayoreplfedthat ~heCitywould certaInly be wllling to try to do this, but stated that any attempts to connect separate shopping centers in the past have failed. Mr, Pullen was asked, If sIgnalizatIon is planned at the lntersectlonof Holleman: & Dartmouth and he replfedthat s'topslgnsare now being planned, but signalization will be installed If it becomes warranted. Mr~ Brochu asked if Mr. Bishop would reply to the possibility of "flip-flopplng"theA-P andC-l districts as has been suggested. Mr. Bishop stated that his applIcant would be amenable to a compromise, but feels that this request is legltlmatebasedon studlesmadeof the area. He added that site plan rev'iew could help with contra 1 ,stat' ngthatheag reestha t a buffer i 5 necessa ry,butthat i t: wou 1 d not necessarflyhavetobealand use buffer. He added that changing that tract to A-P would not necessarily address the problem, asking what difference there is between an attorney's office and a haIr shop, He then addressed the sU9gestlonof a pedestrial right-of-way, adding that they ,feelthlsls a very i.mportantpartof thed.evelopment of the area and they are hoping that this can be established along the floodway.~ Mr. M'C) rtynstatedthathewanted to goon record as be i ngaga ins t th i s reques t for severa 1 reasons ,I ncludlngthefact that although the ComprehensIve Plan, Is not set in concrete, he feels that this request andothe'rs in the past have chopped that plan to pieces, all~w- p&Z Min.utes 8-2-84 page It (' ingptecemeal zonlng; that there has been no indication of any plans made for a downtown area but rathertndivldual development of large chunks of commercial land; and, that there is an over-abundance of vacant commercially zoned land, therefore there is no more needed a tt hi' 5 time. Mrs. Stallings made a mot Lon. to approve this request with Mr , MacG i 1 vtaysecond ing for the purposes of more dIscussion, Mr. MacGilvray then asked Mr. Mayo if it is possible for the motion to include a recommendation for alternative zoning, to which Mr. Mayo replied that the Council has requested that the Commission' include recommendations in cases where ltdisagreeswlththe requested zoning. Mrs. Stall ingsstated that she believes thatA-P zoning next to R-l .zonlng wou 1 dbemore in 1 i ne with the Comprehensive Plan, but stated that C-l zonIng would fit in better than theproposedR-6 zoning shown in the Plan. Mr. MacGilvrayasked if site plan review can actually control buf- fering. Mr. Mayo replied that it has only a certain amount of control ,adding that any use listed under theC-lzonlngdlstrictregulations can be developed, and that although some commercial projects and uses could be developed without having a negative impact on the residentIal neighborhood,staff cannot control the uses developed if they comply wIth the ordInance regulation.. Headdedffuat is the primary reason for his suggestion to s-wftch the tracts, orat least takea.portion of this C-l tract and make it A-P.. Mr ,Martyn said he agrees that If the land.i srezoned ,it woul d be better toswi tch the tracts, but he belIeves it is better to defeat,this motion and to ask the developer to changehl s request when it comes before theCounci 1. Mr. MacG 11 vray agreed that a change in the request should be made by the developer after he has time to make some' further studJes~ Mr. Mayo agreed, reminding theCommisison that it only makes ,recommenda- tionsand the C0uncLl makes the final decisions. Mrs. Stallingsasl<ed if the p&Z makes arecommendation,wouldthatmeanthedevelopercouldefther ~hange the request when it goes to Counc i lor 1 eaveltt he same . Mr ~ Mayo rep 1 i ed thati, scor rec t .. Mrs. S ta 11 i ng s thens,tatedshewouldl Ike to amend her motion to add a recommendation that the C-ltract at the southwest area of the Intersection be switchedwlth the A-P tract at the northwest area of the iontersection,thus theA-P tract would abut the existing residential area. Mr. MacGilvrayagreed, and seconded the motion to amend the original motion of approval. Votes were cast, wlththemotlon as amended failing by a vote of 2-2 (Martyn & Brochu a 9 a I n st) . Mr. MacGilvray then made a motion to recommend approval of the portion of the request to rezone the northeastern most a rea (north & east of the intersection) to C-l (wh i chi s adjacent to the Regional Mall), and to leave the remaining area included in the request R-l. Mr. Brochu secondedthJs motion for purposes of discussion. Mr. Brochu then won- dered aloud If this is something thedevelop~r would want. Mr, MacGilvray said that this land adjacent to the Mall is destined to become commercial, and that since this is a recommendation to the Council, It will give thedevelop~r time to reconsider his request, and perhaps make some changes which would address some of the concerns heard tonight. He then added that he Is agaInst anytyp~ of development in a floodplain and thinks this City should change its policIes. Votes were cast and the motion carried 2-1""1 (Martyn against; StallIngs abstained), AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: 84-715: A public"hearingon' the question of'granting'a.conditiona1 use permit for a children's learnIng center to be located within the existing Peace L'utheranChurch, .' 1100 F.M.2818. Application f s in.. the name. of" Peace Lutheran Church Mr. Callawayexplafned that this request is fora learnlngcentyr to be located within the existing facilities and that when the original conditional use permit was issued, no consideration had been given for this type of use of the building. Mr. MacGilvray asked for staff's recommendation,andt~r,Callaway replied that staff has no recommenda- tion regarding this,request,but added that any possible expansion of this facility can be controlled by this Commission by setting a numberlimlt on children to be allowed. p&Z Minutes 8-2-84 pqge 5 Public hearing was opened. Kearby Etheredge came forward 0 represent the Church and stated that this factlttyison the frInge of a residentla area so there should be no traffic problems from this use, adding that there is. adequate off-street parking on the site for this use as well. Sne said there are plans for expansion of the entire Church facility in the future, but the Church is <aware that it will have to come before the Commission at that time, and that this request in no wayincludesanyexpanslonof any- th ingother than use'. Discus 5 lonfollowed concerning the number of children, classes and hours proposed. Nooneelsespokeand,thepublic hearing was closed. Mrs. Stallings stated that she has no problem wIth this request, adding that the facility is located in a good area for this use. Mr. Brochu agreed. Mr. MacGJlvray made a motion to approve this request with the condition that the number of children complywtth state requirements. Mrs. Stallings seconded the motion which carried unanimously (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO.6: 84-216: Final Plat ,- Barron Road 'Addttlon(10.77 acres) Mr. Mayo stated this plat complIes wIth the Preliminary Plat which was previously, approved, that the P.R.G. has recently approved a site plan for this tract, and staff recommends approval of this plat. Mrs. Stallings made a motion to approve the plat with Mr. Brochu seconding, Motion cartiedunanlmpusly(4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO.7: '84-217: FInal Plat- Replat of Lots 6,7 & 8, Block 2 Shenandoah Subdivision Mr. Mayoexp.lafned the purpose of thtsplat is to divIde Lot 7 between Lot 6 and Lot 8 as there Is agasJ,1 ne easement across Lot 7 whi ch had not been shown on the prev i ous plat, He stated staff recommends approval ofth isplatwLththe cond it i on that the developers- submit a revlsedplat ~f the entire Shenandoah SubdlvJslo'nwhich reflects the entire gaseasemen.t. 'Mr. Brochu made a motion to app'rovethis plat with the condition that applicants' submit a revIsed FInal Plat of the entire Shenandoah Subdivision which reflects the exact,locatlonof the entire gas easement. Mr. MacGilvray seconded the motion which carried unanimously (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO.8: 84-218: FInal Plat - Rainbow Acres Phase II (264.625 acres) Mr. Mayo. stated that staff tsrequesting postponement of consideration of this ,plat untI,l the next meetIng as construction documents have not yet been approved. Vice Chairman Martyn stated that staff's request is granted and consideration of this plat wIll be postponed. . AGENDA ITEM NO.9: 84-307: PreliminaryPlat- Harvey Acres .(28.24 acres) Mr. Mayo located thelandth is p latrepresents on a map on the wal1,andi nformed the Camm; ssionofameet i nghe and theCi.ty Eng i neer have hadw ith theCoun tyComm i s s i oners concerning the futurelocatlon ofastreetin the area, adding the County Commissioners have informed him that a thorough study of the location will be done before a Final Plat ofthls1and is prepared and presented, therefore staff would recommend approval of this preliminary plat as shown with the knowledge that street locations may change. Mr. MacG,i lvray asked about the 5 foot side setbacks indicated and Mr. Mayo stated that because this land is intheETJ, the City would have no control over setbacks, etc., but if the land is annexed into the City prior tc>buildinganything, all development wou 1 d at thatti me have to conform to Ci tyrequi rements. Mr. MapG il vray then made a motion to approve this preliminaryplatwi.th the knowledge that the street location may change and also with the 'conditionthat yard setbacks be changed to conform to the City's Ordinance No. 850 (the Zoning Ordinance). Mr. Brochu seconded- the motion which carried unanimously (4-0). p&Z Minutes 8-2-84 page 6 ( AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: OtherSusiness Mr. Pullen;andMr.MacGilvrayentered into a discussion regarding development within thebounda ri'esof.afloodpla in wi thMr.MacGi lvray stat inghe is not neces sari 1 y con- cerned too much wIth the safety aspect, but rather with the changes which result to the flood plain downstream.. He contends that flood plains within this City could be used to connect sections of the City together, as most of the flood plain area leads to theUnlverslty and greenbelts with bicycle paths and pedestrlal walks could be developed in them with intense planning and cooperation between the City and various developers. Mr. Brochu announced hewou ldbeabsent. from the meeting on August 16th.. There was no other business todJscuss. Mr. MacGilvray then made a motion to adjourn with Mr. Bro- chu seconding. Motloncarried unanimously (4,-0) . APPROVED: ATTEST: C i tySec ret:ary,DlanJones ( ,:::'8::Z (.'~lCt i. t1f1: ~motion con~idered by the Commission recommending approval o'f this. request with the C-ltract at thesol..lthwest cprner' of Dart.m('.)uth and Holleman changed to ?'l-'-P and the A-P tract at. the nort.h\o'Jest .col'-ner- changed to C-1 failed by a tie vote (2-:2). "[h(':?Commission then considered a~otion recommending appr"OYal. of the propqs!=d C-ltractat theno,"'theast cor'ner. The Commi ssi on stab~dthatthe appl i cantc;:oul daddress the conc;;er-nson.t:hebalance ofthel proper-ty. (.)r'ior" to rCoLlncil consi der-ati em of the n.?quest. 1'1'1 is moti, Of'} passed by a vote CJ .f ::2 ..... 1 ..... 1 " (.~ clel i. t. :i. f.J 1"1<::\ 1 E) 1:: <::\ -I: .f: ,.,.' (~C) Olfn e n t:~5 : TheP&Z recommendation for C-1 zoning on only a portion of this reques~ is not a recommendation for R-l zoning on the baJ. ance of the tr-ac::t. The Commission was not able to f"each an agreement un ch~nges in the proposal to address the C;..... :t.l F< .....l'c:cJrt -t": 1 i. C,: 1: i r1l: "'; €:~s C::)l.t t: l"if/~Jef:s i.:~:) CJ r' t:i.01'1 (:J..F t: ,..} i.~~. t: 11"c:\ c:: t II T f"l(: ~5 t: a 1: .f: 1'1 (::UE;c:\ (:j \/ i. so; e~ c:I t: t.} e c:q::> ~:) 1. i. c: an t ' s; r E~ foJ r" e S E" rl t at :i. \l €~~ t 0 address the Commission~s concerns by reversing theC-l/A~P tracts~estof Dartmcuthor by providing an A-P buffer along f, , J' · " '. J, I ,. , . l' , .. '.. . ::I.' I' 'f '\: 1f.-? (:CJITlI11CHl ::) CH..trl (;'::'\1''' :J.(-?S' .tA.fJ.\:: "l(~N 3. ~E;': J.Tl<;J II"" e~s J. (' erl''': J. a.. a 1''' f:?cl 5 II "r hf? s t: at 1: 1: .. r" f? c:: l:Hnm(~,.l <:1 a t i. CJ f'l'c\ J:) C) 'V~? :i. ~s . rl 0 t a"'" f? (: CJ in E~ 1"1 <:j f.:\t i. <:) 1'1 f C) r" denial. The staff did not SLlppo''''t. this request ,for the three reasons given above. We have identified two changes in conditions .in~e adoption of the land use plan. The5~ tr-acts ''''epresent appr-o~d matel y 24% of the fnmtageal ong t..le) 11 (~~f(t ~::H'l 'fr"c:Hn ,~'r €-? ~.~ c15 f~ \1 f.? "t.CJt I, e 13y ..... J::i at S;Si,. "r i, e t.J a 1 61 rH:: E! c).f: th i ~ frontage (wi th the e;<c!=pti on of one small tract) is zoned C-l or A-P. The staff concern with relationship to existing or planned residential areas can be addr~ssed by t::f f"' C) \( i. ~:} i C) 1'1 C) .f: a II s t.~(= ':1 cl CJ to''' 1''', !! :i. .1' ~~ CJ I, i f1 ~~i . rl1: e 1'1 gs i t Y ( CJ 1''' CJ 17." e I.... ~:scl1 tt't: :i.(::lr1 1=.5 \1\11"} i. c: tl ttn-? ap pI it:: (::tf1 t: in f (;.~i"l t c).f f €-?II") .u 1