HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes
MINUTES
WORKSHOP CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY,JULY 24, 1985
4:00 P.M.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor'Pra-tem Runnels, Councilmen
Boughton, Brown, Tongeo
COUNCILMEMBERS'ABSENT: Mayor Halter, Councilmen Bond,
McIlhaney
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Bardell, Assistant City
Manager VanDever, City Attorney Locke,
Director of Capital Improvements Ash,
Director of Planning Mayo, City Secre-
tary Jones, Assistant Director of Plan-
ning Callaway, Zoning Official Kee,
City Engineer'Pullen, Planning Techni-
cian Volk, Council Coordinator Jones
STUDENT' GOVT. LIAISON: Hachtman
VISITORS PRESENT: See guest register.
The meeting was called to order with Mayor Pro-tern Runnels pre-
siding.
Agenda Item No.1 - Joint discussion with Planning and Zoning
Commission: Draft Zoning Ordinance.
Members of the Blanning and Zoning Commission present at the
meeting were Celia Stallings, Mark Paulson and Dan MacGilvray.
Director of Planning Mayo presented the item. He stated that
most of the proposed changes in the ordinance were directed at
improving definitions and wording in the text in order t() remedy
the problems that have been -encountered in trying tointf~rpret
and use the ordinance. He not~d that Section 9 relating to park-
ingrequirements was completel.y?~..,rewritten in order to provide
greater clarification.
Mayor Pro-tern Runnels suggested that an index be included in the
ordinance to help in locating topics.
C<;:>uIlci:lIt\C3.IlTongco expressed her concern with; ~E!7;t::fqIl.v~n\concerning
l1.ewly~nne}Cedte1J?J7itQ]fY. She requested some exphmation of the
section requiring a developer to discontinue constructiol:"} activi-
ty within a newly annexed area without first applyingfo]r andob-
taining the appropriate permits or other approvals requi:ced by
city ordinance.
( ,
WORKSHOP ...CITY..COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 1985
PAGE 2
City Attorney Locke stated .thatconstruction ofa project: can be
halted if it is not complete-and in operation at the time of an-
nexation.
Councilman Tongco asked if there were any legal problems concern-
ing that procedure. City Attorney Locke replied negatively.
After further discussion, Mayor.Pro-temRunnels suggested that
Director of Planning Mayo review.the document and highlight the
proposed revisions. '. He not.ed that. Lowell Denton, a previous City
Attorney,haddistributed....a...memorandum indicating that a study of
the zoning ordinance was to be initiated. He questioned whether
the proposed revisions resulted frornthat stu~y.
Director of Planning Mayo replied affirmatively. He proceeded
with a review of the proposed document and explained the proposed
additions of a Northgate Commercial DistrictC-NG and Commercial
Planned Unit Development DistrictC-P.U.D. He stated that addi-
tionaldefinitionswere included, which attempt to address some
legal problems that have been encountered in the past.
S9ItlJ!li,-99:iOl'l~I'. ~a.9c;i.~yray r~ferred to thede;J::initioo of Hotlle Occu-
l?Cl.1:.ions.l:secti9n{<i)andquestion~d whether :indi viduals having a
'home occupation which is not delineated must make application to
the city fora conditional use permit.
Assistant Director of Planning Callaway explained the process
that usually takes place when an individual is considering start-
ing a home occupation.. Zoning Official Kee stated that if an in-
di vidual has a home occupation in operation prior to app:r'oval of
this ordinance it would be considered a non-conforming use.
Commissioner MacGilvray stated that the definition for One Owner-
ship is confusing. Planning Technician Volk noted that the words
"as to such parcels" should :be deleted from the definition.
Comm~ssione~Pa~ls()l1 a.s](eqwha.~~~_is the purpose for the \diefinitioriif
for~U1.1<.l~n9"iI>.1.pt.<():r. Premi+.s.~s.fCJty Attorney Locke explahied
that a definition 'for Buil;di.ng Plot and Premises is included in
order that the perimeters of the building plot are accessible
during construction.
Councilman Runnels suggested that adefinition>fordensityY be in-
cluded in the proposed ordinance. Director of Plann~ng Mayo con-
curred that a definition of gross density would be advantageous.
WORKSHOP CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 1985
PAGE 3
Councilman Brown referred .tothe<defirlit.io.n.for'l'oWf1,l1ouseand
asked what term is used to describe . a... group of attached dwelling
units exceeding twelve unitso Director of Planning Mayo stated
that usually when there are more than twelve dwelling units the
structure will exceed 204 feet, which is prohibited under the
FireCode.e
p:r:9ces;S;i for ... d~~iS; ~(.)l);s;conce ll'Il.~Il9(!n.e\'l'a.Y 'i:l.nn.l7J0l7Q t!erri# o~il. City
Attorney Locke explained the.. appeals process e
ZOll.ingOfficJ..al............Ke7........exp~a.ined. '..the .....changesmade. in~E;~:9.t.ioll
6 ..lIT()N-+cONFO~IffGUSES. .. She stated that in the current zoning
ordinance refer.ences to non-conforming .uses alld how they are
dealtwitharemadeinvarioussectionse.Shefurther stated that
in. the proposed ordinance these items have been consolidated into
a.separatesectionto.make all the information concerning non-
conforming uses more readily accessible.e She noted that the most
subatantial . change in Sec.tion6. concerns the length of time al-
lowed for discontinued use or .abandonmentbefore the presumption
of intent to abandon shall have been established , which 'Nas
changed frorntwelve(12) to three (3) months.
Councilman Tongco questioned how .~ n'on-conf0rming use is handled
if there is change in ownership. ; City Attorney Locke stated that
~~~fhu:~eW{~f~n~~:i~fn~~~~~~i~~~~nih~fn~~~~~~::~{~gW~~:.rnarketed
~df~ Mayor Pro-tern Runnels questioned the desirability of organizing
~~O. ,.. ,tT.
\' ~ the Zoning Districts in alphabetical order to make it easier for
~ ~ the casual user to locate information.
~t)(lJcI
Cornttlissioner MacGilvray suggested that each' Zoning District begin
on anew page.
Director of Planning Mayost'ated that the proposed organization
of the document is typical of ~ost zoning ordinances.
;~"
Zoning Official Keesuggested tha.t a table of contents be in-
cluded in the document. Mayorpro-tem Runnels concurred with the
suggestion.
There was concurrence on the part of the Council and Planning and
Zoning Commission that each Zoning District should begin on a new
page.
Direct()r ..ofPlanningMayo noted that on page 7-7,;"llnderDistrict:
C-N NeighborhoodBusiness~C. Special Restrictions, section (c)
was added in order to limit the size of the C-N District to two
WORKSHOP CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY,.... JULY 24, 1985
PAGE 4
acres to maintain its compatibility with surrounding zoning dis-
tricts.
Mayor PrQ....~ernJ.}\l1ll'l71$<s~atedthatthe current. State Legislature
rede finedv.tIi9l)d;J.el1.G){(les.asdistinctfrom manufactured hous ing . ^ and
questioned. if that changE! is reflected in the proposed document.
Assistant Director of Planning Callaway noted that the references
to modular homes have been deleted from. the proposed document.
After further discussion of the Neigbborhood Business District
C -N, As s istant.. Direc~or9 fPla,flI1i ng.G a 11 a \'l ay . ...~:x:P1. ~i I1~g: <~~I1g e s
mad e i n;Rectiol1.\;Z.19.. P~~'l'JlI<fl'P__U ~DPLANNEJJ. tJNI'l'DE . .';"iA~N'l'
concerningthe.LaIldUseII1t~l1.f:;it.yRa-t.d;gl?. ....~q~()r .pro...,tem Runnels
referred to. theUL~nd. USfaIntensityRQ.tiosChart~'.< and questioned
if the floor area' ratio ...( FAR) is based on gross land area . As-
sIstantDirectorof Planning Callaway replied affirmatively and
noted that the word "gross" would be added to the definition of
FAR on the .chart.
CorrunissionerMacGilvray questioned why the metes and bounds des-
cription oftheSheratons.iteisincluded in the proposeddocu-
ment on page 7....15. Director of Planning Mayo explained t:.he rea-
sons for including the legal desc~iption in;the document.
\
Councilman . Brown asked if .. t~e term'" financial. <. ;institutiOns" on
page 7-8 and the worduban]{'.r on page 7-9 are inter.changeable.
Assistant Director of Planning Callaway replied affi.rmatively and
explained that since the C-l District is cumulative and allows
A-P and C-3the word "bankllcan be deleted from the C-l District,
with some clarification that "bank" is included in the definition
of "financial institutions" under the A-P District.
City Manager.. Bardell pointed out a problE:f~.thCit.."thecity has en-
countered. for a number.ofyearswithtl1~i:':Il1iI'1~f(lCil.:p9-r1<iIlg require-
ments established for. Sing'lie-~~ilYResi<iential LDistrict R-l ~... He
noted that it is almost impossible foremergency'vehicles to tra-
verse a twenty-eight foot resi~entialstreet when there. c3.revehi-
cles parked on both sides of th"e .... street .He stated that the ci ty
has addressed the parking problems in multi-family areas, but. has
been overlooking the problem in the R-l District.
After further. discussion, Di17ectorof.....PlanningMayo stated.,that
()rlpa~e 8-5 Ipe..pti,c?n 8. l7'rempgrarySalesOfficesa,nd J~OCiejf
-Hgl1les~:t, wasa.dd~d;(-t.o allow the activity in the Single Family Res-
idential R-l District. He pointed out that a time limit for this
activity has been included.
(
WORKSHOP CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 1985
PAGE 5
i',{'
CoInIllissionerPaulson .statedhisopinionthatth~minimum width of
twenty-three<feet (23 I ) . forc:irculatle>n ais res between or
adjacent.to head-in (90 degrees ) parking spaces is inadequate and
suggested that the minimum width be established at twenty-four
feetf24' ) .
Director of Planning. Mayo replied that the width of twenty-three
feet. (23') is workable.
S:o~issiQn~r.......r4a~Gi....~ v'ray questioned why t.h~;IJ1~rl,imUIn off-street
P?-1:~.in.~ir~~\1i~17~~~n.~~aF~~~~t'T2Tnt for. resta.urants serving alco-
holtit.hanth..osefor restaura,n"t:.'~'--'rtQt$'E:!rv-irlg- alcohol.
Director .of.PlanningMayoexplainedthat restaurants serving al-
coholrequiremoreparking because their patrons spend more time
in the .establishmen1:...............~e.....explain.~d.th~footnote included..on. page
9-6 ,concerningthelocationof:res:tauraI?-ts in shopping centers.
zoning..pf.fiCia.l.....Kee...........-=xp+ciiqecl..the... ....proposed changes in Se.9-p'ion
.~.~,t:~.~Q"P.pE'l'I()N'~..EXTENSI()N'dealing\olith landscaping. require-
ment~~ She noted that. the revision provides a four month exten-
sion perlodfrornthe date of the Certificate of OccUpanC}T upon
the approval of an application for extension with a bond or let-
ter of credit in the amount of fi\{e (5) times the required number
of landscape points for the projeci.t and if the required landscap-
ing.is.not completed by the end of the four month period the bond
is forfeited. She further noted that the applicant will still be
requ.iredto put in the landscaping.
Conunissioner MacGilvray asked a question concerning the amount of
bond that would be required. ZonlngOfficlal Keestated that the
amount of bond required would be five (5) times in dollars of an
amount that is equal to the number of landscape points required
and noted that clarification of that requirement would be added
to the proposed document. She explained that the bond isa pen-
alty that the developer forfeits if the required landscaping is
not completed within the four month period.
,~".^ ...... .....:......... '...... .... .... .... ... \
Conunissioner MacGilvray noted that. i'l't.)!-lfff~t"ingU is used quite of-
ten by the Planning and Zoning Corrunission as an argument inzon-
ingdecisions. He questioned what validity this argument has and
if there is written documentation to support it.
Director of Planning Mayo stated that the city'sComprehensive
Plan - Plan 2000 references ubuffering" and is used to support it
as an argument in zoning decisions. City Attorney Locke con-
curred with the statement.
WORKSHOp..CITY.COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNE SDAY , . JULY .....24,1985
PAGE 6
Afterfu:r:therdiscussion,DirectorofPlanning.Mayostated that
the... .changes?sug gested'.. .will.....beincorporated . ..i n..the. .... ..propos ed
ordinance a.nd copies will be made available t.othe public. He
notedthat.thell.ext step' in the adoption process will invol ve a
series of public. hearing is .......infront.of ..both'. the Planning clnd
ZoniIlgC()nup.ission . and.. th~ .Cit.y. Council. ..... He questioned. whether
thel:'"ei~aIleedforany ,additional workshop meetings to discuss
the.p:roposed<ordinance.
The members of the Elalln,i.ng aIldZoning CommissioIl.aIl.,lthe City .
COllncil.concurredthatIlpaddit-iona 1 ..wo.rk sh op ..m~etingswould . be
nee essa:ry ..and ..........dir ected. . t11e. ....staff ...... tobegi n sched1.l1ingp.ublic hear-
ings to consider the proposed ordinance.
Agenda... Item No.... 2 .....- ..Adjo\.1rn.
Mayor Pro-tern Runnels adjourned the meeting at 5:50 P.M.
A~'C.~2-
Rob~rt C. Runnels ,Mayor Pl~o-tem
8~15-85
.
this
if a
.
Chairman Kaiser stated that he had requested that this item be inclu~~~:~nthe
agenda for several reasons,including several proposals made in the8,r~filwhich
would have a definite impact on tllat part of the City, as well asth~ apparE~ntly
rather large amount of land speculation taking place there. He stated he would
like to appoint a study committee consisting:ofMr. Dresser, Mr. MacGilvray and Mr.
Brochu to work with staff, adding that prec~dents for tp.is type of studyha~'e been
set in the past to study areas includingtheiEast Bypass, the Golden/Triangle, the
University Drive corridor. He went on toextl1ain that although he had not
established exact boundaries for this study', :ihe would think it should inclucle from
4
9-5-85
12
~
9-5-85
(8)Suggested the
to
no
.
13
CITY OF COLLEGE "STATION, TEXAS
Planning and Zoning COInmission
11, 1985
p.m..
Workshop
Wendler It
3/4
'.~~
decided toessentiallv leave the Conditional Use
there is adeq~ate protection as it is written.
Mr. Dresser then referred to Section 9.2 A.4,specifically, the reference made to
Chapter 3, College Station City Code. After discussion and researcll, the decision
was made that the phrase should actually: read "the adopted Comprehensive Plan of
the City of College Station".. A typograpllical error was pointed out in the last
sentence of the same section, i.e~ the' word HbeH had been omitted.
1
~
r
that, the word "maintained"
to require that potholes in
times in the same condition as
also decided to delete the 6 foot screenfencerequtrement.
2
....
,
9--11-85
Mr. \~<3.~~;1J{t'I3.~cllJ'l<lo~1'i. K<3.i~~~a~~7d. .....the Zoning Official could be granted
s~tia~;iQ.llflutb.orityforZonipgiOrdin/3.ll()(i1;violations, and after discussion, Mrs. Kee
stated she would check with the City's Legal Department regarding this question.
zoningand.bufferingthrough
no decisions being reached.
~
'Chairman , Ronafd Kaiser
City. Secretary, Dian.Jones
..
3
~
/Jjt#r-
ordinance amending and superceding
Planning at TAMU soon to discuss
is located in the area under
\
Mrs. Stallings stated the University Drive Study is almost complete and should be
included' in the packets for the November 7th meeting.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 12. Adjourn.
Mr. Wendler made a motion to adjourn. Mr. MacGilvray seconded the motion WIlich
carried unanimously (5~O).
APPROVED:
----------------------------~-
Chairman '_ionaldKaiser
-'. ....
ATTEST:
7
City Secretary,DianJones
P8.i.Z
carried unanimously (6-0).
11-7--85
conditions
THE CHAIR AGAIN EXERCISED ITS
ANN'OUNCING THAT THE NEXT IrrEM
TO CHANGE THE ORDER OF THEAGEN'DA,
IDERl~D WOTJLDBE ITEMNOo 9.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9. Consideration of the University Drive Land
Use.. .Study' and'. recommendations.
Mr. Callaway briefly explained that the study and report came as a result of
direction by Council to.conduct ..the..r;tudyfollowing pressure < by numerous <filPplicants
for 0-1 zoning along the eastern part of. University Drive~dOne actual Jez9ning
to C-lin that area. (Please refer to actual study included with thesem~nutes).
Mr. Wendler asked if this report proposes rezoning in the area or i~ it i~tobe
used for simply putting people on notice. Mr. Brochu explained that thet1 will be
no rezoning as adirect.1"esult of thisstudYsbut that thecommitt~~had,~eenasked
to look at the area because of the repeated requests for rezoning9Ilcery,in
tracts,. and this report either confirms the existing plan or reco~i?~s c:~anging
conditions in the area which might callseachanf:{e in the plan. Th~st;ud:y" 'itself is
to serve asa guideline should a rezoning request come up in the future.
Mr. Callaway explained that this report does not recommend changes in the adopted
Land Use Plan, and the committee and staff would only ask this Commission to
endorse the. report or endorse it with any mod.ifications it decides on " Thereport
will not. be sent to Council for formal.consideration as wasrthe.Ea~t~~~~s.La.nd
Use Recommendations, but would simply be forwarded to Councilforitsrin:fc:>rmation
andtosupplementtheLandUse.PlanasadoptedQ
. .
Mr . Paulson said that because hehadnothadt;ime tothoroughlystlldythi!;.. report
he would simply abstain from voting if the rest of the Commission waS ' reaciy . to vote
on endorsement. Mr. Dresser stated that he is comfortable with the report; Mr.
Wendler said he is ready to endorse it.,
Mr. Wendler then made a motion to endorse this report tobeusedasa:general
guideline by staff in evaluating rezoning requests in> this area; that <stajff should
furnish this.information<todevelopers considering requesting rezoning in. the area,
and that this Commission sllouldreferencethisreport as a document to supplement
the Land Use Plan as adopted when considering rezonillg requests in the area; and
further that this report sllouldbe forwarded to Council with this Commission's
endorsement.
Mr . Dresser seconded the motion which was approved by. a vote of 5-0-1 (PattIson
abstained for reasons.mentiQnedabove) ~
AGENDA ...ITEM....NO. 7.. 85-804.: Consideration of .an 'ordinance
amending andsuperceeding Ordinance No. 850 ,the Zoning OrdinllDce.
Mr. Kaiser referred to his memo (attached to theseminlltes)and requested the
Commission to consider each item listed and take action so that tIle revised Zoning
Ordinance can be forwarded to Council with the Connnission's recommendatiolll to
approve, advising that notice will follow that the Commission .has acceptedlor
rejected the language proposed by staff on these particular points. Mr. Dresser
said lle would personally like to see the ordinance read as this Commissiolll want
prior to sending it to Council., Discussion followed on the various points listed
6
P&Z Minutes
11-7---85
in the lnemo
and to vote on
and
to direct staff
Use Permits' - Mr.. Wendler made amotion.. to change the
on how to appeal (the actual mechanics, forms and language) decisions of
coordinat~ng .the language used'.withthe "City Secretary. Mr. Brochu
the mot ioh... which carried unanimously (6-0).
a motion to incorporate the lan~~age used
7
11-7-85
~1r" Dresser
one
how
from staff.
of
~ailroad crossing from
the Industrial Rig}l
8
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
THURSDAY,. MARCH 13, 1986
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Halter, Councilmen Brown,
McIlhaney, Runnels, Boughton, Tongeo,
Bond
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Cole, City Attorney Locke,
Director of Capital Improvements Ash"
Director of Planning Mayo, City. Engi-
neer Pullen, City Secretary Jones,
Zoning Official Kee, Asst. Director
of Planning Callaway, Asst. Zoning
Official Johnson, Purchasing Agent
McCartney, Council Coordinator Garrett
STUDENT GOV'T LIAISON Mike Hachtman
VISITORS PRESENT: See guest register.
The meeting was called to order by. Mayor Pro-tern Runnels, wi th
~1ayor Halter, Councilman Bond and .Councilman McIlhaney absent.
Mayor Pro-tern Runnels noted that Item No. 5 and Item No. 6 were
removed by the applicant.
Agenda Item No. 1 -Approval of the minutes of the City Council
Workshop Meeting, February 26, 1986, the City Council Regular
.Meeting, > Febru8-ry 27, 1986 ,andthe City Council Special Meeting,
March 3, 1986.
Councilman Boughton made a correction to the minutes of the City
Council Regular Meeting on page 4 which should state Church and
Patricia Street instead of Lodge and Patricia Street.
Councilman Boughton moved approval of the minutes of the City
Council Workshop Meeting, February 26, 1986, and the City Council
Special Meeting, March 3, 1986, and the minutes, as amended of
the City Council Regular Meeting, February 27, 1986.
Councilman Tongco seconded the motion which wa? approved
unanimously, 4-0.
Agenda Item No.2-A public hearing to consider an amendment to
Ord inance No. 850 , the Zoning Ordinance, . establishing a new
zoning district.- C-P.U.D.Commercial.Planned Unit Development.
Al Mayo, Director of Planning, presented this item. He stated
the purpose of this district is to provide an opportunity for
-, ~ ;- ,...-- ,..........
. .~; . I
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
THURSDAY, ~1ARCH 13, 1986
PAGE 2
flexible, responsible .commercial developments which will
encourage mixed use development and promote innovative use of
modern development concepts. This district will allow shared
parking, and. landscaping may be accomplished in common areas if
platted and main.tained. He noted the staff and P&Z recommend
approval 0
Mayor Halter arrived at the meeting.
Mayor Halter opened the public hearing.
No one spoke. The public hearing was closed.
Agenda Item No. 3 -A public hearing to consider an amendment to
Ordinance No. 850" the Zoning Ordinance , establishing a new zon-
ing district, District C-NG, Commercial Northgate.
Al Mayo presented this item. He stated this new zoning district
shall apply only to the Northgate area. This zoning district
will relate to the redevelopment of the outlined area from Church
and University Dr. Additional parking and landscaping may be re-
quired if necessary to relieve the parking impact. The staff
would like to see this area contain some historical significanc~e
Mayor Halter complimented on the businesses who have already be-
gun to redevelop in this area. He stated the proposed zoning
district should aid in other development and redevelopment.
Mayor Halter opened the public hearing.
No one spoke and the public hearing was closed.
Agenda Item N.a. 4- Considera t lanat . ord inance amending and
superceding Ordinance No. 850, the Zoning Ordinance, and all
amendments thereto, as well as all.other.ordinances in conflict
with this ordinance, providing a revision.andupdat ing of the
zoning regula tions, .includ iog but not 1 imi tedto.' site. plan
review,. park ingrequiremen ts, . landscaping,.. s igo regulations,
amendment.procedures,theZoning Boardof.Adjustmentand.enforce-
ment and penpltyprovisions, all in accordance with a compre-
hensive plan for thegevelopment pf this 'City, and in accordance
with the provisions ..of the Art i oles IO lla- j., V.A.C.S.
Councilman Tongco stated the ordinance does not cover C-l zoning
immmediately adjacent to R-l property. She suggested a fencing
option of either woodlands or greenbelt which would attract the
R-l property and still al.low C-l zoning. She noted that the
businesses would profit if the option were available because
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
THURSDAY, MARCH 13, 1986
PAGE 3
the land changes as development.. occurs. Mayor Halter commented
that the greenbelt may be more attractive. Cathy Locke, City
Attorney, noted that the staff has begun research on the subject
and has found that a natural greenbelt area can be used as an
alternative toa fence.
Councilman Boughton suggested that the Zoning Ordinance could be
passed at this meeting and the addition of the option proposed by
Councilman Tongco could be made ata future meeting.
Al Mayo stated that he had included i.n the packet a memo from his
his staff. The memo addresses several revisions to the proposed
zoning ordinance. Some of these revisions are changes to the
definition of bed ~ndbreakfast inn, and room/boarding houses.
Councilman Boughton moved approval of Ordinance No. 1638 of the
Zoning Ordinance No. 850 which shall include the zoning di..stricts
C-P.U.D. and C-NG, and the recommendations listed in the memo
from the Planning staff.
Councilman Runnels seconded the motion which was approved
unanimously, 5-0.
Agenda Item No. .5 - A public hearing on the question of rezoni!!Q
Lot 2, LakeviewAcres, located on the north side of Millers Lane
approx. 400 feet east of Texas< Ave., .fromR-1 Single Family
Residential to C-1 GeneralComme.rcial (86-102).
Mayor Halter noted this item was removed from the agenda by the
applicant.
Agenda Item'No.6-.Consideration of a proposed ordinance re-
zoning the above tract.
Mayor Halter noted this item was removed from the agenda by the
applicant..
Agenda Item No.7 - A public hearing on the question of rezoning
LotI Block OneWalden>PondTownhome.s subdivision{21 .64 acres)
located on the north sideofFM 2818 approx. 350 feet west of
Holleman Dr.,. fromR-4Apartments Low Density to R-5.Apartments
Medium Density (86-103J.
Jim Callaway, Asst. Planning Director, presented this item. He
pointed out that the northern part of this tract is multi-family
residential and the balance of the tract is vacant. He also
noted adjacent tracts are vacant. The requested zoning district
is in compliance wi th the land use plan. The staff and Planning
and Zoning Commission recommend approval.
Councilman Runnels asked if the increased density and limited
.," ;-, ,.".r ...;-- _.~