HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report~T~FF R~PCR~'
-Case No.: 88-10~ ~Plic~nt T~~~ ~~~
Re nest: ExpanS~.on ~f the C-I~G gone to include ~ e e1d C~.t;~' ~~~
site.
Location; North side of C:hurch;Street, east side of Wellborn Hd:
Fh~sical Features:
Area: l . ~8 ac
Frontage: 3U0' along t~ellborn Road'; 2'~D' a~ n~ Church
S reet,
Depth: Varies- primarily 135' o'ff of ~e11bo rn Road.
Area Zoning:
North: C-1
East: R~6
South : C=-NG
hest: C=U Texas AB;M University}
Existing Land Use:
~ Subject tract site of old City Ha11`. Buld ~s vacant.
Vacant lots tCity owned} to the north. Resi dential
tprmaril~ apartments} area to t`he east. Co mercial and
i
apartment area to the south. Texas ABM to t
he west, across
~ellbo~n Road and railroad.
i
Land Use Plean:
Area reflected as commercial.
1
En~ineern~:
mater: The tract is served by a 2" waterlin e -not adequate
i, for fire protection.
Viewer: An old 6t' and 4" s`erwerline serves a property.
This system will need upgrsdin~.
Streets: Access primarily to Wellborn Road. Wellborn Road
has adequate oapacity, Church St eet has lnvited
~ capacity.
~ Flood Plaib: No flood plain. Drainage she t flow o
streets.
Notification:
Leal Notice Publicationt } : 12-23-8'1, 1-l -8$
~ Advertised Commission Hearing Dates}. `l-7 $$
~ Advertised ,Counei Hearing Dates: 1-2$-88
Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200': 18
_Response Received: One inquiry, one call support as of
12-29-87.
a
i
'4 _
Staff Comments`: ..
This requested pane ~han~e c~auld pr~vic~~: fc~~~ an e~:ganw~:~~-: .,~~
the Narth~ate special `district created i~~ Mo y 1~~~. ~'~~~
request does not provide fir a substantial c ante irs
permitted uses as the subject tract is curre ntl~r zoned' ~;_._
C-NG zoning would `allow C-1 and R-G uses; C -I~G zoning ~~au1~f
provide for` reduced setback requirements, A llowed uses a~~ci
parking requirements would be established b~T the Project
-Review Committee.
Staff has. n~ objections to the range of uses that the
requested. zoning would allow at this locatio n. Staff fee s
that the prin~pal issue to be addressed by the Commission
and Council is whether to expand the special Morth~ate
district.
'~
P&Z MLNUTES MEETING OF 1-?-88: AGEHDA:ITEM 0. 3: 88-10U:
A public hearing on the question of rezoning Lots 1--6 and 22
~~ `Block 11 Bo` ett subdivision- frog G-1 General Com
y ercial to G-NG
.
Gom~aerc~.al Northgate. Applicant is ion E. Anz.
Owner of
property'is the Gity of College Station.
'Mr. Callaway explained the :request is to expand the C-NG z n g district to include
the subject tracts which are the site of 'the old City Hall He staved `the buildings
on the site are vacant, there are City--owned vacant lots t the north, a resider ial
-.area comprised primarily of apartments to the east, cammer ial and apartment areas to
the south and Texas A8~M to the west across Wellborn Road a d the railroad. -He
.pointed out that `the. area is reflected as commercial on th adaptedland use plan,
and it is :currently zoned C-~. General Commercial. He brie ly re~ie~red engineering
comments which note .that the 2" waterline serving the trac is not adequate for faire
protection, and the existing sewer Ines will. need to be ug raded.
-Mr. Callaway co~mnented that. the requested zone change waul provide for an expansion
of the Narthgate...:special district, and although. it does nv t provide far a substantial
change in permitted uses, it would include R-6 uses and.pr vide for reduced setback
requirements. He went on to s ate that staff .has no objec tions to the range of uses..
that the requested zoning would alloca at`thus location, an after consulting with the
Le~al:Department regarding whether or not this request sho ld actually be considered
since it would involve changing the..baundaries of a specia coning district which: is:
not found in any other part of the Gty, it was determined that the request :could. be
made. He emphasized.: the fact that the real issue is not a e of uses allowed, but:
rather whether or not the special zoning district should e expanded.
opened. Don Anz,, applicant and own
The public hearing was er of .Deluxe Burger Bar and
,
La Taquera, who also recently leased the subject land fro the :City, came forward
and stated that he wants to put a restaurant in the old Ci y Hall, and would like to
da it :with the least amount 'of expense possible:, and he be lieves changing the
district to ~-NG-would cut.:: down an his expenses. He state d that.: he would have plenty
of arkin on the site, so he would not be adding a burden
p g to an already existing
parking problem in the area, but he-would like to put in a gavel lot behind the
building similar to the one behind the Delude Burger Bar.
Mr. Co son stated that although he thinks the idea is a go od one, he wanted to point
i
out there is already a parking problem in this area, and
art of the land included rr
this request is already being -used for parking for La Taq
1 era. Mr. Anz rep ied than.
I
•
Sfiaff Reporfi Rezoning 8$-100
Page #2
t
there will be ~~ spaces available on the .and he is 1.ea~in ahd eve~toaa :~~r ~~~ ~;~. ~:
probably be able to work out': some kind of arrangement with the: o~rnez~ ~.~ t~~~ ~re.Ele ~.
lot behind Delu<~ce Burger;
Mr. Dresser asked how development ~.n the C--NG district can e less e~pens~z~e ~.?~a.~s ~. t
is in a C-l district, since many of the items listed as ch' gad or cn.an~ir~
conditions an the :application will have to be carried out ywa~r. He went on to
state there are avenues to hake to request variances to certain r~qur~ements that_
his Commission cannot consider, and then asked staff if setbacks must b,e mete- before:,.
the building can be .used. Mr. Callawa~r replied that the setback problem must somehoc~~
be resolved, adding ghat the building is now considered-a n n-conforming structure
.and the change of use in the C-1 district would :require tak'n~ a request before the
Zoning board of Adjustment.
l~r. Dresser said that is exactly what he is betting at; tha it is anon:-conforming
use now, but there is a procedure to deal with that if the ser wants to deal :with
it. He added that in addition to ..the use, there re parking Tot standards
which apparently the app.icant does note propose o meet. M . Any replied that it is
~ his intention to finish about one-half of tho lot in a Mann r similar to the "Mudlott'
~ a commercial arkin to }further to the east,
~ P ~
'~ Mr. Gallawa inter °ected that the surface of a parking 'lot is -an issue separate from
Y J
zoning, and should be addressed when the project is proposed and reviewed bar the
P.R.C. He added that just: because a parking lot is`in the arth~ate zoning district'
does not mean that the surface does not have to b~ .the-standard blacktop or concrete.
surface. Mr. Dresser agreed, adding that the surface of a arkin~ lot has-nothing. to
do pith the Narth~ate zoning district, and there is an ave ue to deal with it, just
as there are avenues to falowregarding'the electric drops, setbacks, etc. which are
mentioned on the application, but which have nothing to do with the North ate zoning
district.
Bill O'Brien, contractor for the proposed subject project ame forward and poke of
the existing meters, electric drops and type of ervice which will be required for
~,
~ the project, and haw they relate ta'setback requirements i the Northgate district.
He also mentioned that there is a passibility of proposing some type of landscape
barrier to::discourage vehicles.. from cutting across the cor er of the property. He
stated hat he would prefer-to operate in the C-NG zoning istrict in order to avoid
having to ~a to various boards to xequest variances,, and appears to him to_be
easier to redevelop existing facilities in the C-NG distri t.` He said hat by making
~~ this tract C-NG would bring all- restaurants owned by this ne person under the same
rules, which would make:-them easier to manage, and perhaps sell in the future. He
stated he would also like tc~ postpone a hard surface for t e parking lot until the
~ proposed restaurant starts to pay, but he would try to mak it look as food as'
pos ible with as small an expense as he could manage.
I
No one `else spoke. The pub is hearing was closed.
Mr. Stewart staid that in the ONO zoning district there ar no prescribe regu atlons
regarding parking lots, so there would be no reason taeve; include a parking lot..:
Mr.:Brochu stated;: there are na set ordinance requirements ar parking in the C-NG
district, but parking requirements are set on an indivdua case-b~--.case basis bar the
Project Review Committee, and it is riot automatic that thee is no parking
requirements for ::projects in the C--NG zoning district. He went on to remind everyone
that this issue tonight goes beyond this pecifc project, and how.the future is
affected must be :.oaken into consideration.
Staf f Reporfi Rezon rig $$-100- Page #3
,P _ .:
r. Brochu then read the Purpose statement from ±he Zoning
0rdin~r~ce rear~x~~~~ ~.h~ r,~-.
~tG ~ammercal' Northgate; t'The ores described herein is det ermined t~ be ur~zque a~~d
to contain some historic si~nificancea therefore, tn.is spec ial uobin~ da~~-tric±: ~h~~.~~.
apply only in this area and shall incorporate regulations es~.gned t~ a~.d c~e~r~l4p~e~~
and redevelop~ent in a manner compatible pith the character of the area...". he
explained that this particular rezoning issue is different in that s.pprCVin~ ~.~ ~~~~~:1 c##
be re-creating a special zoning district which was created only after ~: ver~~
detailed, lengthy study.'
Mr. Callaway agreed adding that when cansiderin~ this requ st the Comrnssan should
look at whether or not the special Narthgate zoning distri t should be changed.
' as a real concern with Shan in t
Mr. B ochu sold that he h ~ ~`
r is district, adding the
question of whether the C-NG district is the proper zoning:: for the spec-fic tract
must be addressed, but if the district configuration is ch ged ~.n this instance,
what is to kee still another restaurant located just over
F_ the border from requesting
equel treatment. He stated that the Commercial Northgate oning dis rict was meant
~; to address a specific character of a specific area, and he does not think changing
the boundaries of this special district .for one project is a wise thing to do. In
'addition, he stated that` he does not see anything in the a plicatian which`-addresses
a good reason far atoning change since. all proposed plans- can be carried out under
the existing ~-1 General Cannnercia zoning district.
Mr. Stewart agreed with Mr. Brochu and added that most of he variances; which would
be ,required could be handled with one application. Mr Dr sser reminded everyone
that this Commission does not recommend anything to other oards regarding variances,
nor does it answer for anything those boards or the P.R.C. does, but he does want the
~ applicant o know that there are places to address the pro lems mentioned. Mr.
' Stewart stated that he thinks Mr. Dresser is right, and he just wanted to point .out
that rezoning this particular piece of property is not the proper avenue to take, and
there are other ways to address the problems. Addtionall , Mr. Stewart wanted to
remind the applicant that the area is already congested, d he wou~;d caution him not
to add to the congestion.
Mr. Brochu said this particular piece of property is a`;lar a one and a lot can be
~ done with 'it =- there:. seems to be room to grow, whereas the
~_ properties in the C-NG
district most y cannot be changed.
Mr. Callon stated-that this is an old, existing bu ding w ich is non-conforming, and
erha s should be in the ~-NG zoning district, and'sug~est
P P d that he would prefer to
j give C--NG zoning on 2 lots,.,. and. to leave the rest zoned C- . ' Mr Stewart asked Mr.
Brochu if this Commission can da that and Mr. Brochu said a believes it can, but-
onted out that ma not be what the applicant wants.
p ~ y
'Mr. Colson said that he does not believe an `area can be al 'fined permanently with:
' something on one side of aline in end the identical same hing on the ether side of
the: line out. Other Commissioners dsagreed~wth Mr. Brac u painting out that the G-
NG district is well defined and not just a line on paper. Mr. Stewart expanded that.
~ ~ ,,
idea, tating that Northgate has always been considered
he area close to the earth
~ ;gate, and :close to Univers y..Drive, -and this location is e her, and he personally
s never 'considered' it as ben in "North ate'f Mr. Stew
ha g g rt went on to state that
he `would feel more comfortable considering this request if there were not other ways
~ to uses the. property.
Mr. Stewart ..then made a mot~.on'to deny this request. Mr. resser seconded the..motlon
which carried by a vote of 4_1 ~Calson}.
Staff Report Rezoning 8$-j00 Page #~+