HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesChairman Sawte~.le opened the public hearing. Mike McClu e
of 1722 Broadmo~r in :Bryan came forward. As Mr. FrQehling's
representative, he said that the configuration of the
conceptual plan would serve the applicant's intentions..
Mr. Esmond asked if thecul-de-sac size could'be reduced.
Mr, McC ure paid the `the c~.l-de-sac is presently planned: for
the minimum city requirements.
~°~,..,
In opposition, James ~e~t~ of ` 3208 Bahia Drive, came
forward. He be ieved that he rezoning, if granted, would
significantly alter the `neighborhood. He pointed out he
differences between the R-1 and R-1A zoning classifications.
(Setback ..requirements., density, stc.}
Mr, Dresser asked Mr. ~~ if he was assured that the.
"conceptual plan" 'would be the h~"implemented plan"; would he
and other residents be opposed to the rezoning request?
~..~
Mr. r^t said what while he could not speak for other
residents who have not seen the plan, he was not necessarily
oppo ed to i.t
Assistant to City Engineer Morgan told the Commission that a
note on the plat of this property restricts..drect access
- onto Ponderosa from adjscent residential ots. Thus, she
'i said, 'this cul-de-sac configuration occurred.
Mr.~~ wondered why Staff argues against a variance
.procedure.
Ms. Kee said.-that 'she believed it was appropriate to pursue
a permitted zoning classification which .could handle the
applicant's situation within the constraint of our
ordinances. She also stated that from a staff perspective
the differences in land use of R-1 and R-1A are neg Bible.
~ Seen no one else dome forward, Sawte le c osed the public
g
hearing.
i
Mr. Dresser. suggested that the plat and rezoning request be
considered simultaneously,
l Ms , Kee ~.nf ormed the Commission that they could. table the
rezoning to allow the applicant to brlnq back a plat.
a
there was ~ discussion which revealed that the rezoning
should. not e approved without the ~.~t or the Commission
will have no bads to deny the plat:. if it tecn~.cally meets
all the req~.ircments of R-1A zoning.
__ _ _
a R
Mr. Esmond believed that he request resembled ''spot zoning".
He said that he would be more inclined to approve a smaller
cul-de-sac. He agreed that if lots 2 & 5 are the only 'lot
affected, it should `note: be rezoned.
Ms. Kee said `that in the past., ZBA has preferred
alternatives which are within the confines of the Zoning
ordinance...,
Mr. Gentry, who served on the Zoninq Board of Adjustment,
said that ZBA typically prefers alternative to "spot
variances°P. However, he said that they may grant the
variances if they a.re rely ively minor. He said that he
favors consideration of a p at Tong with the rezoning. He
also`be ieved that some safety issues might hinder reducing
the size of the cul-de-sac.
e.
There was general dlscuss~on regard ng the size of ..the cut-
de-sac.
Mr. Esmond and Chairman Sawtelle agreed that a plat should
be considered with this rezoning reque t.
Morgan informed Mr . McC~ure that Staf f would delay f t ing
the plat at the courthouse until Engineering: approves the
construction documents, however, the plat would be scheduled
for P&Z`andCity Council without those dacumentse
Mr. Gentry summarized the feelings of the Commission and
made a motion to tableths ltema Mra Michel seconded the
motion which carried unanimousl . 6--0 Colson arrived
t ~ ~
during.. this item. ~
AGENDA ITEM N'o. 3: A public hearing to consider rantin a
~ g g
Condltlonal Use Permit fer.a home day ..care for up to 1
children a 1210 Walton. Applicant is Kathy Hudgens.
~I, 90-711
~ ~
Kuenzel presented the S off report. She said that this
applicant currently has a Conditional Use Permit fora day
care at her residence at 203 Francis. She also showed
slides of the proposed..resdence which ha a circular drive.
Kuenzel said that 18 surrounding property owners were
notified. Qf which,.. she stated, the City had received 1
', phone. call. from someone concerned about the. increased
traffic which could result from the day care,
Chairman awte~.le .:reed ~ letter from Pearle Tar~zsr, Kathy.
Hudgen's eighbc~r at X41 Francis. The letter ~. very
complimentary of the udgens' day care,
~,
¢~. rw. _
f
construction o Callie Circle. Legal notice appeared on
December 5 1990 with 3 inquiries and no oppositions.
a
} Chairperson Sawtelle opened.: the public Baring.
1
a
r - Mike McClure of 1722 Broadmoor stated than he and the owner
were present to answer any questions or concerns of the
Comrni son He sfated that the cul-de-sac plan presented_is
the best solution for the site since driveway: access to
Ponderosa is not permitted.
Chairperson Sawtelle closed the public hearing.
~ Mr. E mond moored to approve the final plat of Callie Addition
subject to the removal of the note concerning R-1 zoning. Mr.
Colson seconded the motion which.. passed unopposed ~6-0}.
j '~,,
-AGENDA LTEM N0. 5: Reconsider rezoning of Lot 82, Block 6 of
Southwood Terrace Seotion 3C located on the south side of
:j Ponderosa approximately 3~0- feet ease of the intersection of
j
Ponderosa and Rio Grande Drive., from R-1 Single Family' to R-1A
`Single Family. '~90-110)
Senior Planner Kee presented the staff report recommending
approval of the rezoning rather than having the applicant seek
a variance~snce there is a zoning district available that
would address the ....problem to lot size. The request is in
~' com Hance with the land use lan and is necessar '
p p y to avoid
having to seek a ~rariance as configuration of the property
farces two of the lots to have slightly less than the' minimum
depth required in the R-1 zone. The R~-1A zone does ~.ot have
minimum width ~ depth requirements and allo~rs ..more
flexibility ~.n lit design:. The: applicant has looked at
several different designs and all result in lets with
inadequate depth for compliance pith the requirements of the
R-1 zone. All lots will exceed.. the minimum lot area. 'required
in both the R-1 and R-1A zones.' The average lot'area of the.
existing lots.:. in :Southwood Terrace 3C i5 7,730 quare feet;
....the average lot area of the .proposed lots is 10,339 square
feet. The petition presented was signed by 41 property
owners; 21 own property within 200 feet of the proposed
rezoning; 20 own property outside 200 feet of the pro osed
p
~, rezoning., City Council .will have to passe the: rezoning with a
3/4 majority vote because 54Q of the land owners within 200
o ~ + e e ~
0
feet s~.gned the petition ~.n opposition to the rezoning.
'~ Thirty nine property owners were notified of the request.
Chair erson Sawtel~.e
p opened the public hearing. Seeing nca one
came forward to peak in favor of _ or in oppositioh to the
~ rezor~n she -closed- the ubl~. '
CJ f p ~ hearing .
i
~r Esmond stated th~.t the eacern~ presented in the petition
.were., addressed ~~; the staf epox°t and the goals ~~ the
concearned resde~ ~:~. ~~gald be ~.ch ~ eved bar the rezon~.n e
i
1
j ~
i -
i
j
dir. Mc~el agreed with Nr. Esmond and commended staf f an their
excel ent work in addressing the issues. of concerned
' ~ residents
Mr Dresser moved to approve the. rezoning of Lot' 82, Block 6
of Southwood Terrace Section 3+C. Mr. Michel seconded the
motion which pas ed unopposed Q6-Q~.
_:
AGENDA ITEM-ND. 6: Cansidexatonof a ~empoxaxy. parking lot
plan fox Sneakexs located at 5Q4 Haxvey Road. X90-4~8~
-Senior Planner Kee reported to the Commission the
recommendation of approval by the Design Review Board of
phasing he proposed temporary parking lot and allowing some
o f the lot to have a temporary surf ace fore one year ,with the
following conditions to be included ,as part of Phase
~~
-t ~ } Install parking lot lights for the entire lot .
(2} Provide a landscape s-creep along Highway 30.
(3 ~ Provide curbing along frontage of Highway 3 0
~~~ Barricade around the group of trees at the
north corner of the property. (Barricade note
on p~.at is not adequate.
(5) Improve or dedicate the area { as defined in the
Wolfe Pen creek Master. Plan and ~Zonin
g
ordinances remaining on Sneaker's property and
all o f the add a:oen:t property i f :any is used for
~ Arkin . Still need ~
p g ( owner s assurance of the
dedication.}
(~} Provide the owner°s assurance that at the end
of one year if-the lot is not fully brought u
p
to codep then the lot will be emoved and the
area re odded. (Still need owner's assurance.)
(7~ Clearly indicate on site plan that. the above
~~ items will be completed in Phase Ie
She, explained that temporary ...parking ~.ots were intended. for
' ° °
acil~.t~.es -that have.. the requl.red amount of parking... but need
additional spaces. _ Sneaker' ra osal wil °
p p 1 bring the project
up to code in the first hose of deve~.o meat. Th' ° °
~ p p is _ z.tem is
before t~.e ~ommi~sion because it is a protect in the Wolf Pen
Zoning District where It ~. re aired that the D °
g es~.gn Review
'~ hoard make a recommendation to the Co~nn~issic~n as =well as the
fact tna al 1 re assts for ern ~ ~ '
~ g ° racy o~erf~.c~w parking Lots are
~ t~ be cc~nsldered by the Comma ~slon.
r
i
~~11