Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes.- ~~~ } Y MINUTES Planning & Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS May 19, 1994 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman. Hawthorne and Commissioners. Lane, Smith, Hall and Herring. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Gribou. STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director of Economic and .Development Services Callaway, City Planner Kee, Assistant City Engineer Morgan, Planning .Technician Thomas, Project Engineer McCully, Transportation .Planner Hard, Development Coordinator Volk, Staff Planner Kuenzel and Staff Planner Dunn. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes from the meeting of May 5, 1994. Commissioner Hall moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of May 5, 1994 as written. Commissioner Herring seconded the motion which. passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing to consider a rezoning request at 2800 -Welsh Avenue, Tract B, Block 55 of the Southwood Valley 24A Subdivision from R-1 Single Family Residential to R-2 Duplexes. {94111 Staff .Planner Kuenzel presented the .staff report and recommended approval of the proposed rezoning. The rezoning request is in compliance with the land use plan and approval would bring a few more duplexes to an area that is largely developed in a similar fashion. The abutting R-1 zoning to the west is buffered by a 25'.drainage and utility right- of-way. The proposed platting. of the subject property will have the single family and duplexes facing away from ,one another. The nearest duplex therefore will be at least 75' away from any single family dwelling. Forty-eight surrounding property owners were notified with many calls and letters received in opposition to the rezoning request. Several petitions have also been submitted that. were signed by many of the single family homeowners in the neighborhood. Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. Applicant Glenn Thomas of Thomas Properties and 2708 Jennifer .approached the Commission and explained that he purchased the property with the plan to built upscale duplexes.. The property from the First Baptist Church on Welsh to this property are all developed duplexes that were built eight to ten years ago. On .the current land use plan, multi-family development is shown on the subject tract. With a growth in the rental market, there is a high demand for duplexes. Mr. Thomas gave a slide presentation of duplexes that he has built in the Eastmark Subdivision and adjacent to the subject property along San Mario.. He showed how the single family homes in the Eastmark Subdivision are adjacent to the new duplex development in that neighborhood. Mr. Thomas stated that similar smaller single family homes could be built on the subject property without a zone change. However, the proposed duplexes would be much larger and more .aesthetically pleasing to the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Thomas stated that the residents who purchased homes in this neighborhood did so with the knowledge that there were duplexes in the area. .~' Charles Thomas of Thomas Properties approached the. Commission and stated that the adjacent church property. is .currently zoned for apartments. He explained that they were only trying to comply with the plan previously laid. out by the City. The following residents spoke in opposition to the rezoning. request: Stephan Hatch, 2102 Langford Street (Church of Jesus Christ for Keith Kuttler 9578 Valley View Drive (Church of Jesus Christ for David Ellis, 3008 Bolero Street Kathryn Ellis, 3008 Bolero Street Michael A. Storms, 2907 Aztec Court James Palincsar, 2911 Aztec Court Linda Middleton,. 3011 Aztec Street Gail Colby, 2908 Aztec Court David Kipp, 2910 Aztec Court R. Daniel Lineberger, .2703 Aztec Court. Jim Long, 2914 Aztec. Court Charles W. Graham, .632 San Mario Court Gary Dean, '2$07 North Pueblo Court W. C. Ellis, 704 Encinas Place Suzanne. Segner, 2913 Aztec Court Tommy E. Thompson, 2901 Aztec Court Latter Day Saints) Latter Day Saints) The following concerns were expressed by the surrounding residents: (1) When the. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) church .purchased. the land, it was .their understanding that the subject property would be developed as single family homes. It is the policy of the church to only locate in single.. family neighborhoods. Amulti-family development adjacent to thee: church could potentially cause parking sand security problems at the church. (2) Property values would decrease with additional. multi-family development in the area.: Residents of the area recently received an appraisal from the tax office that raised the values of the homes thus raising. taxes in the area.. The proposed development will .negatively effect the climbing property values in the neighborhood. (3) The proposed duplex development would be targeted for students as rental property. This causes parking and traffic problems, excessive noise, and little or no maintenance of the property. (4) The proposed development would be the closest multi-family development to Deacon Drive and violate the existing single family block of development. (5) At the time many of the single family homes were purchased in the neighborhood, the zoning was checked on thee. subject property. The homeowners were assured by their builder (many of the homes were built by Thomas Properties) that the subject .property would be developed as single family homes. The zoning should not be changed to negatively effect the established neighborhood. The petitions signed by almost every surrounding .single family homeowner sends a statement that the .existing neighborhood should be protected and preserved. P & Z Minutes May 19, 1994 Page 2 of 7 ,~ (6) The drainage ditch that staff referred to as a natural barrier, is not adequate to buffer the proposed multi-family development from the existing single family development. The fact that the two developments will face in opposite directions of each other is irrelevant since the noise, security .and traffic factors are still the .same. The back .yards of the single family homes should also be protected. from the negative factors of multi-family development. (7) The City has failed to establish development. standards to prevent the continual degradation of the existing multi-family development. "Parking slabs" are allowed without .adequate parking and distance between adjacent and opposite drive entrances. It is difficult for emergency vehicles to get down the streets of the existing multi-family area. With the recent development, there is a problem with flooding on the subject property .and surrounding single family homes. (8) The threat implied by Thomas Properties to build smaller sub-standard homes on the property is not appreciated. The surrounding homeowners would prefer that single family 'homes be developed on the subject property regardless of the size. (9) If duplexes are needed in College Station to handle the influx of students of Texas A&M University, the units should be built closer to campus instead of in an established single family, neighborhood. (10) With the increased building and rental costs, students will be forced to share rooms in order to pay. the rent; thus, allowing anywhere from four to six students per duplex unit with only three parking spaces provided. (12) The existing elementary and junior .high schools along Rock Prairie Road are full and the additional living units will only add to the problem. There are too many homes in the area and not .enough schools. Chairman Hawthorne closed the public hearing. Commissioner Herring moved to recommend denial of the rezoning request at 2800 Welsh Avenue, Tract B, Block 55 of the Southwood Valley 24A Subdivision from R-1 Single Family Residential to R-2 Duplexes. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion. Commissioner Herring .stated that although the rezoning request technically complies with the adopted Land Use Plan, the existing single family neighborhood should also be considered. Applicant Glenn Thomas approached the Commission and explained that he was not threatening the Commission or the surrounding homeowners when. he showed the alternative development. If duplexes are not allowed on the subject tract, smaller single family homes will be built in order. to make the property and development economically viable. The single family homes will likely be 35' .wide and approximately 1000 to 1200 square feet. These homes will target first time home buyers and younger couples with children which will put more pressure on the existing schools. Chairman Hawthorne stated that the overall philosophy of the area is important in this particular case. There is an established'.".single family neighborhood in this area and it does not seem fair to change this philosophy after the area is developed. The motion to .recommend denial of the' rezoning passed unopposed (5 - 0). P & Z Minutes May 19, 1994 Page 3 of 7