Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes staff recommends approval of this request for the following reasons: 1. Both the current and requested zoning are in compliance with the land use plan. 2. The proposed C-2 area is well buffered from any low density residential area. 3. Approval of this request will minimize the building permit and utility connection problems referenced above. P&Z ACTION: On 3-6-86P&Z voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request (7-0). P&Z MINUTES: AGENDA ITEM. NO. 4: 86-105: A public hearing on the question of rezoning a 5.21 acre tract located at the northwest corner of the interiection of F.M.28l8 and Longmire Drive (The College Station Busine.ssCenter), from C-l GeneralCo_ercial to C-2 Commercial Industrial. Applicant is The College Station Business Center, Ltd. Mr. Callaway briefly summarized the staff I'eport and the request, reminding the Commissioners that the subject tract is developed as an office/warehouse/retail facility with commercial uses, commercial .vacant land, and apartments adjacent to the tract. He pointed out that the area is reflected as commercial on the adopted Land Use Plan, bo.t additionally informed the Commission that there is no differentiation made .between various commercial zoning districts, although obviously some commercial u~eswould be more appropriate than others, with some C-2 uses actually being more appropriate in areas planned for industrial use. He informed the Commission that the Zoning Official has advised that several potential tenants have not been able to locate in this facility. as C-I uses and additionally, that several building permits or utility connection requests have been denied to applicants in this center in the past. He then pointed out that staff has some concern with respect to locating a C-2 zoning district ad'jacent to any type of residential area, adding that 'a review of the City's plan, policies, and previous zoning action in locating C-2 district areas provides the following: The residential development policies included in the plan recommend the use of multi-family developments ~s buffers around intensive development (the adjacent apartmenta are high density in nature, located in an R-6 district which is the City's highest density multi-famity district and as such should be suitable as an appropriate use adjacent to any of the City'sC- level districts), and C-2 districts have been established adjacent to multi-family districts in the area south of Southwood Valley. He went on to explain that the existing development on this site should serve to limit outdoor activities which might be permitted in the C-2 district which might not be appropriate in this location, further explaining that most of the site is encumbered by buildings,. fire lanes and parking spaces required by ordinance and that existing driveway widths and radii would make maneuvering large trucks into the Staff Report Case 86-105 page 3 site difficult. He concluded by stating that staff recommends approval of this requst because both the current and requested zoning are in compliance with the land use plan, the proposedC-2 area is well buffered from any low density residential area and approval of. this request will minimize the building permit and utility connection problems, thus allowing more latitude in tenant availability. Discussion followed. concerning the various businesses which have been denied tenancy in this facility as well as a discussion of the uses which may be undesirable, with Mr. Callaway reminding the Commissioners that existing site development may restrict the uses. The public hearing was opened. Joe Orsak, representing the owner/applicant as manager of the property reiterated Mr. Callaway's statement that several requests for . tenancy have been refused because the uses.fall underC-2 uses, and this request has been submitted to allow the diversification of uses required to have a successful business. He offered to answer any questions. No one else spoke. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Brochu made a motion to approve this request as submitted; Mrs. Stallings seconded the mQ*ion. Mr. MacGilvray asked if the existing infrastructure could handle the possible impact of someC-2 uses and Mr. Callaway referred to the report from the Engineering Department which indicated that all infrastructure was adequate with the exception that.. there could be some restriction due to the existing driveway widths and radii which would make maneuvering large trucks into the site difficult. He added that any change.tothe existing site development would require additional review by the City prior to approval. Votes on the motion to approve the request were cast with the motion carrying by a unanimous decision (7-0). ""- staff Report Case 86-105 page 4