Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesBob Bower, a partner in the East .Bypass Development Group, the owner of the subject property, informed the Commission that he has a contract with a local car dealership for approximately 4.0 acres of the property. He stated that he has a preliminary proposal for the Douglass Nissan size if the Commission would like to .review it. Mr. Bower offered to answer .any questions pertaining to the proposed rezoning request. Chairman Hawthorne closed the public: hearing. Commissioner Gribou moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request for approximately 15 acres located at the southeast corner of Sebesta Road .and State Highway 6 intersection from R-L Single .Family Residential to C-1 General Commercial with special attention being paid to .the "step down" approach and buffering of the existing single family development. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: Consideration of a harking lot plan `for future improvements of Certified Copy located at 1911 `Texas Avenue in the Wolf Pen Creek zoning district. (94 .408) Staff Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report and .recommend approval with all Project Review Committee and Design Review Board .recommendations. One issue that must be addressed by the Commission relates to the.. driveway... throat' length. Site changes that require site plan review would justify a review of driveway locations and design.. Due to the fact that the: drive is existing and that it provides the sole` access point to the site, staff is allowing: the drive to remain. Staff does have the discretion to require that throat length criteria be met. Again, the layout of the existing. site makes it impossible to meet the full length' hat would be required under -the ordinance. Therefore staff stated that at the, very least, .the throat .length should be increased from the 10' shown on the site plan to 19', and eliminate the first two parking on either side of the drive. The applicant. has not submitted a revised site .plan showing this or thee: other changes. as conditioned by the Design Review Board., Commissioner Hall moved to approve the site plan with all staff and Design Review Board recommendations. The sidewalk along Texas Avenue is important and should not be negotiated. Commissioner Gribou seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a site plan for the University Commons Apartments located .along ,the north and south sides of Colgate Drive at Eastmark Drive and Central Park Lane in the Wolf Pen Creek Zoning district.. (94505) City Planner Kee presented the staff report for a proposed multi-family project which will have 240 living units on 16.5 acres for' a density of 14.5 units per acre. Most of the project will be located on the south side of Colgate between Eastmark and Central park Lane. with 6.4 acres located on the north side of Colgate. The Design Review Board saw the .proposal on May 25, 1994 and required additional information pertaining to paving materials to be presented at the Commission meeting. The Board also asked for details on benches and. walkways. Overall, the Board. was in favor of the proposal having viewed a video of this company's similar project in another state. The sidewalk master plan. calls fore. a sidewalk along both sides of collectors. There is a sidewalk along the north side of .Colgate: presently and the Board did not see .the need. for one on the south side. The Board would .support the variance request to eliminate this sidewalk.:... Several of the dumpster locations as shown on the site plan would be :visible from rights-of-way. The Board required these to be relocated and screened. The applicant has no-problem with this requirement. The site, plan submitted. reflects all Design Review Board concerns except for paving. materials, information pertaining to the details of benches in landscaped areas, and walkways. Staff had also requested thumbnail sketches of the propose drainage ditch from the Eastmark Drive cul-de- sac to the creek that have. not been submitted to date. The applicant should be able to address these things during his presentation to 'the Commission. P & Z Minutes. June 16, 1994 Page Z of S (1) Setting a precedent. While one residential driveway on to North Graham will obviously not create a traffic problem,. by approving this :.request,. the City is in effect approving curb cuts for the other twenty-six potential single family lots on the Edelweiss Master Development Plan that will have rear or side yard frontage on to North Graham. (2) Not the intended function of North Graham Road. Despite the plan to close off North Graham from Wellborn Road, it will still serve as a collector street as per the Master Development Plan for Edelweiss Estates. It is standard planning practice for residential access to be taken from the lesser street, in this case Shire .Drive. Under the worst case scenario, if .all of the. twenty- seven lots. did take access from North Graham, it would not serve its intended function as a collector street. (3) No unnecessary hardship. By ordinance, the Commission may authorize a variance to the driveway ordinance. when "it will not be contrary to the public .interest ... and, a strict enforcement of the. ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship. It is staff"s contention that denying a secondary. access would' not. result in an unnecessary hardship and. 'that approving the variance could'be contrary to public interest .due to the potential for numerous other curb cuts on to North Graham Road. Assistant City Engineer Morgan informed the. Commission that the applicants feel that they do not have enough frontage along Shire to move equipment in and. out of their back yard. Commissioner Hall moved to deny the variance request to .the Driveway Access and Location Ordinance. Commissioner Gribou seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - d). AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Consideration of a sign variance request for Certified Co located at 1911 Texas Avenue in the Wolf Pen Creek zoning district to allow the construction of a sign.. to be attached. to the front of the building. (94408) Staff Planner Kuenzel stated that the Commission must consider this request because the site is located in the Wolf Pen Creek zoning district. The Design. Review Board reviewed this .request and recommends approval due' to the fact that the. site is on the periphery of the Corridor and has little relation to the rest of the Park. Therefore the Board did not feel that it was necessary. in this instance to require compliance with WPC color standards. The Board did suggest to .the applicant that the building be painted to coordinate 'with the propose sign colors. The applicant..intends to place additional parking in the rear of the site. The 'site plan will come before the Commission at a later date before any' such development can occur. Applicant Alton Ofcarczek of 2901 Rayado Court approached the Commission and stated that the proposed sign will blend in with the rest of the building. He stated that he plans to install white vinyl siding alongthe front of the building and paint the trim to match the blue and red accents. in the sign, At this time however, only a sign attached to the building is being requested. Mr. Ofcarczek stated that he is currently leasing the building with an option to purchase the property. If he purchases the property, he would like to add additional .parking. and .other ..improvements to the site. However, not all : of those improvements can be made at this time. Commissioner Gribou moved to approve- the.. additional attached signage as presented with the condition that the building. be painted to coordinate with .the proposed sign. The Design Review Board will make the determination of the building color. Commissioner .Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). P & Z Minutes June ? X994 Page S of 6 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD REPORT May 31, 1994 TO: .Alton Ofczarzak, Certified Copy 2901 Rayado, College Station, TX 77840 FROM: Design Review Board David Brochu, DRB Chairman Jim Gardner, DRB Member Jane Kee, City Planner Veronica Morgan,. Assistant City Engineer Mary Elizabeth Herring,,P&Z Repres ntative Others Attending Natalie Thomas, Planning Tech ' Shirley Volk, Development o di ator Sabine Kuenzel, Staff Plan r Joey Dunn, Staff Planner Tony Michalsky, Electrical Operations Coordinator Samantha. Smith, Engineering Assistant Brett McCully, Project Engineer Peter Barlaro, Sanitation Inspector Tim DeDear, Fire Protection Specialist Laverne .Akin, GTE' Representative Mike Lavender, TCA Cable Representative SUBJECT: Parking Lot Plan -Certified Copy; proposed business to be located at 1911 Texas Avenue South in the 'Wolf Pen Creek zoning district. (94-408) A Design Review. Board meeting was held Wednesday, May 11, 1994 to discuss the above mentioned parking lot plan. Chairman Brochu moved to recommend approval of the site plan as submitted with the .following .comments. DRB Member Gardner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). COMMENTS/CONCERNS: _ Relocate the proposed dumpster site so that it is adequately screened and not visible from any public rights-of-way. Show screening details. A shared dumpster with he adjacent. property may be an alternative. _ The' proposed signage is acceptable even though it does not meet the specific requirements in the Wolf Pen Creek zoning district, because the sign is oriented to Texas Avenue and the project is removed from the park area. PRC Report ,~ ~ Certified Copy Case #94-408 Page Z of 2 _ The Board recommended that the applicant paint the building white and incorporate the sign with the building so that there is .some kind of connection. If the parking lot is reconfigured, the driveway may need to be reconfigured to meet the current .Driveway Access and Location Ordinance. The Board may accept the lengthening of the throat length by two parking spaces in order to meet the intent of the ordinance. _ A complete landscape plan must be reviewed and approved by staff prior to issuance of a building permit.. Show existing and proposed vegetation inchzding a landscape legend and total point requirements. A drainage development permit along with the application fee of $100 is required prior to any site work including the proposed parking area. Show the curb line. _ Dimension a typical parking space and front driving aisle. Provide a raised end parking island at the end of the rear parking row. _ A sidewalk should be installed. along Texas Avenue. There is an existing bus stop at this location. If the existing electrical service is upgraded, the utility lines must be relocated underground. Coordinate telephone service details with G.T.E. Representative Laverne Akin at (409) 821-4723. _ Show the existing and proposed fire hydrants. Show the existing water and sanitary sewer mains and note sizes. Submit water demands if the existing meter size is to be reduced. SUBMIT 10 COPIES OF THE REVISED SITE AND LANDSCAPE PLAN BY THURSDAY, MAY 26, 1994 TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PACKETS FOR THE MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1994. APPEAL PROCESS: An applicant may appeal the decision of the Project Review Committee to the Planning and Zoning Commission within five days after the PRC Committee meeting. Failure to appeal the PRC action shall constitute a contractual acceptance of all conditions imposed, and a waiver and surrender of all complaints, defects, or potential invalidity, whether under state or federal law. An applicant appealing the decision of the. PRC shall file ten copies of the. final site .plan as approved by the PRC, showing all. changes and. requirements imposed by the PRC, and accompanied by a written explanation of those items being appealed. Until said copies are on file, no further development approval shall occur, and no further action by the Commission shall take place. An applicant may appeal only certain aspects. of site plan review, and in the absence of discretionary review by the Commission, or review pursuant to a petition, all other aspects of the site plan shall be final Any .notice of appeal shall state with particularity the aspects which are to be appealed. Coordinate appeal process through Development Coordinator Shirley Volk at (409) 764-3741.