Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneousSEP-23-96 12:49 FM 409 6961 ?562 P. 01 LYl~ 1~ NH 1TE PRt) PERTY MANAGEMENT one ~Ufibe~,s~ 5605 Polo Road e~ 4b College Station, Texas 77845 ~' (409} 696-8015 FAX (409) 690-7562 FAX MAIL Date: _ g.~~ 3 -~ G FAX: ~~~ _ ~ ~ ~~ To: ~ ~ 2'~f /~~ j _,,[ ,/ COMPANY: ~ 4 ~ / ~1'ww From:. ~ 1`~ ~/ ~ i r~ L~/~ RE: Number of pages to follow ~ COMMENTS:. -~ :, iP A ~ P ~ o ti~ ` ~T ~o-~ -, "The foremost Indus#rial fire, safety and ' ~ ergency .response authority for eteven years.° ~~~ ~----- REQUEST FOR LEGAL ASSISTANCE Research ^ ^ '~-d Advice ^ REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE SUBMITTED BY: DATE: DIRECTOR APPROVAL: DEADLINE AND EXPLANATION. THEREOF: ~ 1 n ,, i EXECUTIVE MEMBER APPROVAL: U /~~ Property Acquisition^ LitigatioN Potential Litigation ^ EXPLANATION OF FACTS: ~ ~~ ~~ A r I . ~ ~~~~ `I ~~,~-~- qro-rrs ~ EXPLANATION OF ISSUES: ~ l~ QUESTIONS REGARDING THE ISSUES: air STAFF GOAL ON THIS .REQUEST: '~'"~ SUPPOR ING DOCUMENTATION: 1. 2. ~ ~ 3. Ordinance Writing Contract Writing ^ jslclforn~slassist 04/11/94 C'1 ~1 of College Station FAX To: L//`~f~wG~i Date: Number oC pages inclu ing cover sheet: From: nn ,,`` ~C~-- Phone: Fax phone [!~~~ -' /~C~ a'~ CC: Phone: (409) 764-3570 Fax phone: (409) 764-3496 ___ _ . ~_.., n r,_,.e.,~ rl Rnr vrnir review I 1 Reply ASAP ^ Please comment Dcvclopmcnt Ser`~ices P.O. Box 9960, College Station, TX 77842-9960 °~ SAM SLIDE - ~ THIS CASE COMES BEFORE YOU BECAUSE THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THE ZONING ON HIS PROPERTY SHOULD CHANGE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL USES RATHER THAN REMAIN IN A STRICTLY INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF VICTORIA AND GRAHAM ROAD. THE REQUEST WILL ESSENTIALLY REMOVE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES FROM THE LIST OF POTENTIAL USES AND REPLACE THEM WITH GENERAL COMMERCIAL USES. SUCH AS RETAIL, RESTAURANTS, CAR WASHES, ETC. THIS INTRODUCTION OF COMMERCIAL USES TO THE AREA WOULD NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT LAND USE PLAN OR ZONING FOR THE AREA.. AS A PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSIONS, THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED THAT THE CITY REVISE. THE. CURRENT PLAN. AS YOU KNOW, COUNCIL HAS NOT YET HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE DRAFT LAND USE PLAN. WITH THIS REQiJEST, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING. THAT THE POLICY REGARDING ~~ LAND USES IN THE IMMEDIATE .AREA BE DISCUSSED AT THIS TIME RATHER THAN IN JANUARY. HE IS ASKING THAT THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA CHANGE FROM A PURELY LIGHT AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AREA TO ONE THAT .PERMITS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND COMIvIERCIAL. CURRENT POLICY THE GRAHAM ROAD AREA WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY IN 1992 AND M-2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING WAS PLACED ON THE AREA IN EARLY 1993. THAT ZONING DISTRICT HAD BEEN REVISED IN .THE MID 80'S TO ALLOW FOR MOSTLY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES AND VERY LITTLE COMMERCIAL USES. THE PLAN WAS TO RESERVE THE GRAHAM ROAD AREA FOR FUTURE HEAVY INDUSTRY WHILE ALLOWING FOR THE EXISTING USES AS WELL. MERITS OF CURRENT POLICY THE POLICY THAT IS IN PLACE NOW WAS PUT IN PLACE FOR SEVERAL REASONS. THE FIRST IS THAT SETTING ASIDE AN AREA WOULD MEET. A PERCEIVED NEED TO ALLOW FOR HEAVY INDUSTRY TO LOCATE HERE. THE SECOND IS THAT CITIES THAT HAVE -~ MORE SPECIFIC ZONING DISTRICTS ARE BETTER EQUIl'PED TO PROVIDE FOR FUTURE 1 INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS. A THIRD ARGUMENT FOR LESS MIXING OF USES WOULD BE TO - PROVIDE FOR STRONGER IDENTITY OF AREAS. CHANGE IN POLICY AS I SAID EARLIER, A CHANGE OF ZONING TO C-2 WOULD SIGNIFY A CHANGE OF POLICY REGARDING THE. GRAHAM ROAD AREA BECAUSE IT WOULD INTRODUCE COMMERCIAL USES AND PLACE LESS IMPORTANCE ON HEAVY INDUSTRY. SUPPORT FOR CHANGE IN POLICY THERE ARE TWO CHANGES THAT HAVE. TAKEN PLACE RECENTLY THAT COULD JUSTIFY THE CHANGE IN POLICY. THE FIRST IS THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE. COMP PLAN CONSULTANTS THAT THE CITY SUPPORT MORE CLEAN INDUSTRY AND ACCOMMODATE FUTURE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS ONLY. THIS RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON "I'IIE HISTORICAL FACT THAT HEAVY INDUSTRY HAS NOT BEEN ATTRACTED TO COLLEGE STATION AND ON THE FACT THAT THIS COUNCIL AND PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE SHOWN A PREFERENCE FOR CLEANER INDUSTRIES. HOK HAS GONE SO FAR AS TO RECOMMEND THAT WE DO AWAY WITH THE M-2 DISTRICT ALTOGETHER AND SM'LY ADOPT A POLICY STATEMENT THAT INDIVIDUAL HEAVY ~- INDUSTRIAL USERS MAY BE ACCOMMODATED SHOULD THE NEED ARISE. ANOTIIER JUSTIFICATION FOR MORE COMMERCIAL TYPE USES IS THE CHANGING NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE VICINITY. WHEN THE GRAHAM ROAD AREA CAME INTO THE CITY, IT WAS FAIRLY ISOLATED. IN THE PAST 3 YEARS, THE EDELWEIS SUBDIVISION HAS GROWN AND WILL CONTINUE TO GROW UNTIL THE ENTIRE R-1 ZONED AREA IS BUILT UP WITH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. SITE SHOTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE POLICY REGARDING THIS AREA MAY BE CHANGED BY COUNCIL, IT IS DIFFICULT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THIS ZONING REQUEST. IF THE POLICY REMAINS THAT THE AREA REMAIN EXCLUSIVELY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, THE C-2 COULD BE VIEWED AS A SPOT ZONE AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE TURNED DOWN. HOWEVER, IF THE POLICY CHANGES, THEN THE C-2 COULD BE -~ APPROVED. THE DECISION REGARDING THE FOLICY RESTS WITH COUNCIL. __ S~~'r ~~ 0 Regular Item Consent Item Statutory Item .Item Submitted By: For Council Meeting Of Director Approval City Manager Approval: .Sabine McCully, Senior Planner ovember 20, 199ti ~~. Ends Statements /Strategic Issues: Civic Pride; Employment/Prosperity Item: Rezoning request for 589 Graham Road totaling 3.25 acres and located on the northwest corner of Victoria. and Graham Road from M-2 Heavy Industrial to C-2 Commercial Industrial. (96-115) Item Summary: The requested rezoning will essentially remove the heavy industrial uses that are currently permitted on the property and add general commercial uses. Both the current and the existing districts permit light industrial uses such as kennels, crating, warehousing, and machine/welding shops. This site, as well as the rest of the area fronting on Graham Road, has been set aside for heavy industrial use through land use planning and through zoning. Recent discussions regarding this area have indicated that the area may become more of a light industrial and commercial area on the new land use plan. The City's policy has been to reflect the Graham Road area from Victoria to Wellborn as industrial, and to prohibit commercial uses from this and any other industrial area in the City. As apart of the recent comprehensive plan discussions relating to this area, Council has been asked to revisit the plan and consider allowing commercial uses due to the recent development of a residential area in the vicinity and because there seems to be little attraction of heavy industrial to Graham Road. Financial Summary: The area is within the Sanitary Sewer Service Area 92-01; all changes in service will require cost participation on the part of the ownerldeveloper requesting such change. The rezoning may have a marginal effect on costs and revenues but it will not be substantial. Staff Recommendation: The zoning of the area should not allow commercial uses unless the policy regarding the Graham Road area changes. Under the existing plan, Staff's recommendation would be to deny the C-2 request. However, if Council decides to change the plan as requested, the C-2 would be appropriate. The P&Z does not recommend approval due to reluctance to recommend action that would be inconsistent with the City's adopted plan. City Attorney Recommendation: Legal has drafted the ordinance Council Action Desired: A decision regarding the Graham Road future land use plan and subsequent approval or denial of request. Supporting Materials: 1. Location map 3. List of C-1, C-2, M-2 uses 2. Staff report 4. Application 5. Graham Rd. Businesses 7. P&Z minutes 6. Ordinance 8. Letter in support o:\group\deve_ser\cvsht\96-115.doc ZONING. DISTRICT INFORMATION SUMMARY Case #96-115 From M 2 to C-2 Existing M-2 Heavy Industrial: PURPOSE:. This district is designed to provide land for manufacturing and industrial activities with generation of nuisance characteristics greater than. activities permitted in the C-2 and M-1 zoning districts. Uses within this district .are. not compatible with residential uses and lower intensity .commercial uses. PERMITTED USES:. All uses permitted in M- 1 and C-2, excluding C-L uses, plus the following: Aircraft .landing strips, sales, .service, rental, or repair. Broadcasting. towers. for radio and television. Telecommunications Towers Concrete products manufacturing. Food processing plants. Machine shops. Salvage or junk yards (for. pipe, sheet metal, automobiles, lumber, etc., when visually screened on front, rear, and all. sides with a solid six (6) foot high fence). Storage tanks (for liquid petroleum .and explosives). Tire shops, vulcanizing & retreading. Warehousing. Proposed C-2 Commercial -Industrial: PURPOSE: This district is designed. to provide locations for outlets offering goods and services to a limited segment of the general public. The uses included primarily serve other commercial. and industrial enterprises. PERMITTED USES: All in C-1 plus the following: Boarding kennels (public). Carting, crating, express storage. Farm. implement sales (new or used), storage, repair. Garden (including .greenhouse), for commercial purposes. General merchandise warehouse: Hardware (industrial sales). Lumber and .building material sales and storage. Monument sales. Machine shop. Sheet metal fabrication shop. Sign shop (painting, manufacturing). Trailer and/or accessory equipment sales, rental, storage or repair. Welding shop.. Wholesales and service. Other uses considered by the Commission. 96-115 Melvin Lange P.O. Box 9070 College Station, Texas 77842 96-115 Julian McMurray 3400 Mustang College Station, Texas 77840 96-115 Mary Lind Bryan 1813 Shadowood Dr. College Station, Texas 77845 96-11 S United Oil Exploration Co, Inc 625 Graham Rd College Station, Texas 77845 96-11 S McHayden Dillard 13383 SH 30 College Station, Texas 77845 96-11 S Lynn & David White 5605 Polo Rd College Station, Texas 77845 96-I1 S Judy Cook 3501 Nottingham College Station, Texas 77845 96-11 S Ed Elmore 3501 Regal Row College Station, Texas 77840 96-11 S Chet Fry & Lawrence Link 419 N. FM 2818 Bryan, Texas 77803 96-11 S Kirk W. Brown 12684 Hunters Creek Rd College Station, Texas 77845 96-115 Assisted Living Concepts, Inc. 9955 SE Washington #213 Portland, OR 97216 96-11 S Mary Lois Bland 2309 Oxford Bryan, Texas 77802 96-11 S Melvin Lange ~ P.O. Box 9070 College Station, Texas 77842 96-11 S Julian McMurray. 3400 Mustang College Station, Texas 77840 96-11 S Mary Lind Bryan 1813 Shadowood Dr. College Station, Texas 77845 96-11 S United Oil Exploration Co, Inc 625 Graham Rd ~II'~i 7845 Colle a Station Texas 7 g 9611 S McHayden Dillard 13383 SH 30 College Station, Texas 77845 96-11 S Lynn & David White 'I 5605 Polo Rd College Station, Texas 77845 96-115. Judy Cook 3501 Nottingham College Station, Texas 77845 96-I1 S Ed Elmore 3501. Regal Row College Station, Texas 77840 96-11 S Chet Fry & Lawrence Link 419 N. FM 2818 Bryan, Texas 77803 96-I1 S Kirk W. Brown 12684 Hunters Creek Rd College Station, Texas 77845 96-I1 S Assisted Living Concepts, Inc. 9955 SE Washington #213 Portland, OR 97216 9611 S Mary Lois Bland 2309 Oxford Bryan, Texas 77802 Ci C"1 of College Station rax To: 4' Phone: Fax phone: _ CC: Date: ( ~ ~' f'? Number o(pagcs including cover. sheet E ro R /~" ~~~ C JF ___ Phone: (409)764-3570 Fay phone (409) 764-3496 Development Services P.O. Box 9960, College Station, TX 77842-9960 _ . _ __~ n .,____. r~G„~.,,,~~~ ~~.,;~~.- f-1 Reoly ASAP ^ Please comment GRAHAM ROAD TYPES OF BUSINESSES ' ADDRESS TYPE: BUSINESS 100 OI - Corporate .Office and Computer Assen~Ly ~ Warehouse 102 Vet-Clinic 360 TRIRO - Corporate Office and tee shirt silk screener .4.00 Lometa Oil Company office 415 SASI office building 475 Thermo Insulation - Office and warehouse 500 Lange Micrographics -`Mmcrofilms documents 500 SAFE - Fire :Sprinkler Corporate office and warehouse 501 KWB & A - Office 'and Laboratory 540 OI Warehouse 541 International Pipe and. Supply = Plumbing & pipe supply. company 5.80 A Sheplers office - Concrete hardware supplier/warehouse 580 B Brazos Security Co. Inc. - warehouse for securities ', 580 C & D Wireless-One office and warehouse 589 A & B Industrial Fire World. Corporate office - warehouse 589 C Warehouse 625 Attorney office 625 Mini Storage Complex 727. Laboratory office - TAMU 833 Geochemical & Environmental Resources Group - TAMU Laboratory and warehouse j C-1 ases Alcoholic beverage sales Arena/coliseum. Art studio. Automobile sales/rental. Automobile repair shop. Bank. Bookstore Bowling alley. Business/dance/commercial school Restaurant. Car wash. Child care. Cleaner Cold storage. Commercial amusements Convalescent home. Domestic household equipment rental/storage. Dormitories. Drive-in sales. Drive-in Filling' station Funeral homes. Furniture, appliance store, sales, service. Garage, commercial. Hardware store. Hospital, sanitarium, nursing home or convalescent home. Hotel Marine and fishing equipment sales. Mini-storage warehouses Mobile: home sales, storage. Motel. Nursery plant sales. Offices. Personal service shops. Photographer's studio Public parking building or lot for operating vehicles. Printing and reproduction. Private lodges, fraternal. Radio or TV stations or studios, (no towers). , Retail sales and services. Shopping center. Storage garage, Theaters and motion picture houses. Warehouses for uses permitted. in .this aistriot. C-2 uses Boarding kennels (public). Carting, crating, express storage. Farm implement sales (new or used),. storage, repair. Garden (including greenhouse), for commerciaY purposes. General merchandise warehouse. Hardware (industrial sales). Lumber and building material sales and storage. Monument .sales. Machine shop. Sheet metal fabrication shop. Sign shop (painting, manufacturing). Trailer and/or accessory equipment sales, rental, storage or repair. Welding shop. Wholesales and service. M-2 uses Research and development. Laboratories. htstrument and component mfg. Apparel mfg. Rubber/plastics mfg.. Transportation component mfg. Printing and allied products. Electrical machine mfg. Fabricated metals mfg. Office equipment/supplies mfg. Offices. Warehousing. Large & small recycling collection facilities. Aircraft landing strips, sales, service, rental, or repair. Broadcasting towers for radio and television. Telecommunications Towers Concrete products mfg. Food processing plants. Machine shops. Salvage or junk yards Storage tanks (for liquid petroleum and explosives). Tire. shops, including vulcanizing and retreading. Planning Dlvislon -Graham Rd. Rezoning 000ooo©oanr MERITS OF CURRENT POLICY * Immediate availability. of land for heavy industry • Better planning tool for infrastructure •Strong identity for each district Planning Dlvislon -Graham Rd. Rezoning OOOODOO~~~r GURRENT POLICY • Land Use Pian • No commercial uses Planning Dlvislon -Graham Rd. Rezoning 0~00000~~~I SUPPORT FOR CHANGE IN POLICY • HOK recommendation to no longer provide for heavy industry • New residential construction in vicinity 1 Planning Division -Graham Rd. Rezoning ~~~DOD©©EIQI CHANGE !N POLIGY • Introduce commercial to area • No emphasis on heavy industry Planning Division -Graham Rd. Rezoning 0000[]~00~~i STAFF RECOMMQATION • Policy decision up to Council • Zoning in tine with policy 2 ,, UNITED OIL EXPLORATION CO. ~ INC. WILLIAM D. FARRAR PRESIDENT October 17, 1996 Each City Council Member Via Hand Delivery City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77840 Re: Proposed Rezoning fob ~~~) G~ aliaji R~~'~:d Dear Council Members: I am writing to express agreement with the rezoning request of applicant Lynn. White for the property located at 589 Graham Road. I am unable to appear at this evening's hearing and ask that you accept this letter as my written statement in lieu of a personal appearance. We own property adjoining the subject tract to the northeast. We are of the opinion than the commercial zoning requested is more compatible with the surrounding land use. than is the existing M-1 or M-2 zoning. Thank you for your time and consideration of our view. _._ _~ President MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 409/690-2 2 2 2 OFFICE ADDRESS: P.O. BOx 9762 FACSIMILE: 409/690-3333 625 GRAHAM F20AD SOUTH OOLLEGE STATION; TEXAS 77842. EMAIL: FnRRnRWD@MYRIAD.NET COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS A REVIEW OF SMALL AREA REZONING REQUESTS IN COLLEGE STATION PURPOSE. Recently the Planning & Zoning Commission considered a request for a zone change in a small area along Jane St. The request was for a change from A-P to C-1. At the applicant's request the item was tabled. At that time the Commission requested staff to review and address small area rezoning requests in College Station. PAST REQUESTS Numerous small area rezoning requests have been heard by the Commission in the past. These. have varied considerably in nature, purpose and location.. Some have been for zoning districts that would allow uses comparable to permitted uses in the current district, but would provide for a more efficient use of the land as in the case of a change from R-1 to R-lA. Others have been to allow for redevelopment (sometimes to uses incompatible with existing area uses). Others have been sought to allow utilization of_different sign regulations as in a change from C-N to C-3. A summary of some of the cases considered is included at the end of this report. SPOT ZONING In considering rezoning requests for small area zone changes care must be taken to insure that the requests are appropriate for the area in question. Otherwise, a "spot zoning" situation can arise with negative impacts for the surrounding land uses. Although the definition of "spot zoning" is sometimes debated, it is generally accepted that a spot zone is invalid when all of the following factors exist: 1. an area is singled out for special treatment and is zoned differently from the zoning of the surrounding area; 2. the benefit is for the particular land owner and not in the public interest; and 3. it is usually for an incompatible use and not for the purpose of furthering the comprehensive plan.. (1) Elements and impacts of "spot zoning" can be avoided by paying particular attention. to the following questions when .reviewing small area rezoning requests: 1. Is the change contrary to the established land use patterns? 2. Would the change create an isolated district unrelated to area districts? 1 3. Will the change adversely affect living conditions in the area? E 4. Will the change be a deterrent to the improvement or ~, development of adjacent zoning districts? '~ 5. Is the change in the interest of the general public? 6. Will. the change meet the purpose of furthering the ~, goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan? CONCLUSION While it is important to avoid spot zoning of small areas, it is also important to avoid categorizing all small area rezoning requests as spot zones.. "As it is much more difficult to apply comprehensive zoning thinking to a small parcel or to one lot, there is a tendency. for the designation of spot zoning to be applied to one-lot. zoning, far more than to larger area zoning. As a result the mistaken philosophy has been created that the term spot zoning applies only where you have amended a zoning map to draw a district boundary around a lot in one ownership. This does not necessarily hold true."(2) If a proposed zone change is part of an appropriate phase of use or development for the area, is compatible with area uses, and is not contrary to the city's plans and policies, then that request is valid and should not be classified as a spot zone on the basis of size alone. Consideration of a small area zone change should include the same basic elements of the consideration of any zone change decision. These include appropriateness of the. zone, compliance-with development policies and the land use plan and benefits to the the general public. 2 ENDNOTES 1 Harvey S. Moskowitz and Carl G. Lindbloom, The Illustrated Book of Development Definitions (New Jersey: Center for Urban Policy Research, 1985), p. 182 2 Herbert H. Smith, The Citizen's Guide to Zoning (Washington, D.C.: Planner's :Press, American Planning Association, 1983), p. 229-230 ADDITIONAL REFERENCES Black's Law Dictionarv. St. Paul; Minn.: West Publishing Co., 1979 McClendon, Bruce, and Quay, Ray. Mastering Change. Washington, D.C.: Planner's Press, American Planning Association, 1988. Babcock, Richard F. The Zoning Game. Madison, Wis.: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1977 3 SMALL AREA REZONING REQUESTS On 8-6-81, case #81-124, P&Z Woodstock Addition Section I small site size (2) previous access (4) access distance'f residential area (6) uses in centers. rezoning approved. considered rezoning ,Lot 1 Block 2 from R-6 to C-3. Concerns were (1) denial of C-1 (3)traffic impact & rom intersection (5) screening from C-3 zones '(7) "strip" commercial On 2-4-82, case #82-107, P&Z considered rezoning .81 acres southwest of the intersection of Dowling Road & FM 2818 from A-P to C-3. Concerns were (1) compliance with land use plan. (2) compatibility with. adjacent zoning districts (3) signage (4) depth of the tract. rezoning approved On 3-4-82, case #82-111, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 1 & pt. of Lot 2 Block 7 West Park Addittion from R-1 to R-lA. Concerns were (1) of square footage requirements for 2 residences (2) backing into streets. rezoning approved On 3-4-82, case #82-112, P&Z considered rezoning 3.34 acres (Welsh & Nueces) from C-N to C-3. Concerns were (1) lack of land use :control (2) traffic generated (3) compatibility with area uses.. rezoning approved On 5-6-82, case.#82-119, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 12 Block B College Heights from A-P to C-3. Concerns were (1) traffic generated (2) permitted uses. rezoning denied On 5-20-82, case #82-122, P&Z considered Rezoning of Lots 1-3 Block 1 Cooper Addition from C-1 & R-5 to C-1. Concerns were. (1) access to residential area,,(2) impact of commercial traffic on residential street (3 )'additional depth to small existing C-1 area. rezoning approved On 6-12-82, case #82-119, P&Z again considered rezoning Lot 12 Block B College Heights from A-P to C-3. Concerns were (1) availability: of existing C-1 land (2) access to major streets. rezoning. approved On 10-21-82, case #82-137, P&Z considered rezoning Block Y University Park II from R-3 to C-3. Concerns were (1) commercial access through a residential area (2) inconsistency with land use plans (3) size of~tract (too small) (4) drainage (5) access to major streets (6) visibility for access (line of sight) (7) building in a floodplain (8) traffic generation. rezoning denied On 12-2-82, case#82-137, P&Z considered rezoning Block Y University Park II from R-3 to C-3 (with applicant indicating C-N zoning would suit his needs. Concerns were (1) commercial access through a residential area (2) non-compliance with land use plan (3) access to a major street (4) neighborhood opposition (5) traffic impact (left turns). rezoning denied 4 On 11-4-82, case #82-140, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 1 Block 4 Anderson Ridge Section 2 from R-1 to C-3. Concerns were (1) tract size (too large for C-3) (2) impact on residential neighborhood (3) non-compliance with land-use plan (4) sewer capacity (5) neighborhood opposition (traffic impact on residential neighborhood/streets). rezoning tabled On 11-18-82, case #82-140, P&Z reconsidered above rezoning request. (Applicant revised request to 3 acres C-3, with remainder to be A-P). Concerns were (1) limiting access to neighborhood street. rezoning to C-3 & A-P approved On 4-21-83, case #83-107, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 9, 10 & pt of Lt 8 Block 2 West Park Addition from R-1 to R-lA. Concerns were (1) neighborhood opposition to possible overcrowding (more lots, smaller sizes). rezoning approved On 5-19-83, case #83-109, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 31, 32 & part of Lot 30 Block 9 West Park Addition from R-1 to A-P. Concerns were (1) non-compliance with land use plan (2) using A-P as buffer (3) size of tract (small) (4) sewer capacity (5) traffic impact (deemed no problem) (6) good planning practice (more intense uses at intersect';ion moving away to less intense uses. rezoning approved On 8-4-83, case#83-113, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 15 & 16 West Park Addition from R-1 to R-lA. Concerns were (1) need for study of the area regarding best future use of land. rezoning tabled at request of applicant to allow time for study On 7-7-83, case #83-110, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 8 & 9 Block 2 Cooner Addition from R-5 to A-P. Concerns were (1) impact on neighborhood (2) use of A-P as buffer zone. rezoning approved On 2-16-84, case #84-105, P&Z considered rezoning .2.56 acres at Wellborn & Holleman from R-5 to C-3. Concerns were (1)-non- compliance with land use plan (2) lack of buffering (3) lack of need for commercial development in area (4) size of tract (too small). rezoning denied On 8-26-84, case #84-116, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 6 Block l Cooner Addition from R-5 to A-P. Concerns were (1) compliance with land use plan (2) impac on lot by existing uses and zoning (3) compatibility with existing zoning and uses (4) preferred'. commercial zoning~f.or lot 'size. rezoning approved On 10-18-84, case #84-124, P&Z considered rezoning .46 acres on E.Bypass & Rrenek Tap Road from R-1 to C-1 Concerns were (1) non-compliance with City policies (too small) (2) adverse impact on adjacent property. rezoning. denied On 11-1-84, case #84-125, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 4C, 4D, 14C & 14D Block 18B Treehouse Pl. from R-4 to A-P. Concerns were (1) area uses (2) design of lots.. rezoning approved 5 On 4-4-85, case #85-108,. P&Z considered rezoning Lot 1 Block 18 W.C.Boyett subdivision from R-2 to R-5. Concerns were (1) compliance with land use plan (2) size of tract (too small.) (3) impact on adjacent lots (4) consistency of uses in area (5) adding to wn existing problem in a special area (Northgate). rezoning denied On 5-16-85, case #85-113, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 19 Block 5 University Oaks #2 from R-2 to R-5. Concerns were (1) non- compliance with land use plan {2) encroachment into buffer zone. (3) neighborhood opposition. rezoning denied On 9-5-85, case #85-118, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 18, 19, 20 & part of Lot 17 West Park Addition from R-1 to R-4. Concerns were (1) size of tract (too small), (2) impact on adjacent residential area (3) adverse impacts on drainage & streets (4) sewer capacity. (5) future "domino effect" (6) results of study underway rezoning denied On 10-17-85, case #85-121, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 21 & 22 Block 1 W.C.Boyett Addition from R-6 to C-3. Concerns were {1) compliance with land use plan (2) compatibility with area uses (3J size of lots (favorable). rezoning approved On 7-18-85, case #85-114, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 5 & 7 Block 1 Cooper Addition from A-P & R-5 to C-1. Concerns were (1) compliance with land use plan (2) impact of commercial traffic on residential street (3) consolidation with other small commercial tracts into 1 larger commercial development. rezoning approved contingent upon repiat with other small lots with multiple owners On 7-27-86, case #86-114, P&Z considered rezoning Lots 23 & 24 Block 4 Prairie View Heights from C-N to R-lA. Concerns were (1) compliance with land use plan (2) compatibility with area uses and zoning. rezoning approved On 7-16-87, case #87-105, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 2A Courtyard Apartments from C-N to C-3. Concerns were (1) signage in a district (2) changes in zoning intensity (lack of) (3) interpretation of zoning ordinance {4) impact on area residential development (5) screening. rezoning approved On 9-17-87, case #87-106, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 2B Block 2 Courtyard Apartments from C-N to C-3. Concerns were (1) land use plan vs. actual development (2) changes in zoning intensity. (lack of) (3) signage (4) txaffic generation (5) example of "domino theory". rezoning approved On 4-21-88, case #88-105, P&Z considered rezoning Lot 1 Timber Ridge Third Installment from C-N to C-3. Concerns were (1) land use plan (2) compatibility with area zoning & uses (3) changes in zoning intensity {lack of) (4) example of "domino theory" (5) consistency in consideration and action taken on requests by P&Z. rezoning approved NOTE: request denied ~ Council on 5-12-88 6 SEP-19-96 04:27 PM 409 690 ?562 P.01 LYNN WHITE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 5505 PaLO ROAD COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 Phone (409) 690-7559 (0) t409) 646-8015 {H) FAX {409) 690.7562 FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET DATE: September 19,1996 T0: Shirley Volk FAX: 764 3496 COMPANY OR FIRE DEPT: City of College Station FROM: David White RE: Request for Re-zoning of 589 Graham Road Number of pages to Follow: (0) (If all pages are not received, please call (409) 693-7105 REMARKS: Dear Shirley, We are interested in asking for a Re-Zoning for the warehouse lot at 589 Graham Road. We would like to Re-zone the lot'from M-2 to C-2. We need to know the time frame for the application and what-procedures we need to follow. If you. have any questions or need any other information please let us know. David White UNITED OIL EXPLORATION CO., INC. WILLIAMD. FARRAR PRESIDENT October 17, 1996 Each City Council Member Via Hand Delivery City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas- 77840 Re: Proposed Rezoning for 589 Graham Road Dear Council Members: I am writing to express agreement. with the rezoning request of applicant Lynn White for the property located at 589 Graham Road. I am .unable to appear at this evening's. hearing and ask that .you accept this letter as my written statement in lieu of a personal appearance. We own property adjoining the subject tract to the northeast. We are of the opinion than the commercial zoning requested is more compatible with the surrounding. land use than is the existing M-1 or M-2 zoning. Thank you for your time and consideration of our view. V T ours, ilham ar, President MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 409/690'2222 OFFlCEADDRESS: P.O. Box 9762 FACSIMILE: 409/690-3333 625 GRAHAM ROAD SouTH COLLEGESTATION; TEXAS 77842 EMAIL: FARRARWD~a NrRIAD.NEr COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS a i ,, .~~: ~~;~ ~~ r, ~~ . ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~11L .. ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ G`~ ~0~ ~~~ t -~ _ ;. r ~~ ~~ ` ~ ~!~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ C~ F_ f r--~, M ~1 ~~ ~~ ~_ - ~ _ _ _