HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesC(g-il3
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
August 20, 1998
7:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Massey, Commissioners Garner, Maloney, Parker, Rife,
and Mooney.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners and Kaiser.
STAFF PRESENT:. City Planner Kee, Senior Planner McCully, Assistant Development
Coordinator Ruiz, Transportation Planner Hard, Staff Planner Battle,
Assistant City Engineer Morgan, Staff Assistant Charanza, Assistant City
Attorney Robinson, and. Parks & Recreation Director Beachy.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes from the Regular Meeting held on August 6, 1998.
Commissioner Garner. moved to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting' held on August 6, 1998.
Commissioner Mooney seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Public hearing and consideration of a .rezoning of .approximately 63>698
acres located west. of the West .Ridge Subdivision, from A-O Agricultural. Open to R-1 Single
Family, R 2 Duplez, C-N Neighborhood Commercial, and C-1 General Commercial (98-113)
Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report and stated that the requested rezoning is in
conformance with the recentlg approved Master Development Plan. The. rezoning will create 28 acres
of R-1 zoning adjacent to the existing R-1 development to the south and existing R-2 zoning to the east.
The requested 32 acres of R-2 zoning will be located to the west of existing R-5 zoning and to the south
of future high density single family uses. The 1.2 acre of C-1 and the 2.5 acre of C-N is to be located at
the future intersection of Navarro and Wellborn Road,. with the neighborhood commercial tract to act as
a buffer zone between the corner and the duplexes. The less intense district was also chosen'in an effort
to address the concern that non-residential. cut-through traffic will occur on Navarro. Each .use in the
C-N tract will need. to come before the Commission for approval.
There are approximately 13.1 acres of public right-of--way proposed with this subdivision.. West Ridge
Drive and Navarro Drive are currently..scheduled to be extended as 38 foot wide streets within 60 feet
of right-of-way. The remaining residential streets will be the standard 27 foot wide street section in 50
feet of right-of-way. The northeastern portion of the West Ridge Drive collector will provide access to
the 9 acre park along the full length of that park. The developer has expressed intentions of requesting
oversize participation fora portion of the street cost. The City generally does not participate in the cost
of collector streets; but, in this case, oversize participation may be justified due to the relatively large
P&Z Minutes August 20, 1998 Page 1 of 6
amount of park frontage that will be of .public benefit. The alignment for. Navarro .Drive as it
approaches Wellborn is shown on the. approved Master. Development Plan to be outside of the boundary
of this subdivision. With the final platting of Phase 3 (which includes this portion of Navarro) the
developer will. have to include thaf portion of Navarro in the plat boundary in order to avoid the platting
of "half streets". The alignment is currently shown this way. on the Master Plan because it is the best
alignment for an intersection with Wellborn Road and the existing railroad crossing.
Notices for this request were sent. to seventy-eight property owners within 200 feet of the subject
property. No response was received prior to the meeting.
Staff recommended approval of the rezoning .request due to compliance with the approved Master
Development Plan.
Commissioner Rife asked when the extension of Navarro would be expected. City Planner Kee replied
that the Navarro extension would be included during Phase Two. .
Chairman Massey opened the public hearing.
Suzanne McDonald, Cortez Court, had questions concerning the development. She wanted to know
the specific time frame for the Navarro extension, the size of lots proposed in the R-1 area, and what
would happen to the existing cul-de-sacs along Deacon.
Karp Vargo, 2902 Cortez Court, had the same concerns and questions as Ms. McDonald; but, also
wanted to know the name of the developer.
Bill Williams, 2301 San Pedro, explained that his lot borders West Ridge which is a quiet neighborhood.
He always knew that the street would be extended with progress. He also .expressed concern with the
quality and integrity of the neighborhood when the development is completed. He also wanted to know
the timeline of the street extensions and the park development..
John Duncum, Developer of the property explained that.: he, .Larry Bossier and Mr. Huff. are partners in
the development. He said that they anticipate the Navarro. extension to take place within six months or
as soon as possible. The existing cul-de-sacs on Deacon .will-.not be extended into the proposed
development. He explained :that he did -not know: the actual sizes of the proposed single family homes
or the costs. The density of this development is below that allowed by the City. He explained that the
park area would have a detention pond. The drainage designs would have to be approved by the City.
Mr. Duncum explained that the park land would be' donated at the beginning of development and the
City would then take over the actual development.
Julia Swanson, .San Saba Court, wanted to know where the park would be located, the size, and the
type of park.
The Commissioners explained .that approximately 9 acres will be dedicated along the north side of the
extension of West Ridge. The potential. of the park is approximately two acres for park use, and
approximately 7 acres for detention/open .space. The Parks Department will have the final input for the
actual development of the park.
Chairman Massey explained to the concerned residents that the Commission had the opportunity to see
the plan two .times and had similar concerns as the. residents. The main concern from the Commission
', (in the past) was to assure adequate park land was dedicated. The quality of life issues, density, and
P&Zll~linutes August20, 1998 Page 2 of 6
drainage were also concerns expressed by the Commission at the time of the Master Plan consideration.
The Commissioners also explained to the concerned residents that the proposed plan was in compliance
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Chairman Massey closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Maloney moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request as subrrutted.
Commissioner Rife seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public .hearing.. and consideration of a proposed Amendment to
Ordinance No. 1638, the College Station Zoning' Ordinance Section 7.21 Wolf Pen Creek
Development Corridor and Section 17.5 Effeet of Protest of Proposed. Amendment. (98-812)
Due to an error in notification, this item was removed from the agenda.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing and consideration of a Master Preliminary Plat of the
F.N.. Smith 16.2.acre TracYlocated approximately 1000 feet from the intersection of FM 2818 and
State Highway 6 Frontage Road. (98-321)
Staff Planner Battle presented the staff report and stated that the preliminary .plat is composed of two
reserve tracts and one two lot subdivision... The proposed Dartmouth alignment is shown as it passes
through the 6.98 acre reserve tract. This master plan would proceed the final platting of the Southpark
Subdivision as reflected on this plan. The subdivision is planned as two lots containing office buildings.
Staff recommended approval of the request.
Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. Seeing no one to speak in favor of or opposition to the
request, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rife moved to recommend approval of the Master Preliminary. Plat as submitted.
Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration of a Final Plat of Woodcreek Section 10-A being
approximately 12.624 acres located at the-east end of Woodcreekbrive. (98-229)
Graduate Engineer Kaspar presented the staff report and stated that the plat is one of two final plats that
would extend Woodcreek Drive in two phases to :connect with Faulkner Drive in the Foxfire
subdivision. This connection is shown on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. No access points from lots will
be permitted on to Woodcreek Drive. One of the conditions of approval of the Preliminary Plat was
that public drainage easements be dedicated to encompass the T00 year water surface elevation of the
existing creek. This requirements has been met with this final plat.
Mr. Kaspar explained that this is one of the last remaining undeveloped sections in the Woodcreek
Subdivision. The development is in accordance with the Master Development Plan for the Woodcreek
Subdivision and the Preliminary Plat for Sections l0A and lOB recently reviewed by the Commission on
August 6, 1998.
P&Z Minutes August 20, 1998 Page 3 of 6
Proposed R 2 Duplexes Prouosed C-N Neiuhborhood Business
PURPOSE: This district contains land. which has PURPOSE: This district provides small commercial
been subdivided for single family residential sites for residential convenience goods and personal
purposes and associated uses as well as larger parcels service businesses. No use shall be allowed which
of property which lend themselves to duplex would adversely affect the health, safety, welfare, or
dwellings. This. district is at moderate density. It may residential character of the neighborhood. The use
be utilized as a transitional zone between low density shall be a low traffic generator and shall not create
and other residential uses.. any noise, light, or odors abnormal to the
neighborhood. No outside storage or display of goods
PERMTTED USES: or materials shall be allowed.
Duplex dwelling units.
Single family dwellings, built under the restrictions PERMITTED. USES: All uses permitted within the
of District R-1A. C-N District shall be determined for each proposed
Home occupations. location by the Planning and Zoning Commission
.pursuant to the procedures =established in Section
10.6. Uses. to be considered by the Commission are:
Retail sales of beer and wine only -restricted to off
premises consumption - 2,500 square feet
maximum floor area.
Retail food store - 2,500 square feet maximum floor
area.
Retail sales - 2,000 square feet. maximum floor area.
Restaurant providing prepared food for off-premise
consumption only - 1,500. square. feet maximum
floor area.
Personal service shops -2,000 square feet maximum
floor area.
Offices - 2,000 square feet maximum floor area.
Small recycling collection facilities.
Other uses to be determined by the Commission.
:.;;::.; :.::.::.::.::;:;.:::;:::::::;;::;;:;:::::::::. _
X^ Regular Item
Consent Item
Statutory Item
Item SubmittedBy: Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
For Council Meeting Of: September 10, 1998
Director Approval:
City Manager Approval:
Policy Issue Statement:
Civic. Pride Citizens benefit from well-planned, attractive residential and
commercial areas, and from. preserving historic areas.
Transnortation/Mobility Citizens benefit from the ability to move into, out of, and
within College Station in a safe efficient manner.
The. Land Use .Plan was amended through adoption of the Master Development Plan,
-which shows the area east of the future Navarro extension as duplex, south of Navarro as medium
density single family, and the northeast corner of Navarro and Wellborn Road as commercial.
Item Background: The 1Vlaster Development Plan for the Steeplechase Subdivision was approved
by the City Council per the Planning and Zoning Commission's requested changes. These changes
included. an additional neighborhood park and the :elimination of pedestrian connections through the
existing neighborhood to the south. There was some concern expressed regarding the. connection of
Navarro to Wellborn. Road due to the potential for: cut-through traffic. The plan was approved
o;\group\deve_ser\cvshtlseptlo\98-113.doc
;~
with some commercial at the future intersection. The intent of the commercial corner was for more
limited, neighborhood types. of commercial uses.
Budgetary & Financial Summary: The. developer will likely request oversize participation for
'~ sewer (see Sewer discussion. below) and for a portion of West Ridge (see Streets discussion below).
Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval.
Related. Advisory Board Recommendations: The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends approval by a unanimous vote.
City Attorney Recommendation/Comments: Approved as to form.
Council Action Options: Approval of all or a portion of request; approval with physical
conditions that will mitigate impacts; deny; deny without prejudice; table; defer action to specified
' meeting only after opening and closing of public hearing.
Supporting Materials:
L' Location Map
2. Application
3. Engineering Information and Notification Information
4. List of Zoning District uses
5. PnZ minutes
6. Ordinance
o\group\deve_ser\cvsht~Sept10\98-133.doc
-1
o:~pWeve_serlstfipt~98-120.doc
\1 \,~1
G~
~"
`/~ /'V~
~~
~ ,f ~~~~~rv~~
1
/` f`
\ ¢ ,.t ~ ~ f\ _.fr~ ! .r (`, ~^; (~ A 4,,. ~ p ;C~~` I~``~,'~.` ~... ''~ i t'~ ..~.r~'1 l ~~
.~ ~ 1' i ll
r ~ ~~~
~-..^~ ,
~~ ; ~ ;:: t
G~ ; ~~ ; ~
~~
-.'~ F~ s ~ f~ . `;
"~i ` ~'
r .'
~1~ pu~~?
~4' fir, ~/~s ,t, ~, 'l,- .. r~~./~ ~„ ""-;,~. ~ ~~,, ~ ~: k \1
.I~ ~
~ F~ t
~ `~..~
f ,~. ~.: r ~, 4
r ' s , ',
~., ~ '.i
~~
rc =- ~~
\~ ~` ~ E
4
., ;'
t'` ' ~ ~
r t r` ~ ` J~ f
.~
r
'` ~ ~~ s ~
P
~~ ; ~
/f}/ 4~ t
~. , a ~f
/ i_ //
r
y 1 e ~w } ~ ~.+t~
~~ ~ ~~~ '~ °G,X ~>.~ ~ t .~..
,_ fl t
s ,pp""
r ~ ~ f //m
~, l r °..
.A y..4
F r~1 ~ pp
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i)
l~ rp __ `
~ ~~
~ spa ~~
~~ 1
ti -..
,,...
~, x.>m, ~ ~ (~ ~ ~ ~,
~ ~ {
~ _~ ~ ~
.;~~ a ''
f
. t `' ~ ~
.~ ,,, ~,
ti
~' a. ~ r ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
z1
L ., ~ - ,
,~
,; _
h~`~, ~°`( ~ ~ ~ "~° ~~,~ ~ F
t< .~
^ ~ ~ ~ j yp~ ht ~~ 4 ~ ~ e+w
/ f~
r
~_ ~
~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I ~'
~~_,
'+~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~'`W,.~'F~ ~/ `.~%l w„m` ~,..~ / F. F/Y i <.../~ `;-J ,./fF g ~ ir.~ ~ 5 f - 4 ' f~
\111- l,~^/~ ,,,;4.
~ ~.:~
~,
t .r
k / „ / a
4_ .,
n
'" '?' r
~ a .r r
'~ , .~ . ~`.~ ~ ~ ~ ~` .._ ~ , ` l ~
0 ~ )y
i
~.
~ ~ i.
.~. t ~ r ~ i -.~, ° a r
~, r ~,,,.~ . ~ ~~ y.r" f ~ f
,, ~... .~
.; ~.
A ~
,)
~ .~t ~ ~ s~
s \,
~ ,,~ ( ~ t s
~~ . r ~ -r~~.l WW.. --
~ f ~
(, r ~ Fe }~
~~
~F
~~ l
`~
_ ~~ ,f} y( ~ ~/
~ y. ~ ^,w3 .. f
,.~ ~.
~ 4
<,
~ f{ t~ryd ,,r~` .
v i~ ~ }
}} ~4 ! ~1
h ~
~,< ~. ~~
..
.~
~ ~ ~
~` ,
'' ~ i'++.
~~
~..
r., ~~
r
s f
~ ,
~ ~f
i
{
~:..
. .t
r t, {~(F
~ ~ ~~
~.~
'~~ „
A ^~ f \ V
S Ytp i; r
r t~~
f ~ '.
z x
~ ~ 4
A
U e. - f
~' ~~ ~ ~ ~~ °`~ ? 3 ~ ~ ~ r~ &. ~ ~ `°" ~ gas! ~ e ~ SE~`"u'C _ u ~ & s, ' ~ q 4"" f~ q ,fig ~ry
J"':"; % "~" E._s"eJ ~.+'~"' _. 1 b" ~~ ~$"~ ~4'~_ .ter ,_ p„a y" '~~w~v`@i.,,
it ~ _P ~"~
d r~ ~ ,
~ ,
~ ~ j1 ~ ,~
i gg
+ u`~l`J,,,.~ d .~~~./ d tr ~1.fYA' ~..»r ll'"yn~ ~is~-`. ~" ~ .r s ~ Gad ~~ ,.'e°"~a"~7,.r S~N~~~ `~ ( `/
nn
,
7 4f~ ,~~ ~h/\~..a~.' L~~IR. !/ 7d t }+ ~ ~ wens ~~/ f ».,~. d L<~/ -.= '~'....+,-~o ~, eik '.. f... !~.° f, ~_,.~
v .~
n,
i ! .~ _
~~
m, ~.
a ~.
~,~ . .a
kkk++~,fff f
~~._
~ , (~
~1
® ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t.-~f'
"`~ ~` {f~ [ i ~t~ 1` ~r ~ ~~.'., Y if ,. ~e~ ~~ ~ ,`~'.~-:::~~~ e ,~~,.?`~ `;. _~ e i~-.~,/ ff'...-.~~ 111 /
1 1 2 ~ /(; 3 ~ `Z ~} ~ ~ ~ ~d /
to+. ~ ~ il.. yTL.Ft'~ ~ ~~"G'"_,,~ '~~'* '1... ~ ~ i..E?~s' ~`< ~ f,~ ,.~~ ~;~~ t,.~R e„~~`4.~ ~...1~~~J !_ ,F~v._ `~! ~ tl;~:~ ~,~_,..
u
:,
~1~.,,~
t _
~ f 4r
. ~ _ ,/
~~ ~'~ ~`~~ ~ ~ ~ - ~``~ ~ ~~`._ //gyp ~o~,/ `~'~=~°C.
.F
~+~' }
z ~ -~ ~.
r
z. t
€~ ,. ~
_l~
,, ,
~ ,
rx -~ r
~ ~
~ ,.-
`~ ~ ,
~ ~ . ~ i~ ~ ~ , i ~
~ ~ ;, F
~; ~" ~ ~: f ~'~-
.,; ~,.
t
.. ~ ~,
,`~
will mitigate negative impacts, recommend a less intense zoning classification, recommend denial,
table indefinitely, or defer action to a specified date.
~:_ :~
Supporting. Materials:
I. Location Map
2. Application.
3: Engineering Information and Notification Information
4. List ofZoning District uses
~-
~~ ~xm,,~~u~~
~~, , ~ ,~~
~~. ~: ^~
~.
~ ,~i ~,~
,.
~,~
'' ~ ~
~ : ~ ~ ,~
,,~ ~, r
~~,
~_.
f
,_'
,r
__
~~
~~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ _
__
:y,_
~ .;
,q..w
,~ t r
C ~_ - o
~.4 r ti, r
~` ~ £ ! ~ ~ d
t,
~5 ~~I ~ ~ , ~ `~`
} dry ~ k
s ~'~ t~ ~~
~ ..
y
$~, ~ _.,
a
a
f
~~ °i. .
i
,1 ,,~ t ( ~ ,_ t ~ ~ '' 9 _ ~ .,.~
~ ~_::: ,.
v ~i_. f
,~ ~~
t ~ `
,,
i ~ i
a t 1 ~
`~ a, m
,,
!~ ~
~a~'
i
,"
. ~.;
tf.
~~
~~.,._
,.
I u ~
f f
~ ~~)
e ..
.~.
._
~.
i ,'~ ,
it ,_
o:~roupWeve sa'l4t&pt~&113.doc p ~
~il ~~.;; fi
~, ~.~' ~u
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning- Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
October 15, 1998.
7:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Massey, Commissioners Maloney,
Parker, Mooney, and Kaiser.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Garner and Rife.
STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, Senior Planner McCully,. Assistant
City Engineer Morgan, Transportation'.. Planner Hard,
Assistant Development Coordinator Ruiz, Staff
Assistant Charanza, Parks 8v Recreation Director
Beachy, and Assistant City Attorney Robinson.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing :and reconsideration of a rezoning of
approximately 28 acres located west of the West Ridge Subdivision, from
A-O Agricultural Open to R-1 Single Family. (98-113)
Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report. and stated that the single
family portion. of the Steeplechase Subdivision was sent back to the
Commission by the City Council. Council's direction was to see if anything
could be .done to alleviate the concerns of the adjoining property owners to the
south. Staff felt the major .concerns .were drainage issues and decreased
property values. It was explained that. the applicant intended to meet ,the City's.
Drainage .Ordinance which requires the post-development water run-off rate
equal the pre-development rate. The applicant would meet this requirement by
designing detention ponds and drainage easements. into the subdivision. The
City's Drainage 'Ordinance requires that these be designed by licensed
engineers to assure compliance. The applicant would addre s the property
value issue by meeting or exceeding the minimum standards set within the R-1
zoning district. The applicant submitted two letters from separate veal estate
appraisers expressing their belief that as designed, the proposed subdivision
would not impact existing land uses. To further mitigate potential negative
impacts, the applicant offered to either ..build a 6 - 8 foot .screening fence or
widen the back row of lots from 55' to 65'. Staff recommended approval due to
compliance with the approved Master Development Plan with the condition that
the 8 foot fence be installed as offered by the applicant.
Chairman Massey opened the public hearing.
Mr. John Duncum, 16055 Wellborn Road, developer of the project, explained
that he has experience with 'the development of detention ponds .and he felt
certain the proposed. plan would meet .the Drainage Ordinance requirements
and would not increase water run-off... He explained that the entire
development met the City's requirements and no variances would be requested.
The 'developer was willing to assure compliance with all requirements. The
main concerns expressed by property owners at the Council meeting were lot
size and drainage impact.'.. A petition was submitted to Council requesting that
no homes under the $125,000 price range be .allowed in the subdivision, to
alleviate the decrease in property values. Council explained that this was .not
something the Council could enforce. Mr. Duncum and Mr. Huff offered to
meet with concerned .property owners but the attendance was extremely .low.
He did meet with Mr. 'Vargo and Mrs. McDonald ..(two. concerned owners), and
discussed the following: no street or sidewalk connection :between the two
subdivisions; a very wide easement was included in the plan for a barrier
between the two subdivisions; and a drainage ditch in the .easement exists to
further' limit access across the .easement. The' developers offered an eight foot
fence along the .rear property line of the houses backing up to the drainage
easement; or to increase the lot sizes along the drainage easement to 65 feet
and to allow the minimum house size to be 1400 sq. ft. Mr. Duncum said .that
nothing was resolved at this meeting. He explained that he scheduled another
meeting and notified, by mail, a1T property owners. within ' 200 feet but only one
homeowner attended.
Dr: T.K. Welsh from 29D 1 Durango and Mr. Carl Vargo from 2902 Cortez Court
spoke in opposition to the request with the following comments and concerns:
• Did not feel drainage issues and concerns were properly addressed;.
• Decreased property values;
• Felt' this had the potential of becoming rental property which would have a
.negative impact for the property values;
• Wanted to require the minimum house size of 1600 sq. ft in thee: deed
restrictions for the lots that back up to the. existing subdivision;
• .Quality of life issues.
Chairman Massey closed .the public hearing.
Commissioner Maloney moved to recommend approval of rezoning the property
to R-1 with the screening fence. Commissioner Parker seconded. the motion
which passed unopposed (5-0).
The Commissioners discussed the drainage impact and wanted assurance that
there would not be an impact to the existing drainage. They felt the request
followed .the step-down. zoning. philosophy. They agreed that the developers
had designed a nice development and they seemed more than willing to work
with .the residents, staff, the Commission and Council to address all concerns
and assure that all requirements are met.
MINUTES
COLLEGE STATION CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE AND REGULAR MEETING
.Thursday, January 14, 1999. at 5:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers 1101 Texas Avenue
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT:Mayor-McIlhaney, Mayor Pro Tem Hickson,
Councilmembers Mariott, Hazen, Silvia, Anderson, Esmond
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Noe, City Secretary Hooks, City Attorney
Cargill,: Jr., Assistant City Manager Brymer, Management Assistant Broussard,
Public Relations and Information Manager Chapman, City Planner Kee, Senior
Planner .McCully, Development .Services Director Callaway, Transportation
Planner Hard, City Engineer Mosley
Mayor McIlhaney opened the meeting at 5:03 p.m. with Councilmembers
Esmond and Anderson absent.
Agenda Item No. 6.1 -- Public, hearing and possible action on a rezoning
request of approximately 28 acres located west of the West Ridge Subdivision,
from A=O Agricultural Open to R-1 B Single Family and R-1 Single. Family (98-
120).
Senior Planner Sabine McCully presented a brief report. Mayor McIlhaney
opened the public hearing.
The following audience members addressed the Council.
Benito. Flores-Meath, 901. Val Verde
Carl Vargo, 2902 Cortez Ct.
Al Scott, 2906 Oakbrook Ct.
Antonio Cepeda, 2901 Cortez Ct.
Sue .McDonald, 2903 Cortez Ct.
Brien Smith, 2903 Bolero Ct.
Ms. McDonald presented a letter to the City Council from her attorney, Mr.
Henry Gilmore relating to the effect of protest amendment in the city's zoning
ordinance.
Applicant John Duncum spoke in favor of the proposed rezoning request.
Dennis Maloney from the Planning and Zoning Commission spoke in favor of
the request.
Mayor McIlhaney closed the public hearing.
City Attorney. Cargill responded to the letter submitted by Ms. McDonald. He
noted that the Apollo case which held the. 3/4ths rule does not apply to A-O
zoning was appealed to the Texas. Supreme Court and found to have.. no
reversible error. The. Zoning Ordinance defines A-O as a holding zone. The
3/4ths rule does not apply to holding zones.
At the request of Council, City Secretary Hooks read a petition signed by 34
homeowners from the Courts Homeowners Association.
The landowners of the properties on Aztec Court, Bolero Court, .Cortez. Court,
Durango Court, Meadowbrook Court and Oakbrook Court. who are within 200
feet of the proposed Steeplechase Subdivision protest the requested zoning
change of a parcel of land next to our property from Agricultural Open A-O to
R-1 and R-1 B. We are asking the City Council to deny the rezoning request.
All of the signatures below are ,from property owners in the 200 feet area
surrounding the proposed development.
Councilman Hazen made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2366 rezoning an
8.43 acre .tract from A-0 Agricultural Open to R-1 B Single. Family Residential
and 19.57 acre tract from A-O Agricultural Open to R-1 Single Family
Residential. Motion seconded by Councilman Silvia which carried by a vote of
4-2.
FOR: McIlhaney, Silvia, Hazen,. Mariott
AGAINST: Anderson, Esmond