Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesN +[. MINUTES .Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS ~~, March 5, 1998. 1 7:00 P.M. COMIIIISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Massey,: Commissioners. Garner, Silvia, .Parker, Rife, Gribou, and Lightfoot. ~ COMIVIISSIONERS ABSENT: None. I STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner. McCully, Staff Planner: Battle, Transportation Planner Hard, Staff Assistant Charanza, and Assistant City. Attorney Robinson. AGENDA ITEM NO.1: Approval of minutes from the meeting of February 19,1998. Commissioner Rife moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of February 19, 1998 as written. Commissioner Silvia seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7-0) AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Public hearing .and consideration of a .Conditional Use Permit for a proposed Restaurant and Nightclub to be located in the Chimney Hill shopping center at 701 University Drive. (98-701) Staff Planner Battle presented the staff report and stated that he proposed restaurant and nightclub would be housed in the Chimney Hill shopping :center. The center contains 76,818 square feet of space ~, and is occupied by several businesses. Approximately 43,561 sq. ft is currently vacant. The applicant intends to use the large 41,321:: sq. ft vacant space for several uses .including office space, warehouse .space, and a restaurant and nightclub. The restaurant/nightclub use requires a conditional use permit. Mr. Battle explained that the properiy'is zoned C-B commercial and is entirely surrounded by other commercial uses zoned C-1 and C-B. .The closest residential properties are the condominiums in Chimney Hill which are more than 400' feet away. There are not churches or schools within 1000 feet. Mr. Battle <explained that because this is a shopping center with shared parking, the .size. of the restaurant/nightclub use will be limited by the existing parking. When. a restaurant or nightclub. use exceeds 25% of the shopping center floor area, then if is required to provide .additional parking. He ' stated that this .shopping center is required to have 384 spaces, however 451 spaces exist. B t ' g-. ~ i _ e 64 spaces that exist in excess of the required number, this use can have a maximum size j of _ 385 s an meet. t e muumum ordinance. requirements. e a i ion o parking spaces in the re could allow for the expansion of this use if such an expansion is approved by the. Commission. Because this. business will have a different time of use, most of the other businesses in the center .should not be impacted by the additional parking generated by the proposed use. P&Z~nutes March S, .1998 Page I oj4 I Commissioner Silvia moved to approve the conditional' use permit. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0-1). `Commissioner Lightfoot abstained from the vote and discussion. AGENDA ITEM NO.3: Consideration of a rezoning request for approximately 2.9 acres to ed on the southwest corner of Luther and Jones Butler, .Lot 4, Block 1 of the Melrose Subd' sion from R 5 Apartments Medium Density to C-1 General Commercial. Commission held t public hearing and deferred action on this item at the regular meeting held on February 19 998. (98- 101) .Senior Planner McCully reminded the Commission. that the reasons for deferring a 'non this item: was to give the applicant more time to .submit additional information so that a dete ' ation could be made. whether or not aPDD-B designation .would be appropriate. The applicants miffed a letter outlining specific uses and a concept plan..The original request for C-1 had the po ntial for incompatible land uses and therefore staff recommended a less intense .commercial district The PDD B designation, as described by :the applicant's letter, would -meet .their needs and. woul ensure a cohesive approach to development within the area. The applicant is prepared to restrict t uses to a more narrow range than would be permitted under the C-l zoning. The City is in a positio to agree to this more narrow list and would be able to restrict the uses if the property is zoned PDD Ms. McCully explained that in order to grant a PDD, the Commission must find that the followin standards are met: 1. The proposal will constitute an environment of su ed stability and will be in harmony with the character of the. surrounding area. 2. The proposal is in conformity with the polic' sand goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The proposal will not adversely affect ~acent development. The following uses were requested by a applicant: 1. All A P uses; 2. General retail .and servic , 3. Restaurant and driv hrough eating establishments; 4. Convenience st e; 5. Arcade; 6. Clean s with onsite cleaning facilities; 7. olive and service station with car wash. recommended approval of the PDD-B zoning designation. PBcZ~nutes March S, 1998 Page 3 of 4 I ~~ IVIr. Battle explained that Section 14 of the .Zoning :Ordinance authorizes the existence of conditional uses.. The Commission may permit a conditional use subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards, when after public notice and hearing the Commission finds that: (Staff comments are in italics) 1. "The proposed use meets all the minimum standards established in the ordinance for the type of use proposed." This use meets all of .the minimum ordinance. requirements 2. "That the :proposed use meets the purpose and. intent of the. ordinance and is in harmony :with the development. ,policies .:and goals and objectives -as embodied in .the Comprehensive Plan for the Development of the City." This use is in line with the Land. Use Plan. 3. That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, .welfare, and safety of the surrounding neighborhood or its 'occupants, nor be substantially or permanently injurious to neighboring property." The public hearing is an opportunity for the Commission to measure the potential impacf on surrounding land uses II "The Commission may impose additional reasonable restrictions or conditions to carry out the. spirit and intent of the ordinance and to mitigate adverse effects of the proposed use::. These. requirements may include, but are not limited to, increased open space,. loading and parking requirements, additional 'I landscaping, and, additional improvements such as curbing, sidewalks. and screening." Unless the public hearing brings to light any new information indicating potential negative impacts, Staff recommended approval. Approxunately 20 notices were mailed to property owners within 200' of the subject property. A letter of opposition was received on March 5, 1998 prior to the meeting. Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. Mr. Neely Lewis, Attorney representing the property owner,. explained that this area needs a fine dining establishment because the city of College Station is growing. There are a number of new businesses and II' hotels cumin to .town. He ex lamed that this would be the erfect o ortuni and location for an S P P pP tY upscale dining and entertainment center. He said that this establishment would not really be a "night club", but is being classified as one due to the definition in College Station's.. Zoning Ordinance. The proposed restaurant canhost dinners/receptions, weddings, banquets, and conferences. He said that the proposed portion of the building has been vacant and it needs to be put to good use. The plan for this 1 i- u use .entertainment establishment. The establishment is to provide an upscale dining and mu t p rP restaurant would be open late for dining on weekends... There would be responsible, trained, TABC certified staff and a professional security staff, possibly off-duty police officers. Commissioner Gribou wanted more specifics explaining what types of entertainment was proposed. '~ lVir. Lewis said that the concept is to create. a "sports bay" ype establishment with fine dining and entertainment.. He explained that .live music. is not in he plan. I Commissioner Garner expressed .concern about the: flow of traffic: through the center. Mr. Neely said that the peak time for the restaurant would be evenings at which time,. the other businesses in the center '~~ are closed. He explained that parking issues and trai~ic should not be a problem. Chairman Massey closed the public hearing. iil P&Z~nutes March 5,.1998 Page 2 of 4 i ~ Mr. Happ asked which direction will the water drain. Mr. Metcalf replied that it will drain toward - 6. Chairman Hollas asked if there was anyone to speak in opposition of the request. o one- stepped forward. Chairman Hollas closed the .public hearing. There were discussions among the Board Members concerning the cro sections. Mr. Blackwelder made the motion to authorize a varian our the terms of Chapter. 13, Ordinance Number 1728, Drainage Ordinance because undue dship on the owner will result from strict compliance with those requirements, to'wit: the 1 ` without the variance are unbuildable; and because either of the following criteria are met: Speci circumstances or conditions affect the land involved such that strict compliance with the provisio nd requirements of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land limite y: 1. channel cross section w' ave 4 to 1 slopes 2. concrete pilot cha be placed in the flowline of the channel 3. access to the b inning and end of the channel is provided 4. vegetative over is established I, S and other requirements as required by the City Engineer. ,~ s. Warren seconded the motion which passed unopposed {5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Consideration of a variance to the minimum number of parking spaces required at 701 University Drive East, Building B. The applicant is Zee Stop Holdings DBA the Tavern on Chimney Hiil. StaffPlanner Battle presented the staff report and stated thatthe applicant wants to increase the size of the proposed nightclub for this shopping center. Nghtciub parking is not a new issue in.this City. How man customers a ni htclub '1 vv~ 1 a r y tt act is un redictable. Some existin ni htcl g ubs meet Curren t arkin P g g p g ~ requirements, yet have overflow parlang problems on weekend evenings. In the past, some nightclubs have created problems when overflow parking ran onto. streets and adjacenf properties. In addition, safety hazards have been created when customers parked in adjacent areas and then ran across busy streets. The subject property is part. of the Chimney Dill shopping center. The parking .requirement .for shopping centers of this size is one space per 200 S.F. Up o 25% of the shopping center can be used for intense uses such as nightclubs, restaurants and bars.: The Zoning Ordinance states that when the square footage of these intense uses exceeds. 25% of the shopping center, additional parking must be .provided at the ratio required for that specific use in the Zoning Ordinance, in this case 1 per 50 S.F. for nightclubs. The Center currentl h 4 as 51 arkin s aces 67 more than the r Y P g p o durance. requires. Taking into .. consideration. the existm Tavern R estaurant as an .intense use and the. extra g parking .spaces, the ~~ proposed nightclub .could be 17,574 S.F. (23% ofthe center) and meet parking requirements. ~, ~~ ZBA Minutes May 19,1998 Page 4 of 11 I i The applicant is proposing an additional 11,370 S.F. for he nightclub. use. `The nightclub would be 28,944 S.F.(38% of center). The total intense uses would occupy 44% of the: shopping. center. To meet the parking requirements, 228 additional -parking spaces are needed. There.-is no available space on the property to add new parking spaces. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance of 228 spaces to the minimum parking spaces required. Parking in shopping centers is shared among `tenants. The applicant has stated that this business will. have a different time of use, mostly evenings, than most of the other businesses. If this was a stand ~ alone nightclub. (not in a shopping center), it would be required to have 579 parking spaces.: This is 128 more than the existing 451; spaces in the center. ' The applicant states that the property is fully developed.>and there. is no practical way to acquire additional parking or land. - In addition, the nightclub would mostly operate in the evenings when the . other businesses are closed, thus reducing the shared parking needs. Without a variance the business would be limited to 17,574 S.F. i The'following alternatives have been identified: L Additional parking could be leased from adjacent parking lots such as the Albertson's shopping center. However, this is not preferable because it creates a safety hazard when people try to cross the ~ street. Ualef parking my help some, but not all customers mayuse it. 2. Limit the size ofthe nightclub to meet the parking requirement.. 3. The Board can grant a variance that is less than what is being requested. The intent ofthe ordinance. to establish. guidelines.'for off-street: parking spaces consistent with the proposed land use to: 1. Eliminate occurrence ofnom-resident on-street parking in adjoining neighborhoods. 2. Avoid 'the traffic congestion and public .safety hazards caused by a failure to provide such parking space. 'i 3. Expedite the movement of traffic on public thoroughfares in a safe manner,. thus increasing the ..carrying capacit of the. streets-and reducin the amount of land re aired f Y g q or streets, thereby lowering the cost to both the property owner and the City. In the past the Board has not heard any requests for parking variances for ni htclubs or intense uses in g shopping centers. The Board has granted parking variances for other. uses. where special conditions related to the land .proved that a variance was appropriate. For example, the Board granted a parking variance to a retirement facility because it was shown that elderl eo le do not own or drive as man YP P y cars as others living in multi-family residential units. 2BA Minutes May i9, 1998 Page S of 11 lvir. Happ asked what other type businesses are located in the shopping center. Ivir. Battle. listed those which came to mind as being a florist shop, liquor store and health care center. 1VIr. Blackwelder asked .about compact care parking. Ms Kee stated that the only area where that is f allowed is in the WPC zoning district. 1VIs. Warren questioned if a use such as Hastings is considered an intense use..Mr. Battle replied that it is not considered an intense use but is a retail use. Chairman Hollas opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in favor of the request. Neely Lewis of t20 Lee Avenue, College Station, Texas, Charles Parker & Casey White, of Zee Stop ..Holdings approached the podium together and were sworn in by Chairman Hollas. Mr. Lewis, a local Attorney, :explained that the intentions are to have a nice restaurant/nightclub that .will accommodate ..large .receptions, banquets, etc. Mr. Lewis went over the floor plan. with the Board explaining the layout. __ 1VIr. Hollas asked if they could reduce the size of the total floor space to make. it work. Ivir. Lewis did not offer an answer. . Mr. Happ asked if a traffic study should be conducted for the .area before a variance is granted. Mr. Happ went on to describe `the high volume of traffic, .congestion and safety. factors. There were continued discussions between the Board members, 1VIr. Lewis, Mr. Parker & Mr. White. Mr. Parker added that there are 5 access drives to the shopping ;center and the night club should not add to the congestion. Chairman Hollas asked if there was,anyone to speak in opposition to the request.. ~ Hubbard Kennady of 8900 ,Sandstone, College Station, the mana er of the Chimne Hill Business g Y Complex and tenant, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hollas. Mr. Kennedy .stated that he was before the- Board not. against the nightclub and restaurant but against inadequate parking' that could .result. Mr. _Kennady also stated that he .was. pleased with the efforts that the applicant had made in making a pleasant restaurant. in town. 1VIr. Kennady continued in detail what he felt would happen with inadequate parking and the. overflow that would result in the surrounding businesses (Albertson's and Chimney Hill Business Park parking lots). Mr. Kennedy described he trash that would result. and possible ro ert lama e. P P Y g Mr. Hugh Lindsey tenant at 412 Tarrow stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hollas Mr. Lindsey went over the Zoning Ordinance intent on parking requirements and stated that due to the lack of parking the intent of he ordinance is not met. lVir. Lindsey spoke about hazards it could cause atrons crossin thestreets from arkin in other lots and .the site distance roblem fr P g P g s om P the bushes along the Chimney Hill Business Park. 1VIr. Lindsey continued by saying that the traffic count of Tarrow must be high since Tarrow is the only one-way street in "College. Station. 1Vfr. Lindsey .:concluded by saying that he has spoken with tenants in his office complex and they were also in ' opposition to the variance being granted. ZBA Minutes May 19 1998 Page b of 11 i Kim Stafford stepped before the Board on behalf of tenant Anthonette Ruffino of 414 Tarnow. Mr. Stafford said. that Ms. Ruffino .was not able to :make the meeting; but, asked him to attend to voice her ~ ' opposition. Mr. Stafford stated that Ms. Ruffino is the owner of the Sylvan Learning Center and that it is open. until 8:30 in the evenings. Mr. Stafford concluded by saying hat Ms. Ruffino felt-that there '...would: be disruption of parking at that time of the evening as well as the concern of children in the parking'lot being picked up from classes. ' There was some talk among the: Board Members about a valet parking agreement between the' night club and adjacent property owners. Mr. Battle added clarification to a parking agreement. Mr. Battle stated that if a parking agreement was proposed with. the surrounding properties, that he agreement would :only be good if the applicant could get a perpetual easement or some other permanent ownership interest in the 228 s aces. The adjacent P J .parking lots must also have the additional parking above what is required by ordinance in order to share with the night club.. .With no one else approaching the Board in opposition, Chairman Hollas closed the public hearing. Mr. Alexander offered the suggestion of downsizing the proposed. facility to accommodate the parking requirement.. Mr. Happ moved to den a variance to the arkin re uirement s from h ~' Y p g q t o terms of Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638 as it will be-contrary to the public interest due to the lack of any special conditions, as because a strict :enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would not result in ~ ;i unnecessary hardship to this application, and such than the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Blackwelder seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration ofa variance to Section 7.21 District WPC W en Creek Development Corridor # D Requirements for Dedication/Development of wage and Pedestrian Access Ways. The applicant is Clark & Wyndham Inc., for the Ha ett Group L.P. Jane .Kee, City Planner presented the staff report and stated t this is a variance to the Zoning Ordinance. not. the Drainage Ordinance.. It is a reservation uirement that is established in the Master Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. It requires that "the dway and minimum reservation line as defined in the Wolf Pen Creek Master Plan .shall be i 'cated on the site plan. Upon development of the property and at the o tion of the develo e e floodwa and h P P y t o minimum reservation line'. shall either be dedicated o the Ci for r ty d aina nd public ...open space use or be im roved b the develo er to P Y P conform with the standards: of e Development Corridor...." The minimum reservation line is defined in the WPC Master Plan 20 ft. strip.. adjacent to the. floodway. This space will permit as a minimum ..trails to be develo to a manner where they are not subject to constant inundation. Ms.'Kee added that staff is cu ntly in the process of revising the Wolf Pen :Creek Master Plan and it has gone through ~I numerou ublic meetings, hearings~before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Tax Increment Fin ~ngBoard. The developer also wants to defer the decision to develop or dedicate the minimum 2BA Minutes May i9, 1998 Page 7 of ll MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS March 5,1998 7:00 P.M. COMIVIISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Massey,. Commissioners Garner, .Silvia, Parker, Rife, Gribou, and Lightfoot. COMNIiSSIONERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner McCully,. Staff Planner Battle, Transportation Planner Hard, Staff Assistant Charanza, and Assistant City Attorney Robinson. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes from the meeting of February 19,1998. Commissioner Rife moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of February 19, 1998 as written. Commissioner Silvia seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7-0) AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for a proposed Restaurant and Nightclub to be located in the Chimney Hill shopping center at 701 University Drive. (98-701) Staff Planner Battle presented the staff report and stated that the proposed restaurant and nightclub would be housed in the Chimney Hill shopping center. The center contains 76,818 square feet of space and is occupied by several businesses. Approximately 43,561 sq. ft is currently vacant. The applicant intends to use the large 41,321 sq. ft vacant space for several uses including office space, warehouse space, and a restaurant and nightclub. The restaurant/nightclub use requires a conditional use permit. Mr. Battle explained that the- property is zoned C-B commercial and is entirely surrounded by other commercial uses. zoned C-1 and C-B. The closest residential properties are the. condominiums in Chimney Hill which are more than 400 feet away. There are not churches or schools within 1000 feet. Mr. Battle explained that because this is a shopping center with shared. parking, the size of the restaurant/nightclub use will be limited by the existing parking. When a'restaurant or nightclub use exceeds 25% of the shopping center floor area, then it is required to provide additional parking. He stated that this shopping center is required to have .384 spaces, however 451 spaces. exist. By taking into account the 64 spaces that exist in excess of the required number, this use can have a maximum size of 18,385 sq. ft and meet the minimum ordinance requirements. The addition of parking spaces in the future could allow for the expansion of this use if such an expansion is approved by the Commission. Because this business will have a different time of use, most of the other businesses in the center should not be impacted by the additional parking generated by the proposed use. P&Z Minutes March S, 1998 Page 1 of 4 Mr. Battle explained that Section 14 of the .Zoning Ordinance authorizes the existence of conditional uses. The Commission may permit. a conditional use subject to .appropriate conditions and safeguards, when after public notice and hearing the Commission finds that: (Staff comments are in italics) 1. "The proposed use meets. all the minimum standards established in the ordinance for the type of use proposed." This use meets all of the minimum ordinance requirements. 2. "That the proposed use meets the purpose and intent of the ordinance and is in harmony with the development. policies and goals and .objectives as embodied in .the Comprehensive Plan for the Development of the City." This use is in line with the Land Use Plan. 3. That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of the surrounding neighborhood or its occupants, nor _be substantially or permanently injurious to neighboring property." The public hearing is an opportunity for the Commission to measure the potential impact on surrounding land uses. "The Commission may impose additional reasonable restrictions or conditions to carry out the spirit and intent of the ordinance and to mitigate adverse effects of the proposed use. These 'requirements may include, but. are not limited to, increased open .space, loading .and parking requirements, additional landscaping, and additional improvements such as curbing, sidewalks and screening." Unless the public hearing brings to light any new information indicating potential negative impacts, Staff recommended approval. Approximately 20 notices were mailed to property owners within 200' of the subject .property. A letter of opposition was received on March 5, 1998 prior to the meeting. Chairman Massey opened the public hearing. Mr. Neely Lewis, Attorney representing the property owner, explained that this. area needs. a fine dining establishment because the city of College Station is growing. There are a number of new businesses and hotels coming.. to town. He explained that this would be the perfect opportunity and location for an upscale dining and entertainment center... He said that this establishment would not really be a "night club", but is being classified as one due to the definition in College Station's Zoning Ordinance. The proposed restaurant can host dinners/receptions, weddings, banquets, and conferences. He said that the. proposed portion of the building has been vacant and. it needs to be put to good use. The plan for this establishment is to provide an upscale dining and multi-purpose entertainment establishment. The restaurant would be open late for dining on weekends.. There would be responsible, trained, TABC certified staff and a professional security staff, possibly off-duty police officers. Commissioner Gribou wanted more specifics explaining what types of entertainment was proposed. Mr. Lewis said that the concept is to create a "sports bar" type establishment with fine dining and entertainment. He explained. that live music is not in the plan. Commissioner Garner expressed concern about the flow of traffic through the center. Mr. Neely said that the peak time for the restaurant would be evenings at which time, the other businesses in the center are closed. He explained that parking issues and traffic should not be a problem. Chairman Massey closed the public hearing. P&Z Minutes March S, 1998 Page 2 of 4 r- w Commissioner Silvia moved to approve the conditional use permit. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6-0-1). `Commissioner Lightfoot abstained from the vote and discussion. AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration of a rezoning request for approximately 2.9 acres located on the southwest corner of Luther and Jones Butler, Lot 4, Block 1 of the Melrose Subdivision from R 5 Apartments Medium Density to C-1 General Commercial. Commission held the public hearing .and deferred action. on this item at the regular meeting held on February 19, 1998. (98- 101 Senior Planner McCully reminded the Commission that the reasons for deferring action on this item was to give the applicant more time to submit additional information so that a determination could be made whether or not aPDD-B designation would be appropriate. The applicant submitted a letter outlining specific uses -and a concept plan. The original request for C-1 had the potential for incompatible land uses and .therefore staff recommended a less intense commercial district. The PDD-B designation, as described by the applicant's letter, would meet their needs and would ensure a cohesive approach to development within the area.. The applicant is prepared to restrict the uses to a more narrow range than would be permitted under the C-1 zoning. The City is in a position to agree to this more narrow list and would be able to restrict the uses if the property is zoned PDD-B. Ms. McCully explained that in order to grant a PDD, the Commission must find that the following standards are met: 1. The proposal will constitute an environment of sustained stability and will be in harmony with the .character of the surrounding area. 2. The proposal is in conformity with the policies. and goals and objectives. of the Comprehensive Plan. 30 `The proposal will not adversely affect adjacent development. Thee following uses were requested by the applicant: 1. All A-P uses; 2. General retail and service; 3. Restaurant and drive through eating establishments; 4. Convenience store; 5. Arcade; 6. Cleaners with onsite cleaning facilities; 7. Gasoline and service station with car wash. Staff recommended approval of the PDD-B zoning designation. P&Z mutes March S, 1998 Page 3 of 4