Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutescoq-iis Council Meetings 6/24/99 Page 6 Mayor McIlhaney opened the public hearing. No one spoke. She closed the public hearing. Councilman Massey made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2397 rezoning Woodcreek Section: from PUD #2 to R-1B and a final plat for Woodcreek Section with a variance to the street right. of way width. Motion seconded by Councilman Silvia which carried unanimously, 7-0. Agenda Item No 13 2 -- Public hearing, discussion and possible action on rezoning for Pebble Hills Estates Phase III of approximately 25 acres from Gl, R-5, and R-1 to C-2 and 4.3 acres from R-1 to R-5 (99-26). Applicants, Jerry Windham and Frank Thurmond. Jim Callaway explained this request. The proposed use for the site is the location of a new district office for the Texas Department of Transportation. He noted that the staff and Planning and Zoning,Commission felt that a C-1 zone was more appropriate for this location. Mayor McIlhaney opened the public hearing. No one spoke. She closed the public hearing. Councilman Massey made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2398 to rezone approximately two parcels of land totaling 29.3 acres; 25 acres from C-1, R-S and R-1 to C-1 and 4.3 acres from R-1 to R-2 in the Pebble Hills Estates Subdivision, Phase Three, College Station, Texas, Brazos County, Texas. Motion seconded by Councilman Maloney which carried unanimously, 7-0. Agenda Item No 13 3 -- Public hearing, discussion and possible action rezoning property located at 2000 FM 158, the northwest corner of FM 158 and SH 30, from A-0 Agricultural Open to C-1 General Commercial (99-116).. Senior Planner Sabine McCully explained the item. Mayor McIlhaney opened the public hearing. No one spoke. She closed the public hearing. Councilman Maloney made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2399 rezoning a tract of land totaling 3.03 acres, lying and being situated in the J.W. Scott League, A-49, and Maria Keegans League, A-28, and being out of the 37 acres tract of land conveyed to Lee Ross Batson, et ux, by Raymond Jones, Receiver, and out of the Bethel Missionary Baptist Church tract of land in Brazos. County, Texas. This tract shall. be rezoned from A-0 Agricultural Open to C-B Commercial Business with the condition that height be restricted to R-1 and with the condition that there be a buffer easement along the western and northern property lines that meet R&D requirements. Motion seconded by Councilman Silvia which carried unanimously, 7-0. Agenda Item No. 13.4 -- Public. hearing ,discussion, and possible action on ari ordinance amending the City of CS 1998-99 Budget by $2,862,579 in various funds, and amending the Brazos Valley Solid Waste Management Agency 1998-99 Budget by $2,500,000. G~~K Commissioner Parker seconded the motion. Chairman Rife expressed concerns regarding future development around this property and again mentioned buffering. Commissioner Warren stated that she is a neighbor to a sorority house and that they tend to keep the property and appearance up. Screening around some of the areas does allow light, but she believes that is a safety issue for the residents and has no objection to that. She does, however, believe that vegetation that does screen areas regardless of zoning, is important. Chairman Rife did confirm that the Commission could place conditions on approval regarding buffering and screening. Commissioner Parker noted that his basis on seconding this motion was the lighting and buffering. Commissioner Mooney noted that he believes once the road is extended to FM2818, there will be a continuation of growth, and that current R-1 zoning will potentially become R-5, Commissioner Kaiser stated that he is troubled by speculation of what the zoning may become, especially with the land use plan recommending particular zonings. He believes that the land use plan is being ignored. Senior Planner McCully noted that the land use plan shows this area to be mixed-use zoning. Chairman Rife called for the vote and the motion carried (5-Z). AGENDA ITEM N®e 6: Public hearing and consideration of a request for rezoning Pebble Hils Estates Ph approximately 25 acres from C-1 and R-5 to C-2 and of 403 acres frone R 1 to R- ®(99-26) Trans ati er Hard presented the staff report. The applicants in this case are Jerry Wyndham and Frank Thurmond. This section of Pebble Hills is located on State Highway 6 South, North of Greens Prairie Road, immediately adjacent and abutting the former Desert Hills facility. Graphics were shown to the Commission to better explain the rezoning. The intended use for the proposed 25.5-acres would be the relocation. of the TXDOT district headquarters from Bryan in to College Station. It would primarily house their administrative offices and leave many of the maintenance. sections that the district deals with on Old Hearne Road in Bryan. The purpose of the R-5 zoning would be primarily to buffer between the proposed commercial and an R-1 residential immediately to the east of this property. This rezoning is, in accordance with an approved master development plan for. the Pebble Hills Estates. The portion under consideration for .rezoning is just the portion between State Highway 6 and the part between the proposed future extension of Lakeway Drive, which will be a North/South anajor collecor through the-area. On the master development plan. there is a buffer-area between the proposed R-5 and what is shown to be commercial, which is proposed to go from C-1 to C-2. Planer Hard believes that part of the -reason they may have requested C-2 instead of C-1 is because staff was uncertain as to what types of uses that could occur on the district offices.. grounds and felt certain it could be in C-2, and possibly C'-1. Since .that .time staff has been able to meet with TXDOT and learn that they do feel comfortable with .the C-1 classification as opposed to C-2 and does have a bearing on the recommendation. Transportation, Planner Hard reiterated the uses as being the. main administrative offices, a small sign shop and fleet maintenance. There would be no other outside storage of agregates or other uses for district headquarter offices. Staff recommends denial of C-2 as it would not be', in accordance with the land use plan. Staff does recommend. approval of C-1 and feels comfortable that a PdcZMinutes June 3, 1999 Page 6 of 1S' TXDOT facility would be appropriate within that zoning district, and also recommends approval of the R-5 zoning as a buffer between the commercial uses and single family residential proposed to the east. Comrrussioner Kaiser asked what kinds of assurances the City may be able to provide to ensure that this TXDOT facility would be a reality. Planner Hard said that the City would make no assurances that this is a reality and offered the applicant to speak more on the negotiations with TXDOT. Chairman Rife posed questions regarding properties zoned A-O, located both on the south and northeast of the property in question. He asked how that was intended, as far as the land use plan was concerned. Planner Hard confirmed that it is medium-density residential. Senior Planner McCully oriented the Commissioners and explained that the area in question is regional retail, until you get beyond the collector, and then it becomes medium-density residential. Commissioner Kaiser asked about the land use plan along the expressway and the components that went into the master land use plan with respect to various uses. Planner McCully explained that the property to the west of this development is more residential while the east side was further refined to commercial zoning and how that zoning was organized. Commissioner Kaiser stated that he noticed that it is the City's policy to cluster commercial zoning at major intersections and asked how that was reconciled with the City's development policies. Planner McCully stated that the City would handle that as future rezoning', cases were posed and along what areas we would need buffers. In this particular case there is an area that, in the future is shown to continue with commercial to the south and stop at a collector that the City' feels would be a boundary. The City has also used another regional retail area between two floodplain areas which could also. be a boundary using the floodplain as .buffers. Planner McCully mentioned that what is happening. is that there are so many roads intersecting with the bypass because of growth that the City will have to handle that on a case-by-case basis. Commissioner Kaiser stated that if it is case-by-case then the City will look at commercial the whole way. Planner confirmed that the majority .would probably be that way. Commissioner Kaiser then commented that the northeast side of town will essentially be strip commercial. Transportation Planner Hard noted that at the time the staff report was written, staff recommended approval of the C-1 zoning .with the condition of a 10-foot buffer along the southern boundary. Upon further discussion with staff, it .was noticed that there was a streetscape requirement that would be imposed on a planned commercial collector street. Staff does recommend without the buffer, as it is not needed with the streetscape requirements. Chairman Rife approved of the zoning step-down,. but asked if the City could realistically expect the area to develop that way, or would it need to be rezoned. Planner Hard commented that it would probably be difficult to develop at that density as there are other zoning classifications that. may better lend themselves to that lot size. Planner Hard noted that the initial R-5 property was 7 acres that has been reduced to 4 acres because the potential users for this property requested a specific acreage for their use. Given that this is a state agency, rezoning is not. necessary, but they would like to comply with the City. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing Marion Creagor, 300 Creagor Ln., is upset with the R~5 zoning. Her home sits across the fence, and she would like to have it zoned R-2. She lives at the top right-hand corner of the proposed I~ 5 zoning and would prefer the lower zoning. Commissioner Parker asked. Mrs. Creagor if the property immediately adjacent. to her residence was reasonably designated to R-2, and the northernmost property P&Z 11~frrutes June 3, 1999 Page 7 oj1 S s ,• was designated R-5, would she object. Mrs. Creagor :confirmed that she would. Her main concern is the traffic immediately in front of her home. Frank Thurmond, 3015 (glen Eagle, is one of the property developers. With regard to the proposed land use, the amount of R-5 zoned acreage has been decreased. He also pointed out that there are no concerns that R-5 will affect their R-1 zoned lots, and also that the R-1 zoning surrounds Mrs. Creagor's property both to the north and- east. Mr. Thurmond feels that Mrs. Creagor is in the muddle of R 1 zoned development and that Lakeway Drive provides a prominent barrier between the R-1 and R-5 zonings. Commissioner Mooney asked Mr. Thurmond to comment on the length and width of the R-5 zoned property and the ability to successfully develop that. Mr. Thurmond replied that to meet the City's development requirements regardless of property size, it can still be developed as R-5 and can not put any more units per acre than the R-5 zoning allows. There are also setback requirements to be met. The developers agreed with City staff that this property would be platted with an alley to the rear so that there would be no individual tracts off of the road. All parking access would be from either the alley off of the proposed street by TXDOT, or where the. road would turn and connect to Lakeway Drive. There would be no access off of Lakeway Drive for the individual .apartments. Commissioner Floyd asked Mr. Thurmond if, to his knowledge apartments could be sited. on that location. Mr. Thurmond confirmed and stated that the amount of units per acre could be decreased so that the apartment .complex would be .smaller and more compatible with the rest of the neighborhood and still not affect the future R-1 development. Commissioner Kaiser noted that one option may be to zone Mr. Thurmond's property as commercial, but exercise a development. agreement to limit the development that could take place near the rear of the property. In a sense that becomes a buffer in and of itself, and the -back of the property is not as intensively developed. Commissioner Parker asked Mr. Thurmond about the location or configuration of a proposed road TXDOT was installing. Mr. Thurmond answered that it would be on the south side of the property and would parallel Mrs. Creagor's driveway. Mr. Thurmond also stated that the zoning change from R-5 to R-2 could complicate the economics of the project somewhat and that without further study he could not upport such a change.. Commissioner Mooney asked Mr. Thurmond to confirm the location of the alley buffer. Mr. Thurmond. replied there in fact two buffers, one landscape buffer at the rear of the TXDOT property and an alleyway that would be the access between the C-1 and R-5. At this point, that would not be developed. The only development would be the tract for TXDOT as there is no immediate need seen for the other development. Commissioner Parker asked Mr. Thurmond, with regard to the R-5 zoned property as shown on the site plan,.would there be no access to the property off of Lakeway. Mr. Thurmond stated the only access off of Lakeway would be the alley at the north end of the property, Mr. Parker stated that' basically any resident would go down to Greens Prairie Road and turning around to come into the alleyway, and Mr. Thurmond confirmed that. Benito Flores-Meath, 901 Val Verde, asked for confirmation of notification for this particular property. Planner Lard confirmed that there were five notifications to property owners sent out. Mr. Flores- Meath then requested a rezoning to C-1, and either R-2 or R-4, as the character of the property changes at an R-5 zoning. Chairman Rife closed the public hearing. PdcZ Minutes June ,3P 1999 Page 8 of 1 S P Commissioner Kaiser asked staff if Council or staff could clarify additional. C-1 restrictions. Assistant City Attorney Nemcik stated that on zonings, health and safety restrictions could be placed, and aesthetics could be part of those provided that they are sufficiently related to those health and safety issues. Attorney Nemcik recommended the planning staff be asked what a reasonable buffer footage based on site may be. She also stated that if, on a rezoning, the Commission felt the need to impose an additional buffer between the two zoning districts, that was allowable provided it was a reasonable amount of buffer given the site. Ms. Nemcik stated- that she could not speak on what would be reasonable for this particular site, although she did mention that she believed 300 feet would be extensive. She did reiterate that additional buffering could be imposed as a rezoning condition. She also mentioned that the state has conceded that they are willing to comply with our zoning and platting requirements. Commissioner Mooney asked if the state was obligated to comply and Attorney Nemcik stated that she would have to review the issue. Her summation was that the state is willing to comply if the restrictions were .reasonable impositions. If there are complications, the issue can be tabled for further review. Chair-rrran Rife stated that the location of the buffering needed to be considered, because he understands that the state will only be occupying a portion of that tract. He is concerned that it may not impact the state. City Planner Kee stated that the current plan with the Commercial zoning and the buffer strip, and then. the lesser residential was a good idea. She also stated that she understood Mrs. Creagor's concern regarding the intensity of the R-5 zoning, but stated that she would feel comfortable rezoning it potentially to PDD-H, at a later date. Planner Kee stated that she would rather not. leave the zoning as R-1 or to take it to R-5. Knowing that R-2 will have a lesser impact on the adjacent property and that rezoning is always a possibility would' give Mr. Thurmond flexibility on how to develop the property. Commissioner Kaiser asked Planner Kee if this went as C-1, and TXDOT only required a small piece of this.... property,. we could end up with extensive commercial development at the back of this. property, along the ''It~S zoning. Planner Kee ianswered that that is where the buffer is. Commissioner Kaiser suggested that if the back part of this property is zoned as C-1, even though TXDOT is planning on moving onto this property, there could be a variety of other uses that may not be as benign as the TXDOT facility. Planner Kee agreed, but stated that that was the reason for, the buffer strip between the commercial and what is shown as R-5, and then the road acts as another buffer between that and the single-family that will be developed. Planner Kee stated that if less than 25 acres is zoned C-l, then the City could'. be assured that that would'.... not be a problem. Commissioner Warren asked, in terms of Lakeway Drive, which. would extend possibly into the C-1 area and the A-O area, why that road was moved. Planner Kee stated that several years ago City staff sat down with Mfrs. Creagor and Dr. Marsh to discuss development, and both parties felt comfortable that. the road came centered through.., the property, parallel to Texas Avenue. Initially, when the Pebble Hills development came in, as it curved it was a little further to the west. When TXDOT became interested,in the property, with the amount of property needed and the zonings available, and in trying to buffer and be sure that the single'-family properties were protected from the commercial zonings, it became necessary to move the street because it was not developable for single family the way that it was originally planned. Commissioner Warren stated that the road was identified as a major collector, which allows 5,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day, and expressed concerns at the high intensity of traffic in that area. She believes that the intensification for the use of the road could increase. Planner Kee stated that that was part of the reason houses were not fronting on that major collector. P&Z Minutes June 3, 1999 Page 9 of I S i V Commissioner Floyd stated that to the north the proposed R-5 is narrower than the R 1 was, and asked if the road had been narrowed on both sides. He then showed Transportation Planner Hard where it originally connected and where it connects now, and asked if the distance was the same or if it had narrowed. Planner Hard stated that it had narrowed Chairman Rife then called for a motion Commissioner Parker moved for denial of the C-2, R-5 request, Commissioner Warren seconded, Commissioner Parker asked staff if there was a motion to deny, if the Commission could offer another motion and staff confirmed. Motion carried 7-0. Commissioner Horlen moved to re-zone the area that was originally C-1 and R-5 to C-1 per staff recommendation, and the area identified as R-l, the 4.32-acre tract be rezoned to R-2. Commissioner Warren seconded. the motion. Commissioner Parker stated that the PDD-H zoning gives an alternative to allow the applicant to come forward at a later date and accomplishes a move forward. Commissioner Floyd noted that he did not understand the alignment issue. Should that change, what impact would that have on the surrounding area. Commissioner Parker explained that the alignment issue had not been denied and that the front portion of the property will come back to the Commission at a later date. Chairman Rife called for the vote, which was approved.?-0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: A public hearing and consideration of a rezoning .for the property located at 2000 FM f58; the northwest corner of FM 158 and State Highway 30, from A-O Agricultural-Open to C-1 General Commercial. (99-216) Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report. The. applicant. is preparing this property fc~r the development of a convenience store and service station.. The site is located on the northwest c®rner of Highway 30 and FM 158. Highway 30 forms the easternmost boundary of the city limits. The property on the other side of F1Gi 158 is in Bryan's extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETI) and is currently being considered for annexation into the Bryan City limits. That area, because it is not within the City of College Station's extra-territorial jurisdiction, would never be a part of the City ofCollege Station, and this property would' be the easternmost boundary. The land use plan shows the entire .area between Highways 30, 60 and FM 158 to the former TI '(Texas Instruments) property to be zoned asRural- Density Single Family. That land use plan designation, as well as the A-O zoning in this area that is considered an interim classification, which basically allows agricultural as well as rural residential uses in areas set aside for future growth of the city. As such, the land use plan has not been refined for this area of College Station. In previous discussions with the city planner of Bryan,. when the area across FM 158 comes into the city limits they will, upon annexation, more than likely place the same or similar designation as the City of College Station has, which is an interim classification, and will be a candidate for future discussion as to a more refined land use plan. When the City receives a request that' is P&Z Minutes June 3, 1999 Page l0 of I S si ~ - ~ ~. ~ / Agenda I tcni Cover Sheet ®X Regular Item ®Consent Item ® Workshop Item Item Submitted By: Council Meeting Date: 0- ~' a3a~ ~aaaS Ed Hard, Transportation Planner June 24, 1999 Director Approval: Jim C~laway, Director of Development Services City Manager Approval: Item: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a rezoning for Pebble Hills Estates Phase III of approximately 25 acres from C-1, R-5, and R-1 to C-2 and of 4.3 acres from R-1 to R-5. (99-2~ The applicants are Jerry Windham and Frank Thurmon, owners of the property. Item Summary: This. item is a request to rezone the C-l, R-S and a small part of the R-1 portion of Pebble Hills Estates to C-2 (Commercial Industrial) and to also rezone a portion of the R-1 to R-5. If approved, the intended use for the. proposed 25.6-acre C-2 tract is a new district office for the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT). The proposed land uses for the TXDOT facility will include administrative offices, vehicle maintenance, and a sign: shop. The `applicant is requesting the C-2 District, as opposed to A-P or C-1, since a couple of the uses on this .site may be considered industrial in nature. However, it is possible for the TXDOT site to develop in compliance .with C-1 restrictions. The proposed 4.3 acres of R-5 will serve as a buffer between the C-2 to the west and the R-1 to the east and a landscape buffer is included between the proposed C-2 and R-5 tracts, The.. 29.9 acres proposed for rezoning is located on the west side of the future Lakeway Drive between Lakeway and the SH 6 Frontage Road. The land use plan shows this area as regional retail for the portion adjacent to SH 6 and high density residential for the portion adjacent to the future Lakeway extension. The subject property is abutted on its north side by the (former) Desert Hills facility and on its south side by undeveloped A-O property shown as medium density residential on the land use plan. A commercial street is planned to extend along south boundary of the 29.9 acres. The subject tract is bounded on the west side by SH 6 and on the east side by Lakeway Drive with undeveloped R-1 property approved as part of the Pebble. Hills plan located on the east side of Lakeway. The proposed rezoning would add approximately ~.7 acres of commercial zoning to the existing 17 acres, while it would remove about 3 acres of the 7.2 existing R-5 acres. This area. is shown as regional retail on the land use plan.. While a C-1 zoning classification would be consistent with the land use plan for this .area, the C-2 district would not. C-2 would not be appropriate due to potential for higher intensity land use and its proximity to surrounding residential land uses. Item Background: The original 1Vlaster Plan and two separate rezonings for Pebble Hills Estates .were approved in 1996. In .the first rezoning, approximately 48 acres along Greens Prairie Road was rezoned from A-® to R-1. In the second rezoning, approximately 126 acres was rezoned from A-D to R-1 (101.9 acres), C-1 (16.9 acres), and R-5 (7.2 acres). The R-1 portion of the plan is located on the east side of the future Lakeway Drive. The C-1 and` R-5 portions are located on the west side of the future Lakeway. This is the portion currently under consideration for C-2 zoning, Lakeway Drive extends through the subdivision as a future mayor collector. In January, the plan was revised and a preliminary plat for Phase 3 was approved which shifted the alignment of Lakeway to the east in order to allow for a larger commercial tract desired by the Texas Department of Transportation. Additional revisions made to the original plan in January were as follows, 1. An additional 8 acres of commercial land use was added to the existing 17 acres of commercial. This forms the 25.6-acre tract proposed as C-2. 2. A landscape buffer easement was added on the commercial acreage, The buffer is located between the proposed C-2 and R-5. 3, A reduction in the amount of R-5 buffer between the commercial acreage and the future Lakeway Drive. 4. An alley was added along the .rear. of the R-5. 5. A slight reduction in single family lots (from 262 to 245). 6. A commercial street was added along the south side of the commercial and R-5 tract which extends from the SH 6 Frontage Road to I,akeway. 7. The residential collector street was relocated to the south. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial for the request to rezone the 25.6 acres to C-2 since it would not be in accordance with the land use plan for this area. The C-2 district would not be appropriate due to potential for higher intensity uses and its proximity to surrounding residential land uses, Staff believes the proposed TXDOT facility would be appropriate in the C-1 district and supports a rezoning to C-1 to create a 25.6 acre C-1 tract for this facility. Staff recommends approval of the request to rezone 4.32 acres from R-1 to R-5 since it will serve as buffer between the C-1 to the west and future R-1 to the east. y ~ Related Advisory Board Recommendations: On June 3, 1999, the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended denial of the 25.6 acres to C-2 and recommended in favor of rezoning an additional 8.7 acres to C-1 in order to~ create a 25.6 acre C-1 tract for the TXDOT facility. The P&Z also recommended denial of the rezoning of 4.32 acres from R-1 to R-5, but instead recommended approval. of rezoning the 4.32 acres from R-1 to R- 2. In January 1999, Council approved the revised Master Plan for Pebble Hills Estates along with the preliminary plat for the 25,6 acre Phase 3 portion. Council approved the original Master Plan and rezoring(s) for Pebble Hills in 1996. Council Action Options. 1. Approval of rezoning as submitted. 2. Approval with physical conditions that. will mitigate negative impacts. 3. Approve a less intense zoning classification if recommended by P&Z. 4. Denial. 5. Denial without prejudice. 6. Table indefinitely. 7, Defer action to a specified date. Supporting Materials: 1. Infrastructure. and Facilities, 2. Rezoning Ordinance. 3. Location Map. 4. P~cZ Minutes for January 21, 1999, 5. Application. INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACII.~ITIES Water: Various. water mains are proposed with the Master Plan. A 12-inch water main trunk line will connect the existing 12-inch water main near Desert Hills to existing water service at the Lalceway Drive and Greens Prairie Road intersection. This 12-inch system will also extend to provide adequate water service to the area where the future. Pebble Creek Parkway will extend. An 18 inch water main is shown on the Phase 3 Preliminary Plat which extends along the SH 6 frontage road. This main will. be extended as future development along the frontage road occurs. Sewer: Various sanitary sewer lines are proposed throughout the Pebble Hill subdivision, all of which will. connect to the proposed impact fee trunk line being built as part of the .capital improvement plan in the sanitary sewer impact fee area 97-01. Also shown on the master plan is a small portion of property that is located outside the limits of this plan that will need to sewer into the proposed infrastructure that is .apart of this master plan. The preliminary plat of Phase 3 will obtain sewer service from an 8-inch sewer line .that will be extended by the current owners and will connect with the proposed impact fee line. Streets: The Master Plan shows the extension of Lakeway Drive as a north- south major collector. L,akeway runs along the eastern border of .Phase 3 and separates the R-Sand R-1 in the Master Plan. A commercial collector (Creagor bane) is included along the south side of the Phase 3 Preliminary Plat that' will serve that immediate area. A temporary public access easement will need' to be dedicated at the time of final plat to cover the temporary cul-de-sac of this street. Off-site Easements: No off-.site easements are proposed, Sidewalks: Sidewalks will be required as per the subdivision regulations Drainage: Drainage .will be reviewed in accordance with the City of College Station Drainage Policy and Design Standards at the time of final platting. Flood Plain: The 100-year plan is delineated on the Master Plan as it exists per the 1992. FEMA maps. There" is no floodplain on the Phase 3 portion. Parkland Dedication: Park/greenbelt areas. are shown on the Master Plan. These dedications will be processed at the time of final platting. Impact Fees: The Pebble I-Tills Master Plan is located in the Sanitary Sewer Impact Fee Area97-O1, Impact fees will be assessed at the time of final platting. NOTIFICATION: Legal Notice Publication(s): °I'he l/agle, 5-19-99 and 6-9-99 Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 6-3-99 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: 6-24-99 Number of Notices 1Vlailed to Property Owners Within 2009: 5 Response Received: One AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for Super B Subdivision located on the northwest corner of F.M. 158 and Highway 30, to allow a convenience store and service station. (99-719) Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report and explained that the subject property is located at the immediate intersection of Highway 158 and Highway 30, both of which are considered major arterials. The Land Use Plan shows the entire area bound by Highway 30, Highway 158, Highway 60, and the former TI property as Rural Density Residential. Recent rezoning discussions for property in this area of the City have revealed changes in the area that are pending in the near future, including a proposed medical office/residential subdivision in Bryan north of Highway 60 and a TXDOT widening project for Highway 158. The City of College Station has yet to refine its Land Use Plan relative to the area currently shown as rural density residential. The area is largely undeveloped and therefore the utilities are inadequate to most of the tracts, including the subject tract. It is likely that most of the strip between Highways 60 and 30 will develop as some type of commercial, commercial/industrial, or light industrial. Highway 158 provides an entrance into both College Station and Bryan, and may therefore be a candidate for special land use classifications with perhaps an overlay district to promote an aesthetically pleasing corridor. The City Economic Development Department is currently working with consultants to define the scope of work for an area plan in the part of the City. The subject property was rezoned to C -B earlier this year with the condition that the building height not exceed 35' and that there be a buffer easement that meets R&D requirements between the subject property and any adjacent A- O zoned property. Staff recommended approval with this condition. Commissioner Warren asked if there was adequate turn -around area for the large gas truck that would service the service station. Ms. McCully explained that the transportation planners use templates to determine space needed for turn -around for certain sized vehicles. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Seeing no one present to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Parker moved to approve the conditional use permit with staff comments. Commissioner Horlen seconded the motion. Commissioner Warren felt that it would be important to look at the landscape buffer. Would like the area to be softened because of the unknown potential development for the surrounding properties. Commissioner Floyd said that he would vote in opposition to the motion because he had problems with the site layout and parking. He explained that he was not opposed to the use, but felt it could be better configured. Chairman Rife said that he was in favor of the motion, but understood the opposition expressed by Commissioners Floyd and Warren. He did not see evidence that the site and parking layouts would pose a problem. Chairman Rife called for the vote and the motion to approve the conditional use permit passed 4-2; Commissioners Warren and Floyd voted in opposition to the motion.