HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportsCommissioner Warren asked if there would be the possibility of more than one access? Ms. McCully
said that access would be reviewed at the Staff level (on the site plan) unless a Conditional Use is to be
considered, otherwise the Commission will have authority. Additional access would have to meet the
Driveway Ordinance requirements.
Commissioner Floyd moved to approve the preliminary plat with staff's conditions. Commissioner
Parker seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 6-0.
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.
P&Z Minutes September 16, 1999 Page 3 of 9
1-4 A.
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.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and
approval of a temporary parking lot site plan for Christ United Methodist Church, located east
of State Highway 6 across the highway from the Shenandoah Subdivision. (99-721)
Staff Planner Jimmerson presented the staff report and explained that the church is requesting
permission to build a temporary parking lot to accommodate patronage in excess of what was
anticipated when the facility first opened. Because of the size of the requested lot it was determined
that it is a significant change to the existing conditional use permit and would require reconsideration
by the Commission. These are two separate items for the Commission to address. First, the amended
conditional use permit, in light of the increased parking requested; and second, permission to construct
a temporary parking lot. The church is aware that temporary parking lots are only permitted for a
maximum of 12 months."' After 12 months, the lot must either be brought into full compliance with
parking lot standards required by 'the Zoning Ordinance or the site must be cleared of all paving
material and seeded, sodded or hydromulched d-and can no longer be used for parking. At this time the
-church does not anticipate maintaining the. lot in its current configuration after the 12-month period.
The church 'is currently working on an expansion plan for their parking and building facilities, which
they plan to bring before the Commission for another Conditional Use Permit reconsideration, within
the 12 month` period. The Commission shah determine the beginning date of the 12-month period.
The church is requesting that the?date be set as of the first date that the temporary lot is put into use.
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:
1. "The proposed use meets all the minimum standards established in the ordinance for the type of use
proposed."
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
Development of the City."
3. "That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of the surrounding
neighborhood or its occupants, not be substantially or permanently injurious to neighboring
property."
"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."
Section 9G of the Zoning Ordinance authorizes the existence of temporary parking lots. The
i, Commission may permit a temporary parking lot, subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards,
after taking into consideration the following:
P&ZMinutes September 16, 1999 Page 4 of 9
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 1
Project: Super Trac'Convenience Store - CUP
The following review was done under the assumption that the phase line shown
is just that and not a lot line.
1. Phase line must be a minimum of 20 feet from all disturbed earth.
2. Parking analysis should show 1 space per 100s.f. of restaurant space,
including seating area. So, it should be 15 spaces required for the restaurant
& 10 spaces for the convenience store. Total required = 25. Under the
provided parking the plan shows a total of 31 straight in spaces, including the
handicap, not 33 as indicated on the analysis. Also, each pump service
counts as one parking space. So if each of your proposed pumps provides
service to one car on each side then you have an additional 16 spaces.
3. Add to note #2, that the materials will match the building in color and texture.
4. Show proposed private drainage easement over detention area & channels.
5. Need drainage report and final grading plan for entire phase 1.
6. Note that a minimum clearance of 14 feet is required along the fire lane.
7. Buffer area is required along the entire northwest and southwest property
lines. It needs to be shown along the entire length of phase 1 (including
detention area). The buffer must meet the requirements as set forth in the
R&D section of the zoning ordinance (Section 7.23). What is the adjacent
land use, or is it vacant?
8. The location of the curb cut on SH30, maybe reviewed again, in light of
further information in regard to the preliminary plat.
9. The detention pond and retaining walls may require some screening in the
event that phase 2 does not develop. Determination will be made once the
drainage report etc. are received and reviewed.
10. A Txdot driveway permit must be submitted.
11. A Txdot utility permit must be submitted.
12. Southeastern line does not show entire meters & bounds description.
13. Corners need to have rods set.
14. This is a water valve and water meter? They do not appear to be attached to
a water line? (Near the were the southern property line intersects with SH30.)
15. Waterline dead-ends into an electric line? (Near intersection of FM158 &
SH30. )
16. There is a water valve on an electric line? (Same as #11.)
Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 2
17. Is this just a typo? The others are labeled R.C.P. (First drive on southside of
SH30)
18.Across the drive off of SH30, there appears to be a R.C.P. that is unlabeled.
Is that what it is intended to be?
19. The distance to from the intersection to the drive on SH30 should be
measured from the centerline of the drive to an imaginary line extended from
the pavement edge of SH158.
20. Show the throat depth of the drives.
21.The proposed water line along SH158 appears to also be labeled the 25'
building line.
22. Note #6 does not appear on the site plan?
23. Signs are permitted separately. Following is a sign permit. Return Attention:
Shauna Anderson.
24. Refer to the landscaping plans for landscaping notes.
25. Demo of the existing structures needs to be permitted separately.
26. Note #39 needs to state that the "grease trap does not hinder..."
Reviewed by: Jessica Jimmerson Date: 9/2/1999
Staff Review Comments Page 2 of 2
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 1
Project: super B subdivision - Preliminary Plat
ANSWERS
(September 8, 1999)
1. Line shown is not phase line but lot line.
2. 0. K.
3. 0. K.
4. 0. K.
5. Drainage Report will be submitted latter.
6. Added to Key Note 60.
7. 1 was relying on comments made by staff on August 0 pre-development meeting
which indicated a 20' buffer was acceptable - copy of notes attached. Adjacent
land undeveloped.
8. 0. K.
9. 0. K.
10. TxDOT Driveway Permit will be submitted latter.
11. TxDOT Utility Permit will be submitted latter.
12. Southeastern line does show entire metes and bound description. S 470 22' 57"
W - 588.97' is the entire length of the property line and the 344.34' distance and
244.63' distance are the lengths of the property line per lot which sum to 588.97'.
13. 0. K.
14. The Water Valve and Water Meter have been connected to the Wixon Water Line
along SH30.
15. Proposed Water Line has been connected to existing water line.
16. Water Valve happens to be directly underneath the Overhead Electric Line.
17. No typo, this is a CMP.
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 1
Project: super B subdivision - Preliminary Plat
ANSWERS
(September 8, 1999)
Continued - Page 2
18. The R.C.P. is labeled "Install 18" R.C.P. with 6:1 Safety End Treatment".
19. 0. K.
20. 0. K.
21. The Proposed Water Line is at the same location as the 25' building line. Has
Been relabeled 25' building line and proposed water line.
22. 0. K.
23. 0. K.
24. Comment on Landscape Plan was trees not permitted on top of sanitary sewer line.
Three canopy trees were removed from area, Landscape Points have been
adjusted accordingly.
25. 0. K.
26. "Grease trap does not hinder..." was eliminated, there is no swale at grease trap
location.
STAFF REPORT
Item: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for Super B Subdivision located on the
northwest comer of F.M. 158 and Highway 30 to allow a convenience store and service station.
(99-115)
Applicant: Sanh Trinh
Item Summary: 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 this part of the
city.
Item Background: 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 property.
Budgetary & Financial Summary: The City's Subdivision Regulations require public water and
sewer extensions to and through properties and that they be sized such that future development can
tie on to the lines. Oversize participation requests are anticipated with the final plats of the two
lots contained in the preliminary plat.
Staff Recommendations: 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." Staff conducted a technical review and found general compliance with
development regulations with the exception of the items listed in Staff Comments No. 2.
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
JAPZTEXT \PZ01919.D0C
Development of the City." The PnZ has yet to determine whether this location is suitable for the
proposed use.
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 opportunityfor 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 recommends approval with Staff Review Comments No. 2.
Related Advisory Board Recommendations: N/A
Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over the conditional use
permit. The options are approval as submitted, approval with conditions, table, or denial.
Supporting Materials:
1.
Location Map
2.
Application
3.
Infrastructure and Facilities
4.
Copy of site plan
5.
Staff review comments No. 2
6.
PnZ minutes 6-3-99
7.
Council minutes 6-24-99
J:\PZTEXT\PZ01919. DOC
INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES
Water: A 12" waterline exists along Highway 30. It will need to be extended along
F.M. 158 with the final plat of Lot 1.
Sewer: An 8" sewerline exists across Highway 30 and will need to be extended under
Highway 30 into the subdivision with the final plats.
Streets: Highway 30 and F.M. 158 are major arterials which have the capacity to serve
the full build-out of the zoning. These roadways are maintained by TXDot; there will be
a widening project along F.M. 158 in the near future.
Off-site Easements: The drainage facility for this development will be off-site.
Drainage: The preliminary plat shows a regional detention facility that will serve both
future lots that is wholly contained on future Lot 2.
Flood Plain: N/A
Impact Fees: N/A
NOTIFICATION:
Legal Notice Publication(s): The Eagle;
Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 9-16-99
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: Not required
Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200': 7
Response Received: None as of date of staff report
JAPZTEXTxPZ01919. DOC
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 3
Project: Super Trac Site Plan #99-719
-`l 1. Is the existing fire hydrant (item #19) on the Wickson Waterline? If yes, there
will need to be an additional fire hydrant provided for the proposed site that is
on the City's waterline in order for the city to provide fire protection for this
site. If no, relocate the existing hydrant shown on the drawing to the existing
12-inch city waterline.
In the legend, some of the existing and proposed designations are the same.
Please distinguish between the existing/proposed items and reflect this on
the site plan.
A Show the building setbacks as outlined in Ordinance 1638 Zoning Ordinance,
(Section 7, Table A).
-14. Buffer area: There needs to be at least 9 canopy trees at a minimum of
2"caliper, and there needs to be at least 35 understory (non-canopy) trees,
and you need at least 53 shrubs. You may want to redesign the plantings
within the 30 feet R&D Buffer area. The red tipped photinias will not receive
adequate sunlight due to the tree canopies. Also, do not count the plantings
within the buffer area towards the required landscape points.
5. Recalculate the streetscape tree requirement. The total footage of street
frontage is less than indicated. This will decrease the number of trees
required. Also, do not count the buffer or driveway frontage in the
calculations.
6. Recalculate the proposed landscape points. The plantings within the 30 feet
buffer are excluded from the required landscape points total. In order to
achieve the required landscape/streetscape total points, you may consider
increasing the diameter of the trees in order to increase the proposed points.
Also, the project must expand a minimum of 50% of its point total on canopy
trees. In addition, If the location of the existing trees is approved by TxDOT,
not to be removed at an immediate future date, are they going to be used
towards the required points for Landscape/streetscape? If yes, a barricade
plan will need to be provided in order for points to be awarded for these
existing trees.
7. The screening hedge must be continuous across the parking space areas
that front State Highway 30. Additional screening plantings need to be
located adjacent to Highway 30 for parking spaces 1-3, 8, 13 and 14
Signs are permitted separately.
9. The demolition of the existing structures needs to be permitted separately
Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 2
'-'10. Submit a TxDOT driveway permit application.
,11.In the keynotes, item #10 regarding the dumpster, there is reference to a
detail on sheet SP-3; which detail is it referring to?
12. Staff reserves the opportunity to require screening of the detention pond.
13. Our records indicate that you still need a drainage report for Phase I. Where
is the trapezoidal channel?
14.The overall distance from the intersection at FM 158 to the centerline of the
driveway on SH 30 should be measured from the centerline of the driveway
to an imaginary line extended from the west pavement edge along FM 158
(approx. 294').
Reviewed by: Scott Hester Date: 2-4-00
Staff Review Comments Page 2 of 2
STAFF REVIEW COMMNETS
No. 4
Project: SUPER B SUBDIVISION (SP) (0-26)
1. As per Review #3, Question 1 - The existing fire hydrant (item #19) that is
located on the north side of Hwy 30 is shown tied into the 6" Wickson Water
Line (item #17). This hydrant will need to be connected to the City's 12" line.
2. Landscape Plan (LS-1) - Correct the total number of Elaeagnus (elaeagnus
ebbingei). The legend indicates that there are a total of 102, but the drawing
shows a total of 101 (195 in landscaping and 6 in the buffer).
Reviewed by: SCOTT HESTER Date: 28-Feb-00
Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1
Pnz minutes 6-3-99
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: A public hearing and consideration of a rezoning for the
property located at 2000 FM 158, the northwest corner of FM 158 and State
Highway 30, from A-O Agricultural-Open to C-1 General Commercial. (99-116)
Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report. The applicant is preparing this property for the
development of a convenience store and service station. The site is located on the northwest corner
of Highway 30 and FM 158. Highway 30 forms the easternmost boundary of the city limits. The
property on the other side of FM 158 is in Bryan's extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) 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
of College 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 as Rural-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 contrary to the land
use plan, there are several things that we look at. One is whether there has been a change in the
character of the area that would justify the requested zoning as opposed to a zoning that would
comply with the land use plan. In this case, the Commission may wish to consider that we have
had some development pressures that could qualify. We also found out at a previous rezoning that
.FM 158 is going to be widened, and also the fact that Bryan development is pushing towards this
area. We also look for a compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, specifically the
development policy.
As we discussed in a previous case tonight, our policy would support commercial zoning at
intersections of major roadways. Therefore staff recognizes that some type of commercial
development be at this corner. The development policies also call for College Station to protect its
gateways into the city. The corridor along FM 158 has not been studied nor is there an overlay
district on it at this time, although the city feels that this corridor would be a good candidate for the
study because there have been discussions for other gateways into the city. Staff wants to assure
that any changes in zoning that occur before the Commission, before those studies take place,
would be less likely to interfere with future plans for the corridor. Saff therefore recommends that,
for the time being, the Commission recommend to the Council a C-B classification as opposed to
the C-1 classification. C-1 zoning allows more uses than the C-B zoning, and could include uses
such as mobile home sales, night clubs with a conditional use permit, and possibly sexually
oriented businesses. C-B zoning has a narrower list of permitted uses and would require a
conditional use permit. Although this zoning did not originally permit convenience stores or
service stations at all, it has since been amended. There is now a conditional use process for
convenience stores and service stations so that should this use come to fruition, it would come back
before the commission for final approval. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the C-1 zoning
and approval of the C-B zoning with the conditions that the height restrictions be those of R-1
zoning (two-and-one-half stories or 35 feet), as it is still likely that those properties immediately to
JAPZTEXT\PZ01919. D0C
the north and west may develop as single family residential, and that there be a buffer easement
along those property lines.
Chairman Kaiser explained to the new Commissioners a previous rezoning request and asked staff
to confirm whether or not they had been able to further study this area. He suggested that staff
recommend to Council a more detailed study of this area. City Planner Kee stated that the City is
currently in the budget review process and is requesting more staff so that such a study may be
conducted at a later date but that, as of now, that was not possible.
Commissioner Kaiser then asked planner Kee if there were any plans for a development
moratorium for this area and planner Kee replied that the Commission could recommend that to
council, although there are not any in the works at this time.
Commissioner Floyd asked for further definition of the buffer. Senior Planner McCully stated that
the buffer would have to be a 6 foot wood fence. She stated that the Commission could refine that,
although staff would recommend no more than a 20-foot buffer with foliage included.
Chairman Rife asked Transportation Planner Hard the status of the FM 158 widening project was,
to which Mr. Hard replied that he did not. Chairman Rife then asked how far that would extend,
and Mr. Hard stated that it would be a Texas Department of Transportation project.
Bill Davis, 1219 Boswell St., did a presentation on this project and stated that they are finishing
the Bryan phase of Briarcrest and FM 158. When that phase is complete, it will extend from
Briarcrest to Highway 30 and should begin in the fall of 2000, where it will end
Chairman Rife opened the public hearing.
Gordon Pate, 4739 Tiffany Park Circle, Bryan, Texas, and an employee of Online Realty,
represents Mrs. Leonard McDonald, property owner in that area for the past 45 years. He stated
that his company does have that property under contract and believed the C-1 zoning would be
beneficial to her financially.
John Szabuniewicz, 1004 Shady Drive, stated that he would like he Commission to support the
rezoning as far as the site and traffic pattern.
Chairman Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Parker moved to deny the C-1 zoning. Commissioner Kaiser seconded the motion.
Motion to deny carried 7-0.
Commissioner Parker made a second request to approve the C-B zoning with staff
recommendations. Commissioner Mooney seconded the motion, which passed 6-1 with
Commissioner Kaiser opposed.
Commissioner Kaiser explained that his opposition was not necessarily that the zoning was
inappropriate, but that he believed that until Council could be convinced that this area needed
further study, the entire tract would be piecemealed. Commissioners Floyd and Parker agreed, but
Commissioner Parker further explained that he did not deem the use inappropriate.
J:\PZTFXr YZ01919.DOC