HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportsSTAFF REPORT
Item: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, use and site plan,
for Christian Science Society located at 201 Boyett, which is on the northwest corner of
Boyett and Patricia Streets. (99-148/99-726)
Applicant: Lee Davidson for the Christian Science Society
Item Summary: Churches may be permitted as conditional uses in any district upon
approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The applicant is requesting
permission to expand their church facilities at their existing site. The site is zoned NG-1,
Historic Northgate, and shown on the Land Use Plan as a redevelopment area. This site
is not listed in the Northgate Historic Resources Survey.
The existing structure is approximately 1030 SF, and the expansion would be another
1970 SF, bringing the total building area to 3000 SF. The new facility will seat 70
people, which requires 23 parking spaces. The site plan shows only 2 spaces. However,
the applicant has stated that there is agreement with the adjacent parking lot owner for
use of those spaces on Sundays and Wednesday evenings. In addition, the City's public
lot is directly across Boyett.
Item Background: The original structure, which was built in the 1950's, and the existing
use predate the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision Regulations, therefore there is not
an existing Conditional Use Permit. The existing site and use are grandfathered. Because
of the size of the expansion the change is considered significant and even if there were an
existing CUP, it would be required to come before the Commission for approval.
The expansion of this use does not appear to affect the surrounding uses with liquor
licenses. The two closest establishments, Satchels and Hole in the Wall, were able to
originate new licenses within the past 18 months or so, even with the Christian Science
Society in its present location.
Budgetary & Financial Summary: N/A
Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the use, and approval of the
site plan with the condition of addressing the Staff Review Comments #2, which are
attached. If addressing the Staff Review Comments causes any significant changes to the
site plan, it will be required to be resubmitted to NRB and the Commission for approval
of those changes.
Related Advisory Board Recommendations: NRB met on Friday, November 5`h. They
unanimously approved the site plan as proposed, with the condition of relocating the one
non-handicap parking space to the area where the trash receptacles were shown on the
plan, which the applicant has done. The minutes of the meeting are attached.
J:\PZTEXT\PZ02240.DOC Page 1 of 6
Commission Action Options: 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, height restrictions, additional landscaping, and additional
improvements such as curbing, sidewalks, and screening."
The Commission has final authority over the Conditional Use Permit. The options
regarding the Conditional Use Permit are approval as submitted, approval with conditions
relating to specific site characteristics or with time limitations, denial with specified
reasons for denial, or table or defer action to a specific date.
Supporting Materials:
I . Location Map
2. Application
3. Infrastructure and Facilities and Notification Information
4. Staff Review Comments #2
5. NRB Meeting Minutes
6. Site Plan
J:\PZTEXT\PZ02240.DOC Page 2 of 6
INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES
Water: Upon reviewing the site plan it was discovered that a 4-in water line
exists along the Patricia St. frontage of the property without a utility easement.
The applicant has begun the process of dedicating the necessary easement. The
applicant has indicated that water usage will not increase, therefore it is
determined that the existing service is adequate for the proposed use
Sewer: The applicant has indicated that sewer usage will not increase, therefore
it is determined that the existing service is adequate for the proposed use.
Streets: The property has adequate access. It is bounded to the east by Boyett
St. and to the south by Patricia St.
Off-site Easements: None identified at this time.
Drainage: This project will be required to fully comply with the City's Drainage
Ordinance. If compliance necessitates changes to the site plan, it will have to be
presented to the NRB and the Commission for approval of those changes.
Flood Plain: N/A
Oversize request: See Budgetary and Financial Summary Section.
Impact Fees: N/A
NOTIFICATION:
Legal Notice Publication(s): The Eagle; 12-1-99
Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): 12-16-99
Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200': 18
Response Received: None as of date of staff report.
J:\PZTEXT\PZ02240.DOC Page 3 of 6
M1 4
Commissioner Mooney asked if the intersection would be signalized in the future. Ms. McCully said
that during past discussions with the City's Transportation Planners, the probable location of a signal
would be at the intersection of Holleman and Harvey Mitchell.
Commissioner Warren asked if the one access point on Luther would be adequate for this size of
development. Ms. McCully explained that the applicant was made aware of this during the planning
process and they seemed to not have a problem.
Commissioner Mooney asked if the Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.) could be held until Luther is
upgraded to required standards. Ms. McCully said that this the rezoning is conditioned with this, then
the C.O. would be withheld until Luther Street meets the requirements.
Chairman Rife opened the public hearing.
Mr. Paul Johnston, 2045 Highway 360 Suite 250 Grandview, Texas, was present to represent the
applicant and the owners. He said that they were in agreement with all of Staff's recommendations.
He stated that they were in the process of working with Staff regarding any issues that were unresolved
at this time.
Chairman Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Mooney moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request with staff
recommendations. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 6-0.
Commissioner Warren was pleased to see that access to Harvey Mitchell was limited for developments.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of an appeal of the sidewalk condition placed on
Christian Science Society's Conditional Use Permit; located at 201 Boyett. Previously considered
by the Planning and Zoning Commission on December 16, 1999. (.!m,6)
Staff Planner Jimmerson presented the staff report and reminded the Commission that the Conditional
Use Permit was granted on December 16, 1999, which allowed the expansion of the existing church
facility. The approval was conditional upon the applicant addressing all staff comments. All staff
comments have been addressed with the exception of the sidewalk requirement. The applicant is
questioning whether or not the Commission specifically desired the installation of the portion of a
sidewalk that would extend a proposed sidewalk across the entire Patricia frontage. This project was
subject to review not only as a conditional use permit but also a project in Northgate. The project was
submitted and initially reviewed by staff. Staff comments were then forwarded to the NRB. NRB
generally only discusses those comments and issues over which they have discretion, unless there are
questions regarding staff comments. In this case the NRB forwarded a recommendation to the
Commission to approve the site plan. Unless otherwise noted it is assumed that the NRB supports staff
comments. After an NRB meeting, an applicant is usually required to submit a revised plan. If all
comments have not been addressed, staff can either forward the plan to the Commission and
recommend denial or recommend approval with conditions, which is what was done in this case. The
Commission approved the use permit with staff comments, which included the sidewalk condition.
She explained that the sidewalk comment was originally made by staff because of the relatively heavy
pedestrian nature of the area and was made under the authority granted by Section 10, Site Plan
Review Requirements, of the Zoning Ordinance. Subsection 10.2.13 states that, "In order to be
P&Z Minutes January 20, 2000 Page 3 of 6
k,
approved, a site plan must provide for: Assured pedestrian safety, which may include the provision of
sidewalks along the perimeter of the property meeting the specifications for same as outlined in the
Subdivision Regulations relative to width and placement." Ms. Jimmerson pointed out that the
Planning & Zoning Commission has heard requests for sidewalk variances for site plans and
conditional use permits, although none have been granted to date. Therefore, Staff requested that the
sidewalk condition be upheld.
Ms. Deborah Fry, representative of Christian Science Society, approached the Commission and asked
that the sidewalk requirement be removed from the site plan for the following reasons:
• Maintaining the maximum amount of "green space" on the property has been a central concept
since the inception of the project. In the current design, the side of the building facing Patricia
includes a landscaped garden area with a meandering, naturally shaped pathway, and retains all of
the existing "green space" on the property.
• This is one of the few remaining "green spaces in the Northgate area and they wanted to retain as
much of it as possible.
• An additional sidewalk along Patricia would further reduce the limited "green space" remaining in
the neighborhood, and necessitate reducing or eliminating the planned naturally shaped garden and
pathway.
• The Northgate Review Board seemed very receptive to their plans to retain the maximum amount
of green space and create a natural garden. The NRB did not mention or suggest to the applicant
(during their meeting) that an additional sidewalk would be desired at Patricia Street.
• They were concerned that the sidewalk, so close to the front of the building, would compromise
privacy of the church sanctuary during services.
• There is an existing sidewalk along the south side of Patricia Street to accommodate pedestrian
traffic.
Commissioner Mooney moved to uphold the sidewalk condition placed on the Conditional Use Permit.
Commissioner Warren seconded the motion.
The Commissioners told the applicant that when the Commission approves items, it is their intent that
all of the staff comments and conditions are included, unless otherwise said.
Commissioner Warren said that safety for the pedestrians was the main issue with the sidewalk,
although she was in favor of saving greenspace.
Chairman Rife said that this should be looked at from a "global perspective". His concern was with
inconsistent sidewalks (starting and stopping in the middle of property).
Chairman Rife called for the vote, and the motion to uphold the sidewalk condition passed unopposed
6-0.
P&Z Minutes January 20, 2000 Page 4 of 6
He said that other locations were considered, one of which was the water tower at Holleman and Texas
Avenue, but this seemed to be the best location for the applicant (Sprint).
The Commissioners asked if there were any discussions about a different design other than a stealth
tower. Mr. Battle said that he was not sure of any discussions with the Church.
The Commission asked what the reasons were to not locate the cell tower on the water tower. Mr.
Battle said that his understanding was that the City has there own communications equipment on the
tower, and City representatives were concerned with interference. The Water Department also was not
interested in locating this cell tower on the water tower.
Commissioner Warren said that the ordinance encouraged collocation of towers, and felt the water
tower fell into this category. Assistant City Attorney Ladd explained that the Telecommunications Act
requires collocation if possible, but only if it is feasible and if the tower can handle it.
Commissioner Mooney opened the public hearing.
Mr. George Crain, 1110 Klamath Lane, was present to represent SprintCom. He clarified that there
would be no temporary tower as first proposed. The proposed stealth tower will actually be 80', which
is an increase of 2 feet. There will not be a cross placed on the top of the tower. He told the
Commission that it is standard for Sprint to investigate collocation prospects before searching for a
new location. The City was the first they contacted about collocation on the water tower. He said that
through discussions with City's Water Department officials, it was determined that the City was not
interested in this cell tower on the existing water tower. The City's reasons were because they were
not sure if there would be interference with the existing communications equipment on the water
tower, and they were not certain of the future of the water tower at this location.
Commissioner Mooney closed the public hearing.
Commission Horlen moved to approve the request. Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion, which
passed 5-0-1; Chairman Rife abstained.
V,
Chairman Rife returned to the duties of Chairman.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, use and
site plan, for Christian Science Society located at 201 Boyett, which is on the northwest corner of
Boyett and Patricia Streets. (99-726)
Staff Planner Jimmerson presented the staff report and reminded the Commission that churches may be
permitted as conditional uses in any district upon approval from the Planning & Zoning Commission.
The applicant is requesting permission to expand their church facilities at their existing site. The site is
zoned NG-1, Historic Northgate, and shown on the Land Use Plan as a redevelopment area. She
pointed out that this site is not listed in the Northgate Historic Resources Survey. The existing
structure is approximately 1030 square feet, and the expansion would be another 1970 square feet,
bring the total building area to 3000 square feet. The new facility will seat 70 people, which requires
23 parking spaces. The site plan shows only 2 spaces. However the applicant has stated that there is
agreement with the adjacent parking lot owner for use of those spaces on Sundays and Wednesday
evenings. In addition, the City's public lot is directly across Boyett Street. The Northgate Review
P&Z Minutes December 16, 1999 Page 4 of 12
Board unanimously approved the site plan as proposed (November 5, 1999), with the condition of
relocating the one non-handicap parking space to the area where the trash receptacles were shown on
the plan, which the applicant has done. Staff recommended approval of the use and approval of the site
plan with the condition of addressing the Staff Review Comments #2. If addressing the Staff Review
Comments causes any significant changes to the site plan, it would require resubmission to the NRB
and the Commission for approval of those changes.
Chairman Rife opened the public hearing.
Ms. Debbie Fry, 904 Holik, was present to represent the Church. She said the church was a place of
meeting and worship only. The expansion would allow for Sunday school classes, which would run
concurrently with the services. She explained that there should not be parking problems because the
church meets when the adjacent business are not operating. She said that there is a written agreement
with the adjacent property owner to use their parking during the church services. She said that 70 seats
would be adequate, since there has been steady attendance and they do not anticipate an increase in
membership.
Chairman Rife expressed his concern that the Staff Review Comments had not been addressed.
Mr. Christian Galindo, Galindo Engineers, explained that the comments expressed by staff in the
review were being addressed. He informed the Commission of the plans for the sidewalk from the
proposed drive to the neighboring property (where the parking agreement is).
Chairman Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Horlen moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit with staff's conditions.
Commissioner Mooney seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 6-0.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, meet use,
for Kappa Delta Sorority located in the Creekside Shopping Center at 809 E. University Drive,
Suite 220. (99-728)
Staff Planner Anderson presented the staff report and explaine&'that proposal would be to provide a
temporary meeting place for the sorority until their recently approved house is completed. She
explained that the shopping center is zoned C-B Commercial Business, and houses several uses, such
as a restaurant, a dance studio, and administrative offices. Ms. Anderson pointed out 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:
1. "The proposed us meets all the minimum standards established in the ordinance for this type of use
proposed." The lease appropriates 59 parking spaces for the Sorority, 60 spaces are required by
the Zoning Ordinance.
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."
P&Z Minutes December 16, 1999 Page 5 of 12
FROM : PUMP-EXCHANGE PHONE NO. : 4095354201 Jan. 04 2000 0E:21AM P02
i
January 3; 2000
To: Natalie Ruiz
From: Christian Science Society
Lee Davison, Clerk
Subject: Christian Science Society- Conditional Use Permit Site Plan
Dear Natalie,
Thank you for the fax dated December 30th. The Board of Directors met last evening and went
over the requests made by the City and have responded in this manner.
In the initial meeting with the Northgate Review Board, the subjc;ct of the sidewalk was
thoroughly addressed. Suggestions were made, and the outcome was a consensus that our
original intention of being a, true "Green Space" in an area of concrete and paving was a, good
one. We have a plan for sidewalks that may not be the same configuration as youae suggestion,
but when aesthetics are concerned, it is definitely better than looking at a. ribbon at the street..
Currently we have a sidewalk next to our church building and as we sit in church for services or
business, we see people using it and not, afraid to walk close to the building. The new plans call
for a lovely integrated sidewalk and landscaping to beautify the }arojcct. The NRB came to that
same conclusion with the exception that we put a handicap ramp in the area where the adjacent
parking lot abuts our property. This has been drawn in. and submitted weeks ago by our
engineer, Chris Galindo. There seems to be a, misunderstanding on the City's part about this
,joining. Currently, the sidewalk goes past light poles and runs into our driveway. Pedestrians
use the sidewalk, then use our driveway and some use the street or cross over to the sidewalk on
the other side. Please review our plans and take these points into consideration as they have
already been addressed. We have given the City tile requested easement for the water line and as
of this morning will have the final paperwork completed for your approval. However, when this
is done, that property you are asking us to build a sidewalk on is now the city's. We would hope
you would not use that as a bully stick to put in a sidewalk that is inappropriate and has already
been addressed in an acceptable manner by the NRB.
Where is the city in their responsibility to do a professional job oi'reviewing the grading and
drainage plans that were submitted months ago and should have been completed before we even
went to the P&Z. Committee. To ask a small group for an additional $100 fee every time there is
a question and not try to complete your part and then review it all together is unprincipled.
When can we expect. the city to do the drainage review? Will you ask us for more money to
look at this? The delays of these items arc costing our group time;, and ultimately our contractor
who ;has been very patient with us and our plans.
We expect that the you will settle the matter of the sidewalk discrepancy without delay, go back
and look at Chris Galindo's changes that the NRB okayed and send us a fax stating; those !acts.
Also, please give a definite date when we can have the drainage and grading, plans reviewed. If
we need to meet with ,you, any of our group would be happy to do so.
Sincere r,
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 1
Project: Christian Science Society - 201 Boyett
1. Show where 15 foot rear setback is.
2. Provide easement over 4-inch water line.
3. Show electrical service and easements, etc.
4) Are the sidewalks shown existing or proposed? We would like to see the
sidewalks extend to the property lines on Boyett and Patricia, esp. since you
have an agreement with the adjacent property owner for parking. What
surface is the area that the handicap ramp leads to next to the parking
spaces? There also need to be handicap ramps everywhere the sidewalk
meets the curb, and we need to see handicap ramp details.
5. Show One Way/Entrance/Exit signs at either end of drive.
6. Show fire hydrant on plan to scale. If hydrant in within 300 feet of center of
Boyett frontage, then fire lanes will not be required on site.
7. Is the storage building new or existing?
8. Are the dumpsters roll-off? That location is fine for storage of roll-off
dumpsters, but would not be accessible by sanitation trucks.
9. Doesn't ADA require that if there is only one handicap space available that it
must be van accessible and van accessible requires an 8-foot access space
next to the parking space not 5-foot?
10. If no new landscaping is required, we would not require irrigation.
11. Grading and drainage information is still under review by staff.
12. Barricaded tree points will not be awarded for any tree that can not be
completely barricaded out to one foot for every inch of caliper. The live oak
south of the existing building may possibly be awarded protected points, if
the sidewalk is moved out of the required barricade area, thus meeting the
landscaping ordinance without the need for new landscaping.
13. Provide a parking analysis that shows what the parking requirement for this
project would be in any other district.
14. Show location of bicycle parking.
Reviewed by: Jessica Jimmerson Date- 10/29/1999
Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 2
Project: Christian Science Society - 201 Boyett
1. Provide easement over 4-inch water line. (Applicant has begun the necessary
paperwork)
2. Show electrical service and easements, etc.
3. Staff has a concern about the sidewalk ending at the entrance to the proposed
expansion, and not continuing along the frontage on Patricia Street.
4. It does not make sense for the sidewalk/ramp shown from the proposed drive to the
neighboring property, with which there is a parking agreement, to lead to a chain link
fence. If the sidewalk/ramp is moved so that it is adjacent to the curb will pedestrians
be able to access the parking area without stepping into the roadway?
5. Show handicap ramp details for non-corner ramps.
6. ADA requires that if there is only one handicap space available that it must be van
accessible and van accessible requires an 8-foot access space next to the parking space
not 5-foot.
7. Grading and drainage information is still under review by staff.
8. Describe or show landscaping barricade plan.
Reviewed by: Jessica Jimmerson Date: 11/11/1999
JAPZTEXT\PZ02240.D0C Page 4 of 6
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 3
Project: Christian Science Society - 201 Boyett
1. Provide easement over 4-inch water line. (Applicant has begun the
necessary paperwork)
2. Staff has a concern about the sidewalk ending at the entrance to the
proposed expansion, and not continuing along the frontage on Patricia
Street.
3. Grading and drainage information is still under review by staff.
Reviewed by: Jessica Jimmerson Date: 12/29/1999
Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1
City of College Station
Development Services
1101 Texas Avenue - College Station, Texas 77842
(409) 764-3570 / (409) 764-3496 [Fax]
NORTHGATE REVITALIZATION BOARD (NRB)
REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
November 9, 1999
TO: Lee Davison, 201 Boyett, College Station, Texas, 77840 [via fax 823-59581
Christian Galindo, via fax 846-8868
FROM: NRB Review Subcommittee:
Julius Gribou, NRB Chairman
Elton Abbott, Jr., NRB Member
Richard Benning, NRB Member
Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner
Rick Floyd, P&Z Commissioner
Staff Attending:
Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinator
Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Chrisdan Science Society - 201 Boyett. A proposal for the expansion of an existing
church located in Northgate.
An NRB meeting was held on Friday, November 5, 1999, to discuss the aforementioned project. The
architect, Peter Fisher, displayed a model of the expansion being proposed. He mentioned that they
are planning to move the existing temporary building and to expand the existing building. He stated
that they have chosen a very residential-looking building and will use some of the similar brick from
the existing building. The new roof will be a metal roof and will be a burnished slate color. The
building will be painted a beige/off-white color. He mentioned that there will be no day school and
the building is sometimes uninhabited. They are planning to install an irrigation system even though
it is not required.
Mr. Fisher stated that they have a parking agreement with Don Ganter to use his parking on Sundays
and Wednesday evenings. The parking agreement does not have an expiration date. The church
patrons will receive and display a placard in the cars when using Mr. Ganter's parking.
DRB Chair Gribou stated that he would rather the parking, that is located behind the building, not be
so close to the building. He stated that he would rather see one parallel handicap parking space than
the two head-in spaces shown.
Some discussion took place regarding the trash receptacles and whether they were needed. Mr. Fisher
stated that they do not produce very much trash. It was decided that a parking place could replace
where the roll-offs were shown on the plan.
home of TexasA&M University