Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/05/1970 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commissionrip,. MINUTE S 41114 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS October 5, 1970 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Commissioner C. D. Wells, Chairman; Commissioners J. A. Orr, Bob Evans, Carl Landiss and George Boyett; City Engineer Lloyd James, and City Planner George Eby; City Council Liaison Bill Cooley Members Absent: Commissioners Douglas Stone and Carl Tishler Visitors Present: Harry Seaback, W. D. Fitch, H. G. Smith, Ed E. Powell, Keith Haines, David R. Roseland, Bob Reese, James C. Smith, L. M. Stasney, and Edward H. Miller Chairman Wells called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Room of the City Hall. Commissioner Orr moved that the Minutes of September 21, 1970 meeting be approved as written. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Landiss. Motion carried. Mr. Guy Smith, Manager of Easterwood Airport and Chairman of the Easterwood Airport • Joint Zoning Board presented a talk on the ramifications pertaining to airport zoning and dis- cussed the height limitations in the clear zone. The first item on the Agenda was the consideration of a Preliminary Plat of Southwood, Sections 6, 7 and 9 (P&Z Case No. 40-70). Chairman Wells pointed this area out and explained to the commission that the section containing the 1/2 street was excluded from the plat being submitted. Commissioner Landiss moved that the Preliminary Plat of Southwood,, Sections 6, 7 and 9 be approved (P&Z Case No. 40-701. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Orr. Motion carried. The next item on the Agenda was six (6) zoning requests from the developer of the Plantation Oaks Subdivision. Commissioner Boyett questioned Mr. Seaback, the developer of Plantation Oaks Subdivision, extensively, about the proposed usage of the land he was requesting zoning for. Chairman Wells opened the floor for a public hearing on P&Z Case #32-70. There being no comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Orr moved that P&Z Case No. 32-70, a request to rezone Reserve E, a 5.88 acre tract near the intersection of Hwy. 30 and the East By-pass of Hwy. 6 from District No. 1, first dwelling house district and District No. 3, Apartment House District to 411, District No. 4, First Business District, be recommended to the Council for approval, subject to: (a) The commercial development be started on 50% of the land area in question within five years or the zoning being granted will revert to its original classification. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Landiss. On the question, Landiss and Orr voted - Yes. Boyett and Evans voted - No. Motion failed for lack of the four necessary affirmative votes. r � Planning and Zoning Minutes, October 5, 1970 Page 2 • The next item on the Agenda was P&Z Case No. 33-70. City Planner Eby pointed out that the acreage as shown on the Agenda was incorrect and it should be 1. 539 acres instead of 1.4 acres as shown. Chairman Wells opened the floor for the public hearing. A gentlemen from the audience who was representing the trustees of the First Baptist Church spoke and said that they were concerned about the character of businesses that might develop on the proposed tract. Their concern, he explained, was that it might be something detrimental to the character of a church. The public hearing was then closed. Commissioner Landiss moved that P&Z Case No. 33-70, a request to rezone Reserve G, a 1.539 acre tract located approximately 2,200 feet southwest of the Hwy. 6 East By-pass along Hwy. 30 from District No. 1, first dwelling house district and District No. 3, Apartment House District to District No. 4, First Business District, be disapproved. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Orr. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Boyett moved that P&Z Case No. 32-70, a request to rezone Reserve E, a 5.88 acre tract, be reconsidered by the Commission. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Evans. Motion carried. Commissioner Orr moved that P&Z Case No. 32-70, a request to rezone Reserve E, a 5.88 acre tract near the intersection of Hwy. 30 and the East By-pass of Hwy. 6 from District No. 1, first dwelling house district and District No. 3, Apartment House district, to District No. 4, First Business District, be recommended to the council for approval of rezoning, as stated in his motion earlier in the meeting, to-wit: "The commercial development be started on 50% of the land area in question within five years or the zoning being granted would revert to its original classification." Motion was seconded by Commissioner Landiss. Motion carried. Vote was unanimous. Chairman Wells opened the floor for a public hearing on P&Z Case No. 34-70, Reserve B, a 1-acre tract in Plantation Oaks Subdivision. The spokesman for the First Baptist Church of College Station spoke opposing the rezoning. The public hearing was then closed. Commissioner Evans moved that P&Z Case No. 34-70, a request to rezone Reserve B, a 1-acre tract located 800 feet northwest of Reserve G in P&Z Case No. 33-70, from District No. 1, first dwelling house district to District No. 4, first business district, be disapproved. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Orr. Motion carried unanimously. Chairman Wells opened the public hearing on P&Z Case No. 35-70, a 17.4 acre tract in Reserve C of Plantation Oaks Subaivision. There being no comments, he closed the hearing. Commissioner Boyett moved that P&Z Case No. 35-70 be approved, which is a 17.4 acre tract located approximately 1,600 feet southwest of the Hwy. 6 East By-pass along Hwy. 30 from District No. 1, first dwelling house district to District No. 3, Apartment House District, and that it also include that portion of Reserve G, which is P&Z Case No. 33-70, not already zoned for Apartment House District, to be rezoned to apartment house district. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Landiss. Motion carried. Vote was unanimous. L_ Planning and Zoning Minutes, October 5, 1970 Page 3 • Chairman Wells opened the public hearing concerning P&Z Case No. 36-70, a request to rezone Reserve D, a 5. 5 acre tract located in Reserve E in Plantation Oaks Subdivision. There being no comments, the hearing was closed. Commissioner Orr moved that P&Z Case No. 36-70 , a request to rezone Reserve D, a 5.5 acre tract located immediately adjacent to and northwest of Reserve E in P&Z Case No. 32-70, from District No. 1, first dwelling house district to District No. 3, apartment house district, be recommended for approval of rezoning to the City Council. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Boyett. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Seaback, developer of the Plantation Oaks Subdivision, asked for permission to withdraw P&Z Case No. 37-70, which is a request to rezone Reserve F, a 1.5 acre tract located approximately 100 feet west of Reserve G in P&Z Case No. 33-70, from District No. 1, first dwelling house district to District No. 4, First Business District. The P&Z Commission was agreeable to this request. The next item on the Agenda was consideration of P&Z Case No. 38-70, a request to rezone Block 5, Lots 1 - 25 of University Oaks Subdivision from District No. 3, Apartment House District to District No. 2, second dwelling house district (duplexes). City Planner Eby pointed out that this request to rezone this property from apartment house to duplexes was in keeping with the desires of the developer and the City Council, and that he had the formal request in writing. Chairman Wells stated that even though the property owner was absent, the case could still be considered, since this was a condition to the approval of the subdivision plat, that the developer was present at the Commission meeting when the plat was approved and submitted the zoning change request at that time, and that there was a clear understanding between the commission and the developer. The public hearing was then opened. There being no comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Boyett moved that P&Z Case No. 38-70, a reauest to rezone Block 5, Lots 1-25 of University Oaks Subdivision from District No. 3, Apartment House District to District No. 2, second dwelling house district (duplexes) be recommended to the City Council for approval. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Landiss. Motion carried. Commissioner Evans moved that sidewalks be located at the following locations in the Plantation Oaks Subdivision: (1) On both sides of Rhett Butler Drive from Hwy. 30 to Plantation Oaks Blvd. (2) Southwest side of Rhett Butler Drive from Plantation Oaks to the property line of the Subdivision. (3) South side of Plantation Oaks Blvd. from Rhett Butler Drive West to the property line of the subdivision. (4) Both sides of Scarlett O'Hara Drive from Hwy. 30 to Plantation Oaks Blvd. (5) On the east side of Merry Oaks from Plantation Oaks Blvd. to the north property line of the Subdivision. Commissioner Boyett seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote was unanimous. -11 Planning and Zoning Minutes, October 5, 1970 Page 4 • Commissioner Evans moved the meeting adjourn. Motion was seconded by Commissioner - Orr. Meeting adjourned. APPROVED: Chairman ATTEST: Zeik.,,_6. ycL-- City Secretary las S S PLANNER'S BRIEF FOR THE OCTOBER 5, 1970 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON ADGENDA ITEMS Item 2 Preliminary Plat of Southwood . Sections 6. 7 and 9 (P&Z 40-70), Southwood (sections 6,7 7 9) addition is located on the northeast side of the new highschool site. It consists of 2 cul-de-sac streets and extentions of two existing streets, namely Guadalupe and the stub off of Shadowood drive. Basically the plat reflects detailed thought and extensive planning oil the developer' s part. The extention of quad alupe Street is curved in a precise manner in order to miss a number of very large trees. Madera Circle, the longer cul-de-sac, is about 40 feet longer than the 600 foot limitation imposed upon cul-de-sac streets. The reason it is 40 feet longer is two-fold. One, the lots back up to a creek and are about 200 feet long as opposed to 240 feet long. Two, there are numerous very attractive and large trees that the street has been designed to miss, that otherwise would need to be cleared. There is no reason to deny the variance requested on this cul-de-sac. An interesting conflict in the Subdivision Ordinance is uncovered in this plat. Refering to Section 8 Paragraph G.4, quote: Half streets: No half streets shall be platted. Refering to Paragraph 8. 2 quote: Relation to adjoining Street Systems: Where necessary to the neighborhood pattern, existing streets in adjacent or adjoining areas shall be continued, in alignment therewith. Where adjoining areas are not subdivided , • the arrangement of streets in the Subdivision shall make provision for the proper projection of streets into such areas. Obviously, the stub off of Shad owood Drive terminates on the property line of two developers. Someone must plat first, consequently a half street must be platted. I have discussed this with Mr. McCrory afld he agrees with the location of the extention. It is interesting to notice that this plat names the extention of the stub, LANCELOT DRIVE, which is the name the Camelot Qorporation wanted also. The extention of Guadalupe terminates at the Adkins (APC) and McCrory property line in a manner in which the extention thereof may be easily and properly accomplished within the McCrory tract. REVIEW: The plat is satiscactory as it is drawn. Variances requested should be granted in the interest of preserving the natural beauty of the area. Any arguements against the half street (Lancelot Drive) can be countered with the provision within the subdivision ordinance relating to the continuation of existing streets in adjoining areas (8-G.2) The dead end street arguement may also be countered with the same paragraph. Some lots are peculiarly shaped due to the topographic features of the land . All sewer and drainage facilities are already constructed that serve this subdivision. They were built to serve subdivisions and land in adjacent areas. • Item 1 Zoning requests within the Plantation Oaks Subdivision (P&Z Cases 32 thru 37 - 70) Please review the Planner' s Brief on Plantation Oaks as applies to zoning, It was pointed out in the Brief that the entire subdivision was dependent on certain zoning requests. Mr. Seaback is aware of the risk involve in placing all of his eggs in one basket but time is very important to him in starting this subdivision. Basically, all of the zoning requests were reviewed extensively in this office. All of the apartment zoning requests ( Reserves D and C ) meet all requirements for apartment zones. They are surrounded by collector streets and adjacent to Highway 30 for ease in mobility. The location of the two apartment areas are established to provide ready access to the commercial areas and the two parks as well as convenient tb highway 30. The extention of the present commercial zone down highway 30 (reserve E) offers greater highway frontage to the area and makes access to the site much better than originally established. It would then be possible to orient much of the commercial growth related to the subdivision along highway 30 and to have the motel site facing the east by-pass with probably a service station on the corner which would serve • both through traffic and subdivision traffic. It is a needed extention and could easily be oriented to serve the subdivision and other neighborhood areas to be developed in the future. The reserve F, destined to become a child care center, is requested to be a commercial zone. Since the area is destined by the developer to become a child care center, which is covered in the Kindergarden:-Ordinance, I recommend denying the requested commercial zoning. (Child care centers may be established in any zone when in compliance with the Kindergarden Ordinance. ) Reserve G, an area requested to be rezoned to Commercial is centrally located to large areas zoned and developable as apartments both in the Plantation Oaks Subdivision and the University Oaks subdivision. It is a small 1.4 acre tract designed to be used for a service station or other similar highway and local oriented business. It would offer good location to local residents who necessarily must pass by this corner in either their exit or return to the subdivision. Reserve B, an area requested to be rezoned to Commercial District No. 4 should be denied and the subdivider should be requested to resubmit a request for NEIGHBORHOOD Business District (Dist #4-A) . A Commercial zone should not be located in a residential area unless it is restricted to the uses indicated in Neighborhood Business Zone. That particular reserve does not lend itself to any other use satisfactorily. It is in a difficult position due to the proximity of the major collector street intersection at the corner and since it faces the back yard of the double frontage lot across the street, and 111 has a gas line easement across it. 4 • Item 1-A Rezonine reauest within University Oaks Subdivision This request is to rezone from Apartment Zone to Duplex zone the block behind Gilchrist and Kyle Avenues. This block is Block 5 of the University Oaks Apartment Complex. This request was made a condition of approval for the preliminary plat of this subdivision, and was requested by the City Council some number of months ago. I recommend directt`,and straightforward approval whether the requestor is present or not. Item 4 Discussion of sidewalk location within Plantation Oaks Subdivision I recommend sidewalks in general to be placed along all collector streets (60 ft. ) within subdivision. The City Engineer and the city planner believe that sidewalks along both sides of Ann Marie St and Westover St from Plantation Oaks to Highway 30 are necessary. A sidewalk only on the apartment side of Plantation Oaks should be sufficient on that street. A sidewalk on the park side of Merry Oaks Drive is also necessary. See enclosed sketch of subdivision (zoning request sketch) . Purple lines indicate my recommendations. • S • • a • PLP Arritrri 0 A Oil h- 5 Z 0 N/iti 6- . R E QUb S TS . / Rtsittot/7141 1075 .1 • • 2,9 Acas 12Ppi7iy4.1.9 . • 40 Aca5 PARKS i . . - . IC, 35 AcPE COMPILOciAL coRNER 1 i . I i ( II t . 3—04Acry. i,a AcRE SPEcliel„, i--; toS'E cONIME-Ret art. Anits..; .: 1 i raLZMINIELDRIVE ;.! • • — 1 1. 1 . . _ , ....._, , 1 A , : _ 1 N Li i I I it , „,\ - . ---- 1 \ ) / ,__ _._ 1 OE , --- _ , 0 : • ! t ' \ , -. -- --------",- ------- i - -----...„. • Ve," ,___ , _ . ._ •''------- ! • I , i I I 1 -- \ ' -- Z 140 - I 1 U 1 '•417 - iHii . ' I --- : . I AcRE . - - , t , .............---" • '. INtll'IL ' ' '' ' -'-='-- - "!) •-......1 t i A. - . - PR oPoS Eb . vi • t • ; 1 : , , rnii• AcRE . I , 1-) PTM &NT _ Ex isT/AJG E commE.Rc,A,_ r. , . ..,..„ / PRo pOSE b D" /4/ p PARTM E'VT 5. 5 Ac-RE : ZoNE * # , __ _ _ CHURc H PARK C PRO POSE b It" 1.7 CgliMERCtilj.. (4 b • AI .- H ,1 CS .4 Acit ay i q7' /i 6- / `,- *--w I p tAi __ - -, - I p s , i r 0- • 0 , • 4, . ------;-----------..„ -*' . . \ 1 / . 1 / •-•-•"%".. "'"-----'1--------- ... . . ... 0 0 i ______, .....,,,___ ....,,,,,. s_s-ov K'g /. , 79/1,-2 s - ..._ 14, \-- — —1 ,......_.... _ ...... _., -� �` , 7: a ., , ... .. \\4\ i \ / / / / i ,ammillilitirkarz., k N I ' c� 7 iLl 1 ; - 1 ,i - % 0 � , i v .. i i ) . _ _ ��. .7, / / •7( . ,... ) 1.......„........... ( .4 . .. 16„, IA 0 ""‘f 6°4.0c/L%.........%.. 1,,4s ...............)....