Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/15/1979 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission~, _ MINUTES City of College Station Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting March 15, 1979 7:00 P.M. C MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Stover; Commissioners Etter, Sweeney, Watson; City Planner Mayo, City Engineer Ash, Community Development Planner Callaway, Planning Assistant Longley. MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Burke, Jones, Mathewson; Council Liaison Hazen. AGENDA iTEM N0. 1 -- Approval of minutes - meeting of March 1, 1979• Commissioner Watson moved that the minutes be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sweeney and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2 -- Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 -- A ublic hearin on the uestion of ado ti the Zoning Ordinance No, 50 establishing the position of Zonir an ordinance amendi icial. Mr. Mayo explained that the ordinance provided that the powers of enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would now be in the hands of the Zoning Official rather than the Building Official and that this was the only substantive change made by the amendment. Chiarman Stover suggested that sections g-6.2.1 and 9-B.2.2. be reworded to state that "The Zoning Official is not permitted to grant an exception...", rather than "The Zoning Official under no circumstances is permitted..." Commissioner Sweeney suggested that section g-F.2. could be made more clear as to the person to whom notice of violation would be delivered. Commissioner Etter suggested that the section might specify the property owner or his agent. City Planner Mayo explained that section g-F.2. had been written by the City Attorney but that he would check with him on the wording of the section. Commissioner Sweeney suggested that section 11-E. APPEALS: be changed to clarify the statement "Such appeal shall be made within thirty (30) days by filling..." He noted that it should be made clear at what point the 30 days began. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Jerry Bishop asked if a new employee would be needed to fill the position and what his duties would be. Mr. Ma yo explained that Mr. Jim Callaway would fill the position so that no new employee would be needed. He also explained the duties of the Zoning Official. The public hearing. was closed. Commissioner Etter moved that the Commission recommend the adoption of the proposed amendment and that the City Attorney and staff consider the discussed changes before the ordinance is considered by the City Council. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission March 15, 1979 7:00 P.M. Page 2 The motion was seconded by Commissioner Watson and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4 -- Consideration of a final plat - Krenek Tap Addition located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Texas Avenue and Krenek Tap Road. Mr. Mayo explained that the plat provided a 30 foot access easement for the church property and the property requesting rezoning. He also noted that a site plan had been provided which showed the development of both properties. Mr. Mayo suggested that he would prefer a 50 foot easement. Mr. Ash advised that a 50 foot wide easement would allow the radii of the access curves on a 30 foot drive to be entirely on the property involved but that he saw no problem with a 30 foot easement. Commissioner Sweeney moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by .Commissioner Watson and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 5 -- Reconsideration of an application to rezonr:a 1.00 acre tract located east of and adjacent to Texas Avenue and approximately 500 feet north of Krenek Tap Road from Single Family Residential District R-1 to General Commercial District C-1. The application being in the name of Mrs. Irene Krenek Skidmore. Commissioner Watson moved that the item be removed from the table. i The motion was seconded by Commissioner Etter and unanimously approved. Mr. Mayo stated that, although he had no objection to the proposed project, the C-1 zoning would be a spot zone and that A-P zoning would better accommodated the project without the objections associated with the C-1 zone. He pointed out that there was a considerable amount of vacant C-1 property in the City and that it would be hard for the City to support this much vacant C-1 property. The Commission discussed the concept of "spot" zoning and whether or not the proposed rezoning was, or was not, a "spot" zone. Commissioner Etter pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan did not call for commercial development in the area of the request. Commissioner Watson stated that he felt the actions of the Commission at the last meet- ing had led the applicant to believe that the rezoning would be granted if the plat was provided granting the easement. He stated that it was unfair to turn down the request now. Chairman Stover advised that, in his opinion, the only circumstances. under which the rezoning could be considered were if the access problem were solved, and that this would not guarantee of approval of the rezoning. Commissioner Sweeney pointed out that the major issue of discussion at the last meeting was the zoning of the tract and not the access easement and that the zoning had allways been his primary concern. Mrs. Mildred Gandy spoke in favor of the request. She stated that the property was not suitable for residential development. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission March 15, 1979 7:00 P.M. Page 3 Mr. Wick McKean spoke in favor of the request. He pointed out that he could not request A-P zoning since his lenders required that he maintain the option of using some of the proposed building for light retail sales, not permitted in A-P. Mr. Jerry Bishop spoke in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Steve Hanson spoke in favor of the rezoning. Following a lengthy discussion, Commissioner Watson moved that the Commission rec- ommend the rezoning. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Etter and failed by the following vote: For: Commissioner Watson Against: Chairman Stover; Commissioners Etter, Sweeney Commissioner Etter moved that the Commission recommend that the property be rezoned to District A-P, Administrative-Professional. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sweeney and approved with Commissioner Watson voting against. Commissioner Watson stated that he felt the action was rotten as Hell and that the actions of the Commission at the previous meeting had mis5~ed the applicants. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6 -- Consideration of a final plat - Southwood Valley Section 106. Mr. Mayo explained that, with minor exceptions, the final plat was identical to the preliminary. Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sweeney and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 7 -- Reconsideration of a parking layout for Del Taco. This item was withdrawn by the applicant to be placed on a later meeting. AGENDA ITEM N0. 8 -- Reconsideration of a preliminary plat - Parkway Plaza Phase 8. Commissioner Watson moved that the item be removed from the table. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sweeney and unanimously approved. Mr. Mayo explained that the developers had revised the plat to deepen the lots and provide a 24 foot access easement along Village Drive, but that this easement needed to be extended to Village rather than being setback 28 feet in order to insure access to the street from all of the lots. He also noted that, if the tract were one piece of property instead of 14 lots, the tract would be allowed 3 curb cuts rather than the seven proposed. He suggested that every other curb cut be eliminated thus serving the lots with 4 curb cuts. He stated that, in reality, the nine parking spaces provided for each four-plex would be inadequate and that closing every other curb cut would provide space for extra parking. Mr. Frank Murphy, developer, stated that if the curb cuts were limited to the four- plexes, he might have to build commercial on the tract as he had first planned. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission March 15, 1979 7:00 P.M. Mr. Murphy pointed out that he would have problems getting financing for four-plexes if each lot could not have some direct access to Village. Mr. Ash stated that if .the property were to be platted into 14 lots, he would rather have 7 curb cuts on Village than 4. He also suggested that the primary concern of the Commission when considering a plat should not be the number of curb cuts, but rather, the number of lots or tracts created by the plat. Mr. Mayo pointed out that the final number and location of curb cuts would be determined at the time of site plan approval and that, as far as the plat itself was concerned, he had no objections. Chairman Stover suggested that the access easements be provided only at points to have curb openings rather than running the entire length of Village Drive. Mr. Murphy stated that this would be no problem. Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sweeney and unanimously approved. Page 4 AGENDA ITEM N0. 9 -- Other business. Mr. Mayo advised the Commission that the next joint meeting with the County Com- missioners and the Bryan Planning Commission would be held on April 10 at the • County Multi-use Facility. Mr. Mayo advised that the next agenda would include the discussion of-the number of person comprising a family. Mr. Mayo advised that a question had been posed by Dr. McMath the number of detached signs on his site. He noted that some such as the shopping center site at Highway 30 and the East B~ more than one detached sign and that this was not now allowed Mr. Mayo suggested that the Commission might want to consider to allow more than one detached sign in such cases. of A.R.C. concerning very large sites pass would require by the ordinance. changing the ordinance It was the determined. that the question should be placed on the next agenda for discussion. AGENDA ITEM N0. 10 -- Adjourn. Commissioner Watson moved that the meeting be adjourned. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Etter and unanimously approved. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M. APPROVED • Attest Chairman Secretary