Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/04/1980 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES City of College Station, Texas Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting • December 4, 1980 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Maher, Commissioners Bailey, Behling, Gardner, Sears, Hazen; City Council Liaison Jones. MEMBERS ABSENT:. Commissioner Watson. STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Mayo, City Engineer Ash, Zoning Official Callaway, Planning Assistant Longley. AGNEDA ITEM N0. 1 -- Approval of minutes - meeting of November 20, 1980. Commissioner Bailey noted that "STANDARDS" was, once again, misspelled in Item No. 1. Commissioner Sears moved that the minutes be approved as amended by Commissioner Bailey. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bailey and approved with Chairman Maher abstaining and Commissioner Behling absent. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2 -- Hear visitors. No one spoke. • AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 -- Public hearing on the question of rezoning Blocks 2 and 3 of Brentwood Section 5 from District R-1 to District R-2. The application being in the name of Brentwood. Inc. Mr. Mayo explained that the property in question had first been zoned R-2 and that the developers had requested that it be changed to R-1 at a time when there was little market for duplex lots. He pointed out that, if the change to R-2 were granted, the single family lots on Auburn Court would be surrounded by duplex zoning. He sug- gested that some portion of Block 3 might be zoned for duplexes, but not the entire area requested. He also pointed out that a petition had been received from all of the residents on Auburn Court opposing the requested rezoning. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Richard Smith, applicant, said that he did not intend to push the rezoning if the residents of Auburn Court were opposed to it. He asked that only Block 3 be rezoned to R-2 as there was now a strong market for duplex lots and that rezoning only Block 3 would leave Colgate Circle and a row of single family homes as a buffer. Commissioner Gardner asked what the plan was for the development of the rest of the Brentwood property. Mr. Smith said that the original plan for the project, done in 1973, showed single family all the way to the Bypass. He said that, at that time, the market for single • family was very strong and that there was very little demand for duplex lots, and that now the trend had reversed and there was a great demand for duplex lots. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission December 4, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 2 • The public hearing was opened. Mr. Gerrald Miller 2313 Auburn Court spoke in opposition to the request. He presented a petition opposing the rezoning signed by all of the residents on Auburn Court. He said that the residents were opposed to the rezoning of any of the property in question. Mrs. Janet Davidson, 2302 Auburn Court, spoke and also opposed the rezoning of any of the property. She said that she did not think one row of homes was an adequate buffer. Mr. Cliff Young, 2307 Auburn Court, spoke in opposition to the requested rezoning. Mr. Dave Schakel, 2304 Auburn Court, said the the realtor who had sold him his home had told him that the surrounding property would be developed as single fi.amily. He said he did not want this to be changed. Chairmam Maher asked the residents how they would react to some sort of compromise. Mr. Miller said that rezoning only Block 3 to duplex would not leave an adequate buffer. Mr. Smith said that he felt the Commission should give consideration to the people who would live in the proposed duplexes. He added that the potential occupants of duplexes and apartments were never heard at public hearings. Janet Davidson pointed out that the majority of people who live in duplexes do not own them and do not maintain them as an owner would. She also pointed out that most • duplex owners in College Station rent their duplexes to students and often rent each side to four, or more, students. Mr. Joel Craig, 2300 Auburn Court spoke and said that he was opposed to the requested rezoning. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Gardner said that the market should not be the determining factor in the Commission's consideration. He continued that the Brentwood area has been planned as a neighborhood of homes and was shown as such on the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Gardner moved that the Commission recommend denial of the request. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved. Commissioner Bailey warned the residents of the area that they should attend the City Council meeting and make their opinions know again. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4 -- A ublic hearing on rezoning a 2.4 acre tract from District~~R-1 to District R-lA and a 11.50 acre tract from District R-1 to District R-4. Both tracts are located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Tarrow Street. The application is in the name of Building Crafts, Inc. Mr. Mayo showed the Commission a possible alternate plan which the staff had prepared. • It showed a row of duplex zoning in back of the R-lA along Lincoln as well as duplex zoning along Tarrow rather than R-4. He pointed out that this would provide~.a better MINUTES Page 3 Planning and Zoning Commission December 4, 1980 7:00 P.M. • buffer between the single family area to the south of Lincoln and to the west of Tarrow Street. The public hearing was opened. Mr. J.W. Wood, applicant's representative, said that his client had not really had time to consider the alternate proposal, but that they had discussed building duplexes along Tarrow Street. He pointed out that the rear access alleys which had been plan- ned would serve as a sort of buffer. Mr. Caporina of Building Crafts said that he would not object to the row of duplexes behind the R-lA strip. Mr. Wood suggested that two rows of duplex lots along Tarrow might by more suitable to their plan. Ms. Jannete Adams, 609 Lincoln, presented the Commission with a petition in opposition to the requests signed by residents of the neighborhood to the west of Tarrow Street. She went on to say that the opposition to the request was based on eight points; they were: 1. Increased traffic in the area 2. Increased if lux of people at all hours disrupting neighborhood quiet 3. Increase in vandalism and pranks 4. Probable increase in tax rate 5. Possible overload of utility system • 6. Removal of land which could be used for recreational and residential purposes 7. Greater chance of hazards such as fires 8. Infulx of transients leading to neighborhood deterioration Ms. Barbara Boone, 822 Avenue B, said that she was opposed to the rezoning and was representing some residents of the area who were not able to attend the meeting. She said that she was opposed due to the increased load on the utility system in the area and the increased potential for fires. Mr. Collins Humphrey, 818 Avenue B, spoke in opposition 'to the request. He said that the project would mainly house students and that the development would disturb the neighborhood. He suggested that there was adequate vacant property on the University campus for such projects. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bailey pointed out that it was inevitable that Lincoln Street would have increased traffic when it was extended to University Drive as planned. Commissioner Gardner said that he would have to rely on the City Engineer on the question of utility adequacy in the area. He continued that, although it would be no consolation to the residents in the area, this proposal was much more modest than the existing apartment development in the neighborhood. Mr. Mayo explained that it was unlikely that the area between Lincoln Streets Tarrow • and University Drive would be developed as single family due to the large C-1 zoned tract on the corner of University and Tarrow and the extension of Lincoln to Univer- sity Drive. He suggested that much of the area would be developed as medium density residential with some commercial. He said that he felt the proposed project would MINUTES Page 4 Planning and Zoning Commission December 4, 1980 7:00 P.M. • help to buffer the neighborhood west of Tarrow from potential commercial uses to the east of the tracts in question. Commissioner Bailey moved that the Commission recommend that the 2.4 acre tract along Lincoln (TRACT ONE) be rezoned to R-lA. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. Commissioner Bailey moved that that the 11.5 acre tract (TRACT TWO) be rezoned to R-2, one lot deep behind the R-lA lots and R-2 two lots deep along Tarrow Street and that the balance be rezoned to R-4. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioner Hazen voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 5 -- A public hearing on granting a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a convenience shopping center in a Flood Hazard District located on the northeast corner of the East Bypass and Highway 30. Mr. Mayo explained the proposed plan and pointed out the flood zone as projected by the Flood Insurance Agency and the flood zone as projected by the project engin- eer of the proposed development. He also pointed out that the plan included drain- age improvements which would keep the entire structure at least l foot above the flood elevation as required by Ordinance 936. He said that the main question of the Planning and Engineering staff was the location of the gasoline storage tanks and • the possibility of damage to them in a flood situation. City Engineer Ash pointed out that the Commission had received a letter from the project engineer which suggested an amendment to the F.I.A. maps but that getting that amendment made would be a very time consuming process. He said that he had advised the project engineer to assume that the F.I.A.. study was, indeed, correct, and design the project according to the F.I.A. flood elevation. He continued that this is what the engineer had done and that the proposed plan would satisfy the requirements of Ordinance 936. Mr. Ash, in response to a question from Commissioner Gardner, explained how a mis- calculation in the size of the overall drainage area could effect the flood elev- ation on the project site. He said that the drainage basin effecting this project site was one of a tributary of Carter Creek, and not of the main channel of Carter Creek. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Bob Reese, representing the owner of the property, spoke and explained the owner's position on the discrepancy between the F.I.A. study and their engineer's study. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bailey moved that the Use Permit be granted on the condition that the site meets the requirements of Ordinance '936 as determined by the City Engineer. • The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling. Commissioner Bailey asked Mr. Ash at what point the stamp of the professional engin- eer of the project would appear on plans of the project. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission December 4, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 5 • Mr. Ash said that the plans submitted for the building permit would have to bear the engineer's stamp. Commissioner Bailey's motion was approved with Chaiiman Maher and Commissioner Gardner voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6 -- Consideration of a parking lot layout for a convenience shopping center to be located at the intersection of the East Bypass and Highway 30. Mr. Mayo pointed out two suggested changes to the plan: 1. Move curb opening on Highway 30 to allow for the required setback and relocate dumpster as necessary. 2. Relocate access from Bypass frontage road so that curb re =urn will be entirely on property in question. Commissioner Hazen asked about the safety of the underground gasoline storage tanks. Mr. Mayo said that he felt the problem could be taken care of if the tanks were anchored to the ground. Commissioner Behling moved that the plah be approved with the two recommendations of Mr. Mayo. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and failed by the following vote: For: Commissioners Sears, Behling, Bailey • Opposed: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Hazen, Gardner Commissioner Hazen said that she had voted against approval because she was unsure about the safety of the gasoline storage tanks and their location. Mr. Ash explained that the location of the tanks on the site made no difference and that the same problem could be present on any site. He said that he had merely point- ed the question out so that the architect would be aware that some type of anchoring device could be installed on the tanks. Commissioner Bailey moved that the question be reconsidered and that the plan be ap- proved with the two changes recommended by the staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling and approved with Commissioner Gardner and Chairman Maher voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 7 -- Preliminary Plat - The Boardwalk. Mr. Mayo explained that a site plan for a Taco Bell had been approved on Lot 1. He recommended that Lots 28 and 29 be combined so that lot 29 would not have to be granted a curb cut on Texas Avenue. He explained that, because of the creek between the two lots, the only possible access to Lot 29 would be from Texas Avenue, and that this was far to close to the Texas Avenue - Highway 30 intersection to be safely des- igned. He pointed out that access to the remainder of the lots would be from a private access easement running along Highway 30. He noted that the lots between the Taco . Bell site and Highway 30 would be granted two more curb openings to be located as determined by the City Engineer. He said that the only problem remaining with this plan was the timing of the construction of the access drive. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission December 4, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 6 • Mr. Ash presented a drawing showing the locations of existing curb cuts and street intersections on Highway 30 and the proposed improvements to Highway 30. He said that the one of the .two curb cuts for access to Lots 2 thru 28 should be located directly across from the service drive into Culpepper Plaza and the other directly opposite the main entry into Culpepper Plaza from Highway 30. Mr. Richard Smith spoke and said that he would agree to construct the entire access drive before any structures were built on the site. He said that without this drive, the property would have no value. He also suggested that the location of the two curb cuts to the access drive be specified on the plat. Commissioner Hazen moved that the plat be approved with the following conditions: 1. Combine Lots 28 & 29 2. Provide and access easement and drive for the length of the plat from Lot Z thru Lot 28 3. That the location of two curb cuts to the access easment be designated by the City Engineer and specified on the face of the final plat The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioner Gardner voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 8 -- Preliminary Plat - Dragon`s Nest Apartments. Mr. Mayo explained that the property had just been rezoned from C-1 to R-5 and that the project was intended to be developed into four-plexes. He suggested that the access easments be redrawn to be more clear. • Commissioner Bailey moved that the plat be approved with the stipulations that the access easements be redrawn and clarified and that a note be place on the final plat limiting access to the private easements. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM NQ. 9 -- Other business. Chairman Maher asked the Commission for a motion requesting an explanation from City Council regarding their action rezoning the 9.2 acre Paul Wahlberg tract on Southwest Parkway from R-2 to R-5. He pointed out that the Commission had recommended denial of the request and that the Council had first voted to deny the request and had then changed their vote. He said that, while he realized this was the right of the Council, he still felt the Commission was due some explanation of the action. Mr. Mayo said that, since the first studies on the property in question had been done, it had been the position of the planning staff that the 9.2 acres would support R-4 or R-5 zoning and that this was still the position of the staff. He explained that there seemed to be some confusion amoung the City Council members about the effect of R-5 zoning. He said that the density of the proposed project was only about 2 d.u. over the limit for R-4 and that some Councilmen thought that R-5 zoning would dictate that 24 units per acre be built. Commissioner Bailey said that he had attended the Council meeting and that, although he also felt that the R-2 zoning was unsuitable for the 9.2 acres, the R-2 zoning had been applied to cause an overall decrease in the area density. He also noted that, no matter what the land was zoned, the Commission could grantA ~ site plan permit for any density it so desired. He said that he thought these ideas were among the ~. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission December 4, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 7 • Council's considerations on the tract. Following a lengthy discussion on the question at ha~id, the traffic situation on Southwest Parkway, and the density planning for the area, Chairman Maher withdrew his request for a motion to City Council and asked the Commission for their permis- sion to go to the Council as a representative of the P&Z and request some explan- ation of their actions. The Commission expresse no opposition to Chairman Maher's suggestion. In other business, Mr. Mayo said that Commissioner Watson had called and asked that he be excused from this meeting due to a family emergence. AGENDA ITEM N0. 9 -- Adjourn. Commissioner Behling moved that the meeting be adjourned. The moiton was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. • APPROVED ~ P ,cue.. Chairman Attest Secretary • • City of College Station Planning and Zoning Commission 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas November 29, 1980 Dear Sirs, ~~ We, the undersigned of Auburn Court in College Station are firmly against the proposed rezoning of Blocks 2 and 3 of the Brentwood Section 5 Addition. There are numerous reasons for our position. The major points are: 1) The proposed rezoning would completely encircle the present R-1 land on Auburn Court with duplexes. As Auburn Court contains only one block of single family dwellings, this encirclement could result in significant devaluation of our property. 2) As of now, Auburn Court is the beginning of a large strip of R-1 land extending east towards the east bypass. A rezoning of the Brentwood Addition behind Auburn Court would create alternate strips of R-1 and R-2 zones which are only one block wide! Such indiscriminate zoning only serves to lower property values and make a mockery of the concept of zoning. 3) Most of the property owners on Auburn Court purchases their homes from Brentwood, Inc. with the understanding ,and in some cases promises,that the remainder of the Brentwood property would be developed as single family dwellings. With the request by Brentwood, Inc. for rezoning of this land, we feel betrayed. We feel that the present ,zoning will allow for a beautiful section of College Station to be developed into a quiet residential community of single family dwellings,,, something that the eastern section of this area desperatly needs. Such homes would be residences for local citizens who can live and work in the community; People who can takes pri a ~n their homes; People who can make this area something for the city to be proud of. I need not remind the Commission that many duplexes are not owned by local people and the property often suffers much neglect. We ask the Planning and Zoning Commission to maintai zoning in Brentwood and allow this area to develop into a residential area. Please deny the application to rezone. W ~ ~~ ~I ~ C ~' ~~ a~~ ,~~_~ i. n the present ~j-~ decent ~~~- ~~ 'l ~~G~".'"c.~ ' ter; 4~ ~~,~~~ : a J i o _ ll ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ G' ~s, ~,.~ - r