Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/16/1980 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting • October 16, 1980 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Bailey, Gardner, Behling, Hazen, Sears, Watson; City Council Liaison Runells. MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Mayo, Zoning Official Callaway, Planning Assistant Longley AGENDA ITEM N0. 1 -- Approval of minutes, meeting of October 2, 1980. Commissioner Sears pointed out that on Page 4, Item No. 7, he was shown as both making and seconding a motion. He said that Commissioner Behling had made the second. Commissioner Hazen said that her statement in Item No. 12 should read, "... the property being platted into two lots." Commissioner Hazen moved that the minutes be approved as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioners • Bailey and Watson abstaining. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2 -- Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 -- A public hearing on the question of rezoning three tracts out of a 8.9 acre tract located between Universit Drive and Munson Street as follows: TRACT ONE: 1.5 acres from R-1 to C-1 TRACT TWO: 2.8 acres from R-1 to A-P TRACT THREE: 4.6 acres from R-1 to R-4 The application being in the name of Building Crafts, Inc. Mr. Mayo reviewed the original rezoning request and then advised that a revised re- quest had been submitted by the applicant on the day of the meeting. He showed the Commission the revised request and preliminary plat which showed half of the land from University Drive to the south zoned C-1 and the remainder zoned R-6. Mr. Mayo then detailed an alternative plan for land use and transportation in the entire area generally bounded by Tarrow Street, the northern city limits, the East Bypass, Lincoln Avenue and University Drive. This plan showed the tract in question divided generally into thirds and zoned as follows: Administrative/Professional along University Drive, Townhouses in the middle section, and Single Family as abuffer to the existing houses in the Munson-Lincoln street area. • The public hearing was opened. Mr. J.W. Wood, agent for Building Crafts, Inc. explained that the C-1 land was intended MINUTES Page 2 Planning and Zoning Commission October 16, 1980 7:00 P.M. • for subdivision into small lots for ownership by individual small businessmen. He said that the only access to the commercial lots would be from the cul-de-sac and that, while no certain uses were known at this time, uses would be limited to low traffic generators. He added that their plan called for low to medium density apartments on the back portion of the property. Mrs. Phyllis Hobson said that she was Trustee for the 13 acre tract to the east of the tract in question. She asked that any rezoning or future planning in this area give consideration for access to her tract. Mr. W.D. Fitch. stated that, no matter what zoning was granted to the property, Lincoln Street should be extended to University Drive as shown in the staff's rec- ommendations. Mr. .Jeff Brown appeared representing Mr. and Mrs. A.G. Kemler, 901 Munson. He presented a petition opposing the rezoning which had been signed by 79 residents of the Sweetbriar Addition area. Chairman Maher read the petition to the Commission. The petition opposed the proposed R-4 zoning. Mrs. Joan Aberth, Munson Avenue, spoke in opposition to the request. She asked that some assurance be given that Munson Street would never extend to University Drive. • Mr. Stanley Kratchman, 1105 Merry Oaks, spoke in opposition to the request. He suggested that an A-P zone along University Drive might make some sense, but not C-1. He said that he was opposed to any apartment zoning. Dr. Susan Wilson, 906 Munson, stated that she was opposed to the rezoning. Mr. John Crompton, corner of Rose Circle and Munson, spoke in opposition. Mr. Bill McGuire, 1204 Munson, said that he was opposed to the rezoning. Mr. George McIlhaney, 1028 Rose Circle, spoke in opposition to the rezoning. Mr. Wood said that he felt the proposal made by Mr. Mayo was one that his clients could work with and he asked that a revised zoning be approved. Chairman Maher ruled that action had to be taken on the request as submitted but that the Commission could give Mr. Wood an indication of what type of zoning pattern would be acceptable. Commissioner Watson suggested .that Mr. Wood withdraw the request and work with the City staff on an acceptable compromise. Mr. Wood stated that he would be willing to withdraw the application. Mr. Mayo suggested that the public hearing not be closed but be continued at some • time after Mr. Wood had had an opportunity to meet with the area residents. MINUTES Page 3 Planning and Zoning Commission October 16, 1980 7:00 P.M. • Mrs. Mary Anger, 1200 Munson, asked that ample notice be given of any further action on the rezoning. Mr. Mayo explained that there was no possibility of Munson ever extending to University Drive due to the fact that the Dartmouth - Highway 30 - Munson inter- section had been offset. He said that this offset would create severe problems if traffic on Muson were to greatly increase. Commissioner Behling moved that the item be tabled and added the following conditions: 1. That standard media publicity be given to the reconsideration of the request 2. That the residents be renotified by mail. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bailey and passed by the following vote: For: Commissioners Bailey, Behling, Sears, Watson Opposed: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Hazen, Gardner AGENDA ITEM N0. 4 -- A preliminary plat - University Hills located between University Drive and the north end of Munson Avenue. Commissioner Watson moved that the item be tabled since this was the same tract involved in item No. 3. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bailey and approved with Chairman Maher • and Commissioner Hazen voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 5 -- Revision to a site plan permit for an apartment project to be located on the northeast corner of University Oaks and Munson. r1r. Mayo pointed out that this was a revision to an approved plan. He advised that the changes were necessary because of lender's requirements in regards to building setback from the Lone Star Gas pipeline easement. He pointed out the following recommendations of the P.R.C.: 1. Relocate dumpster to be directly in line with main drive. 2. Driving lanes should be designated as fire lanes. 3. Have fire hydrant locations approved by Fire Marshall. 4. Rectify repetition of project name (Timber Ridge). Chairman Maher said that the P.R.C. had. made it clear to the developer that if overflow parking began to get into the street due to improper location of parking spaces, the streets would have to be signed for no parking. Commissioner Watson moved that the plan be approved with the four stipulations outlined by the staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling and approved with Commissioner Hazen abstaining. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6 -- Parking Plan for Eastgate Square Shopping Center. • Mr. Mayo explained the proposed uses of the buildings on the plan. He advisied that changes had been made according to the P.R.C. deliberations. Commissioner Gardner asked if any change would be necessary to take care of the bus traffic. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission October 16, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 4 Mr. Mayo said that there was adequate room for the buses to continue their • present operation. Commissioner Watson moved that the plan be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 7 -- Final plat - Raintree Phase 4. Mr. Mayo explained that the reserved piece of land on the east end of the plat was for access to the open area behind the subdivision. He also pointed out that the unplatted area between Ehase 3 and Phase 4 was left unplatted because of the number of utility easements running through it (Gulf States, Exxon, Lone Star). Commissioner Gardner pointed out that the majority of the lots on the east end of the subdivision were involved in the flood plain. He questioned the advisability of platting these lots in this manner. Mr. Gardner asked how the location of the flood plain on the plat had been arrived at. Mr. Jerry Bishop, project engineer, advised that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data had been used. He added that the property in question dropped off very sharp- ly to the creek and that it should be obviouse to anyone considering purchase of the lots that there would be flood plain involvement. He also pointed out that the flood plain was deliniated on the face of the plat. Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved. • The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling and approved with Commissioner Gardner voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 8 -- Final plat - Resubdivsion Reserve Tract A; Parkwa Plaza Section 8. Commissioner Sears excused himself from the Commission table. Mr. Mayo explained the proposed plat and four-plex project. He noted that an apart- ment project had been approved on this site but that the developers now wished to build four-plexes on individual lots. He added that Village Drive would have to be changed to Barthelow Drive. Commissioner Gardner asked what the density of the project would be. Mr. Larry Wells, Bishop and Associates, said that the density would be 20.38 d.u. per acre while the apartment project which had been approved for the site was around 24.2 units per acre. Commissioner Gardner objected to the use of private access drives. He suggested that the burden of maintenance might be better placed on the City. Mr. Mayo pointed out that, if the access ways were public streets, the parking plan for the project would not work because direct access parking would not be allowed. • He explained that the project would function like an apartment project. Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission October 16, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 5 • The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bailey and failed by the following vote: Voting for: Commissioners Watson, Behling, Bailey Voting Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Hazen, Gardner Abstaining: Commissioner Sears Mr. Mayo pointed out that the staff had worked with the developers on this pro- ject and had advised them to follow this method of development. He also advised that the same arrangement had been used several times in the past with no objection. He asked for some guidance from the Commission. Commissioner Hazen suggested that problems could be caused by having 43 different owners, each being responsible for maintenance of the drives. Mr. Mayo pointed out that this was the same situation that exists in any town- house or condominium project. Maintenance would be controled by a property or homeowner's association. Mr. Jerry Bishop, project engineer, pointed out that the lenders for the proposed project were very strict on the requriement for maintenance of the access drives. He also pointed out that maintenance would be much easier with the money generated by fortythree owners than by one owner. Commissioner Watson asked Commissioner Gardner to explain what the advantages would be of direct access to a public street. • Commissioner Gardenr said that certain services and conveniences were available to properties on public streets that were not available to those on private access- es, and that there was no question of responsibility fdr~~~aintenance. Commissioner Behling said that the proposed plan was a good way to limit curb cuts and that it was his opinion that this was the type of development that the Com- mission had been promoting. Following continued discussion., Chairman Maher directed that the next agenda item be considered. AGENDA ITEM N0. 9 -- Final plat - Garden Square. Mr. Mayo advised that the only changes needed on the plat would be the inclusion of utility easements as required by the Director of Public Services. Mr. Cruse, developer, told the Commission that Mr. Ford had required only a 15 foot utility easement on the north end of the property and that the plat had been correct- ed to show the easement. Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. i0 -- Final plat - Southwood Valley Section 22A. • Mr. Mayo said that the final plat was identical to the preliminary. MINUTES Page 6 Planning and Zoning Commission October 16, 1980 7:00 P.M. • Commissioner Gardner moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioner Behling abstaining. AGENDA ITEM N0. 11 -- Final plat - Southwood Valley Section 22B. Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bailey and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 12 -- Consideration of number of parking spaces required for a motorcycle dealership. Mr. Mayo advised that a motorcycle dealership intended to move into the old Adams Transfer building on Foster at Lincoln. He said that the Commission would have to set a requirement for parking since the Zoning Ordinance did not specify one. He said that other ordinances from cities around Texas required an average of one space per 500 square feet. He advised that this requirement should be adequate. Commissioner Bailey moved that the parking requirement for a motorcycle dealer- ship be set at one space per 500 square feet. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Spars and approved with Commissioner • Watson abstaining. AGENDA ITEM N0. 13 -- Other business. The Commission set a workshop session to discuss Plan - 2000 for Thursday, October 30 at 4:00 P.M. Mr. Mayo and the Commission held a discussion on the suitability and legality of development of residential lots on private access easments versus public streets. The Commission decided to have the City Attorney look into the question and advise them of the legalities of the situation. AGENDA ITEM N0. 14 -- Adjourn. Commissioner Bailey moved that the meeting be adjourned. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. APPROVED C~,~,,, Chairman . Attest Secretary i• 2,~s ;, T] T T T T T lll~l TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS We, the undersigned, property owners and citizens of College Station, Texas do hereby express our opposition to the application requesting rezoning of an 8.9 acre tract presently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential District. More specifically we would request that the 4.6 acre tract requested for an R-4, Apartment Building District (Low :7 Density) designation remain R-l, in order to protect the value of our property as a residential neighborhood. 1. 31, 2. ~ 32 3 33. 4. 34. 5. ~ 35 6 7 8 9 0. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 l 2 3 4 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. ~0. 30.1 ,. • 11~TTTT/~AT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS We, the undersigned, property owners and citizens of College Station, Texas do hereby express our opposition to the application requesting rezoning of an 8.9 acre tract presently zoned R-l, Single Family Residential District. More specifically we would request that the 4.6 acre tract requested for an R-4, Apartment Building District (Low Density) designation remain R-1, in order to protect the • value of our property as a residential neighborhood. • • 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 57. 58. 59. 60. 27. 28. 29. 30 .