Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/02/1980 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING . October 2, 1980 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chariman Maher; Commissioners Gardner, Hazen, Sears, Behling; City Council Liaison Runnels MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Bailey, Watson STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Mayo, City Engineer Ash, Zoning Official Callaway, Planning Assistant Longley AGENDA ITEM N0. 1 -- Approval of minutes, meeting of September 18, 1980. Commissioner Behling moved that the minutes be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and approved with Commissioner Sears abstaining. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2 -- Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 -- A public hearing on the question of granting a Conditional Use Permit to the College Station Independent School District for the construction • of a maintenance, warehouse facility of Welch Avenue. Mr. Mayo explained the proposed facility and suggested that the Commission might consider requiring a screening fence around the property. He pointed out that the property to the west and south of the facility was zoned for residential uses and would probably be developed as such. The public hearing was opened.' Mr. W.D. Fitch representing the School Board, said that the property between the tract in question and Welch Avenue was commercially zoned and would be developed that way so a screen fence would not be need along that property line. He suggest- ed that a chain-link fence with wide wood slats would be adequate for screening the balance of the tract. He said that a chain-link fence could be reused when the site was expanded as shown on the plan. He added that solid wood fences soon become a maintenance problem. Mr. Don Ney explained that the school planned to install a chains-link fence with barbed wire along the top.. He said that only a portion of the site would be used at this time and that when the site was expanded the fence would have to be re- located. Mr. Edsel Jones stated that he was concerned about the need for a screen fence because his land, which adjoins the subject tract was zoned residential and he in- tended to develop it that way. He also questioned the school's use of Christine • Lane for access to the site. He said that the right-of-way fro Christine Lane hit Welch Street at the point where the school was taking access to the property. `\~~~ MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission October 2, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 2 Mr. Jones said that he was concerned that this use by the school would effect his • access to Christine Lane. Mr. Mayo pointed out that this section of Christine Lane had not been used by the public for many years and that most people were not even aware of its existance. Mr. Jones said that the road had been cut off by a drainage ditch but that the right-of-way remained and that it was still a main access point to his land. Mr. Ney stated that the school's deed and title policy stated that they owned all of the land including the area designated as Christine Lane and that none of the School's surveys and descriptions showed this area as a "public road". Mr. Mayo pointed out that the property line for the proposed project did not include any of the right-of-way in question and that no action of the Commission on the site plan could have an effect on the access to Mr. Jone's property. Mr. Jones said that his only concern was that nothing be done to preclude the im- provement and extension of Christine Lane into his property. Councilman Runnels suggested that the proper course of action would be to have the City Attorney research the issue and determine the status of Christine Lane. Commissioner Behling asked Mr. Ash how the City's curb cut policy would apply to this project. • Mr. Ash said that as long as the access to the site was a private drive there would be no problem and that if it was determined that Christine Lane was a public street at this point, two curb cuts would be granted to the school tract. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Behling moved that the Use Permit be granted with the inclusion of a solid screening fence. Commissioner Sears suggested that a solid screen fence would provide no security or protection for the facility. Mr. Mayo pointed out that the Ordinance does not require any kind of screen fence in the situation under discussion. Commissioner Behling amended his .motion to state that the permit be granted with the inclusion of a screening fence. He suggested that a chain-link fence with wood slats would be adequate. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved. Commissioner Behling asked that the question of Christine Lane be persued by the parties involved and that the questions be answered. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4 -- A public hearing on the question of rezoning a 0.90 acre tract • located at the intersection of University Drive and Forest Drive from C-N to A-P the application being in the name of J.W. Wood and Associates. Mr. Mayo explained the request and said that the A-P zoning would allow Mr. Wood MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission October 2, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 3 to build the office building which he was proposing. He explained that the build- . in was some 800 square feet to large to go into the C-N zone. The public hearing was opened. Mr'. J.W. Wood spoke to answer questions from the Commission. Commissioner Sears stated that he felt this plan was a~~~more appropriate use for the land than C-N uses. Chairman Maher asked if an effort would be made to save as many of the trees on the site as possible. Mr. Wood said that he was going to maintain a 25 foot building setback and that the site was covered with trees. He said that as many trees as possible would be pro- tected. He also pointed out that the area in front of the site on University Drive was highway right-of-way so the trees could not be removed. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Behling moved that the Commission recommend approval of the rezoning. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0 5 -- Consideration-of a--parking-p-lan for an office building to be lcoated at the intersection of University Drive and Forest Drive. • Mr. Mayo pointed out that the plan had been revised as per P.R.C. recommendations and that additional parking had been added to acommodate employee parking. He rec- ommended approval of the plan. Mr. Ash asked that the Commission require that final plans for water and sewer ser- vice to the project be cleared by the City Engineering Department before final ap- proval was given. Commissioner Gardner moved that the plan be approved subject to the conditions stated by the City staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6 -- A public hearing on the question of rezoning a 0.79 acre tract located near the intersection of Airline Drive and Hillside Drive from C-1 to R-5. The application being in the name of Area Progress Corporation. Mr. Mayo explained that this rezoning was being done due to the realignment of a street in a future phase of Southwood Valley which had been recommended by the previous Commission. He recommended the rezoning for approval. The public hearing was opened. Mr. W.D. Fitch spoke in favor of the request. • The public hearing was closed. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 4 • Commissioner Behling moved that the Commission recommend approval of the rezoning. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 7 -- Consideration of a parking plan for Taco Rio, 509 University. Mr. Mayo made the following recommendations for the proposed plan: 1. Close the curb cut on University Drive nearest Stasney Street. 2. Close the curb cut on the alley on the west side of the site. He explained that the owners intended to sell tacos from the exisitng gas station and continue to operate the gas pumps in front. Commissioner Gardner asked if some of the area to be used for parking in back of the building was now covered with some junk cars. Mr. Mayo said that it was. Mr. Mayo asked that a determination be made of what curb material would be used. Mr. Cully Lipsey, owner's representative, said that the alley in the rear was platted but not used. He proposed to pave this alley and make use of it for access. He pointed out that a portion of Stasney Street was curbed and that there was curb as shown on University Drive. He continued that the portion along the alley was not curbed and • proposed that it be curbed in the process of construction. He requested that they be allowed access from the alley on the west side. He also suggested that closing the curb cut on University Drive would somewhat hamper the traffic flow to the gas pumps. Commissioner Behling suggested that it might be better to allow the curb cut on University Drive. He suggested that the final determination could be left up to the City Engineer. Mr. Lipsey said that he would rather have the curb cut on University Drive closed than the one on the alley. Commissioner Sears moved that the plan be approved with the recommendations of the City staff and with designation of raised curbs as shown on the plan. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 8 -- Consideration of a final plat - Northpark. Mr. Mayo advised that the final plat was identical to the preliminary and recom- mended approval. Commissioner Gardner moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. • MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission October 2, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 5 • AGENDA ITEM N0. 9 -- Consideration of a final plat - Froehling Addition. Mr. Mayo pointed out that the right-of-way of the road-was still 60 rather than 70 feet as required by the Subdivision Ordinance, and that the lots on th cul-de- sac were still less than 100 feet of frontage as required. He added that the preliminary had been approved with those changes by the Commission and the Council. Commissioner Gardner asked why 100 feet of frontage was required. Mr. Mayo replied that, if the urban-rural section street was to be allowed, density was to be held rather low. He also noted that the lots were very large and that the Commission could grant a variance to the 100 foot frontage if they so desired. He suggested that a variance be granted to allow the 50 foot lots but that the 70 foot right-of-way be requried. Mr. Don Garrett, project engineer, pointed out that the cul-de-sac was located at the end of an existing county road that was only a 50 foot right-of-way so that the developer had already dedicated an additional 10-feet of right-of-way. Mr. Mayo said that, in the case of future annexation of the area, some county roads would have to become major arterial - city streets and narrow rights-of-way would necessitate the purchase of additional right-of-way for the upgrading of these streets. He noted, however, that it was not likely that the street in question would ever have to be made a major city street. • City Engineer Ash asked that utility easements be included on all of the property lines, including the borders of the subdivision. Commissioner Sears moved that the plat be approved with the requirement of utility easements along all property lines as per the requirements of the City Engineer and that a 60 foot right-of-way and lot frontages of less than 100 feet be allowed. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling and approved with Chairman Maher and Commissioner Garnder voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 10 -- Consideration of a final plat - Resubdivi~ion of Lot 35, Block 16; Southwood Valley Section 3. Mr. Mayo pointed out that the access easement still needed to be entirely on the property being subdivided. Mr. Don Garrett, project engineer, said that this change had already been made. Commissioner Behling moved that the plat be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 11 -- Consideration of a final plat - Welch Place. Mr. Mayo pointed out that the property had now been platted all the way to Holleman • Drive, but that the property owner of the strip of land to the south had not agreed to enter into the plat. He recommended approval of the plat as shown. MINUTES Page 6 Planning and Zoning Commission October 2, 1980 7:00 P.M. Commissioner Gardner moved that the plat be approved. • The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved. AGENDA ITEM NO 12 -- Consideration of a final plat - Resubdivision of Lots 1 and 2, Block F; College Heights. Mr. Mayo advised that the final plat was identical to the preliminary and recommended approval. Mr. Ash asked that approval be made conditional on his approval of access:dr.ainage and utility easements. Commissioner Hazen pointed out that the property be platted into two lots could require the city to grant an additional curb cut on University Drive. Mr. Mayo pointed out that curb cut location had already been determined by the ap- proval of the site plan for the project. Mr. Ash pointed out that the property would be entitled 'to a curb cut at that lo- cation anyway. Commissioner Behling moved that the plat be approved with the condition that the City Engineer approve all easement locations. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approoved. • AGENDA ITEM N0. 13 -- Discussion of proposed ordinance amending certain commercial sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Mayo outlined the proposed ordinance, the permitted uses to be left in the C-1 zone and the proposed permitted uses in the C-3, high traffic generator zone. He went over some traffic trip generation figures which had been used in placing various land uses into one of the two zones. He pointed out that traffic generation was only one of the considerations for classifying the uses; the type of use and its impact on the surrounding area also had to be considered. He said that the pro- posed ordinance would give the City more flexibility in considering commercial re- zoning requests. He pointed out that, at this time, commercial rezoning was an "all or nothing" proposition while the proposed ordinance would allow the City to grant commercial zoning for uses of lesser impact without the fear of a higher impact use ending up on the site. The Commission discussed the proposed ordinance at length and determined to hold a public hearing .and further discussion on the ordinance at the first Commission meeting in November. AGENDA ITEM N0. 14 -- Consideration of proper~~zoning classification for a funeral home. Mr. Mayo told the Commission that a study of zoning ordinances from other Texas cities indicated that those cities listing a funeral home as a permitted use allowed • them in a C-1 type zone. He recommended that College Station follow a like proceed- ure. And suggested that they might even be placed in the proposed C-3 zone due to their high traffic potential. MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission October 2, 1980 7:00 P.M. Page 7 • Commissioner Behling suggested that funeral homes might be allowed in residential zones with a use. permit. He pointed-out that some older, large homes might be desirable for this use. Commissioner Behling moved that funeral homes be allowed in the C-1 zone. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioner Gardner voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 15 -- Other business. Commissioner Hazen asked if some consideration was to be given to street contruction standards in the E.T.J. She said that she was speaking in relation to the Froehling Addition plat. She suggested that a special standard might be set for cul-de-sacs. Mr. Mayo said that what need to be done was planning to determine locations of major arterial streets in the E.T.J. so that adequate right-of-way can be obtained. Commissioner Behling suggested that a Plan - 2000 workshop session be scheduled. The Commission decided to hold the workshop session on Wednesday, October 15, 1980 at 3:00 P.M. AGENDA ITEM N0. 16 -- Adiourn. Commissioner Sears moved that the meeting be adjourned. • The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling and unanimously approved. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Attest Secretary • APPROVED n ~ ,cam.. Chairman