HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/05/1981 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES
City of College Station, Texas
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
• February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman .Maher; Commissioners Behling, Livingston, Gardner,
Hazen, Sears, Watson; City Council Liaison Ringer.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Zoning Official Callaway, City Engineer Ash, Planning Assistant
Longley.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 1 -- Approval. of minutes - Meeting of January 15, 1981.
Commissioner Gardner moved that the minutes be approved.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 2 -- Hear visitors.
No one spoke.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 -- A public hearing on the question of rezoning six tracts of land
• all located between University Drive, Dominik Drive and the East Bypass as follows:
TRACT A: 15.729 acres from District R-1 to District C-1.
TRACT B: 10.260 acres from District R-1 to District R-5.
TRACT C: 6.871 acres from District R-1 to District R-2.
TRACT D: 5.980 acres from District R-1 to District A-P.
TRACT E: 4.749 acres from District R-1 to District R-3.
TRACT F: 4.585 acres from District R-1 to District R-lA.
The application is in the name of Brazosland Properties.
Mr. Callaway explained the requested changes and referred to Mr. Mayo's memo which
recommended approval of the rezoning.
Commissioner Gardner asked if traffic flow through the area had been discussed by
the developers as one of the main considerations in the question.
Mr. Callaway said that traffic flow had been considered,and that the Comprehensive
Plan now showed a connection of Francis Drive to University Drive.
Commissioner Gardner pointed out that the Plan also showed the area as mostly low
density residential.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. Steve Ardan of Brazosland Properties spoke and explained that the project would
be a five to 6 year development, with the C-1 portion being the last phase of the
• plan to be built. He said that the developers. plan to build the residential areas
first in order to build support population for the commercial tract. He explained
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 2
that the plan showed Francis Drive connecting with the proposed Glenhaven Drive in
• a "T" intersection in order to cut down. traffic on Francis through the project.
Mr. Ardan then explained the location of the proposed park and the potential
property to be purchased by the city. He said that the park was located so as to
cause the least possible disturbance to the existing neighborhood.
Chairman Maher asked why .the C-1 tract must be so zoned now if it were not to be
developed for five .years.
Mr. Ardan said that the zoning was needed now in order to make the entire project
economically feasible.
Chairman Maher asked where the access to the commercial tract would be from.
Mr. Ardan said that the main access would be from the Bypass and University Drive
with minor access from Glenhaven Drive near University Drive.
Commissioner Livingston asked if Mr. Ardan had given consideration to any of the
other street alignment plans for Francis Drive-.which had been proposed by area
residents.
Mr. Ardan said that these plans had been considered, but that the proposed plan
most closely went along with the layout shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Gardner asked Mr. Ardan if the plan would not be a deviation from the
Land Use Plan in the Comprehensive Plan.
• Mr. Ardan agreed that it would be a deviation.
Chairman Maher asked Mr. Ash if there would be any access or safety problems caused
by the R-5 or C-1 areas.
Mr. Ash said that adequate access and circulation was possible for these two tracts
either from the Bypass or University Drive.
Mr. John Painter, 1119 Merry Oaks, read a statement into the record. The statement
said that, if the entire area were to be zoned for low density residential use, the
proposed street layout would be acceptable. If, however, the C-1 and R-S tracts were
included, the street plan would have to be modified. He suggested that Francis Drive
should not be allowed to become a shortcut to a commercial area.
Commissioner Gardner asked Mr. Painter if the residents had considered the location
of the proposed park.
Mr. Painter said that the residents considered this to be a good location for the park
because the distance of it from them would reduce the parks nuisance value.
Mr. Steven Miller, 1201 Francis, said that he was opposed to any connection of Francis
to University Drive. He said that most of the residents of the area never went any-
where but the University, so access to the Bypass and University Drive was not impor-
tant to them.
• Commissioner Hazen said that she had been in favor of the connection of Francis to
the proposed Glenhaven Drive because children in the proposed development would be
MINUTES Page 3
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
• attending College Hi11s School and the connection of Francis to Glenhave~ would allow
them access to the school.
Dr. Schoenvogel, Forest Drive, objected to the density of the proposed R-5 and R-2
areas. He also suggested that the R-lA area would allow only small inexpensive
houses.
Mr. Gallaso agreed with the previous speakers that there was no need for a~•.con-
nection of Francis and University.
Chairman Maher asked.. Mr. Ardan if he would consider leaving the C-1 tract zoned R-1
for the present time.
Mr. Ardan said no.
Ms. Dianna Kratchman, Merry Oaks, said that no decision had been made by the Parks
and Recreation Committee on the location of the park and that consideration of the
rezoning should be delayed until the park location was resolved.
Mr. Raymond Reiser, Post Oak Drive, asked Mr. Ardan if the R-lA lots could be made
deeper.
Mr. Ardan said that the units built on the R-lA lots would be very similar to the
units in Post Oak Forest, but that the owners would own the entire lot. He pointed
out that the lots in the R-lA zone were nearly as deep as the lots in Post Oak
Forest.
• The public hearing was closed.
The Commission. discussed various methods of realigning Francis Drive through the
project so as to lessen the impact on the adjacent existing area. The Commission
determined that some alignment of Francis which required additional 90° turns to
get to Glenhaven Drive would be desirable. They also suggested that Carol Street
be cul-de-saced in the proposed project with pedestrian access maintained between
the proposed street and the existing Carol Street.
Commissioner Gardner said that he felt the impact of traffic on the existing area
would just be too great and that the area should be left low density residential
with an attempt made to get a neighborhood park.
Chairman Maher said that the staff had pointed out several times the abundance of
undeveloped C-1 property and that he could not support a request for more. He
suggested that the Commission should not be so concerned about the C-1 zoning
making a given project economically feasible. He pointed out that the developer
could offer no proposed uses for the C-1 area and that there was no need for add-
itional vacant C-1 land.
Commissioner Behling pointed out that the specific use of the C-l tract should not
come into consideration. He said that zoning-the land C-1 now would allow the future
residents of the area to know what the possible uses of the land were rather than
being surprised by a commercial rezoning request in the future.
• Commissioner Gardner moved that the Commission recommend denial of the rezoning
request on all tracts involved.
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 4
• The•moiton was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and failed by the following vote:
For. Chairman Maher, Commissioners Gardner, Hazen
Against: Commissioners Livingston, Watson, Sears, Behling
Commissioner Behling moved that the Commission recommend approval of the requested
changes with the stipulation that the alignment of the streets be changed to lessen
the traffic impact on the adjacent neighborhood.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Watson and failed by the following vote:
For: Commissioners Watson, Behling, Sears
Against: Chairman Maher.; Commissioners Livingston, Gardner, Hazen.
Commissioner Livingston said that his ''no" vote had been based on his concern that
the density and traffic impact caused by the R-5 tract would be too severe.
Commissioner Behling moved that the Commission recommend approval of the requested
rezoning of all tracts except the R-5 tract, TRACT B, and that TRACT B be recommended
for denial.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Livingston and was approved by the following
vote:
For: Commissioners Behling, Livingston, Sears, Watson
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Gardner, Hazen
• Commissioner Behling said that he agreed that the R-5 property should be a lower
density.
AGENDA ITEM. NO. 4 -- Consideration of a revised rezoning request from Mr. J.W. Wood,
Trustee, for the rezoning of portions of a 124.53 acre tract located north of
University Drive and east of Tarrow Street and Fed-Mart Drive from District R-1
to Districts C-1, A-P, R-3, R-4 and R-5.
Mr. Callaway explained the revised proposal, pointing out the variations from the
first request.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. J.W. Wood, applicant, went over the concept of the proposed development. He re-
viewed the existing land in the area of the city which was now zoned commercial or
for apartments. He pointed out that almost all of the commercial or apartment land
in this area of the city was developed. He said that the proximity of the site to the
University made it desirable for higher density housing and its proximity to the East
Bypass and. University Drive and the developing industrial area made it desirable for
commercial development. He explained that the area shown for a park was in the flood
plain but that it was flat and could be used for playfields. He said that the Parks
Committee had indicated that it favored this location.
Mr. Dan Perkins, Post Oak Forest, spoke in opposition to the request. He suggested
• that the plan included too much commercial and high density residential land. He
asked that all developments of this type require an impact statement.
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 5
• Mr. Warren Kilpatrick, Post Oak Drive, spoke in opposition to the request.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Behling moved that the item be removed from the table.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved.
Commissioner Gardner pointed out that, to be in compliance with the Comprehensive
Plan, the highest density that could be allowed in the development would be duplexes.
He also suggested that the size of the C-1 tract could be reduced.
Commissioner Hazen said that it was her opinion that the C-1 tract was too large
and that the overall density created by the R-4 and R-5 zoning would be too high.
Commissioner Livingston said that the C-1 tract did not concern him as much as the
R-4 and R-5 tracts along University Drive and Tarrow Street.
Commissioner Hazen moved that the Commission recommend denial of the requested re-
zoning.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gardner and passed by the following vote:
For: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Gardner, Hazen, Livingston
Against: Commissioners Watson, Sears, Behling
• Mr. Wood asked if the Commission would consider voting on each of the seven tracts
involved.
Chairman Maher ruled that the Commission would take a formal vote of recommendation
on each of the seven tracts. The Commission voted as follows:
22.880 Acre C-1 tract: Commissioner Livingston moved that approval be recommended.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Watson and approved by the follwing vote:
For: Commissioners Livingston, Watson, Sears ,. .Behling
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Gardner, Hazen
11.895 Acre R-5 tract on Tarrow Street: Commissioner Hazen moved that denial be
recommended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gardner and approved by the
following vote:
For: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Hazen, Gardner,. Livingston, Sears
Against: Commissioners Watson, Behling
6.631 Acre R-4 tract on Tarrow Street: Commissioner Hazen moved that denial be
recommended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gardner and approved by the
following vote:
For: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Gardner, Hazen, Livingston, __~,.~.-_-
Against: Commissioners Watson, Sears, Behling
55.102 Acre R-5 tract: Commissioner Livingston moved that approval be recommended.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and approved by the following vote:
• For: Commissioners Watson, Hazen, Livingston, Sears, Behling
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioner Gardner
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 6
8.332 Acre A-P tract: Commissioner Watson moved that approval be recommended.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved by the following vote:
For: Commissioners Hazen, Sears, Watson, Livingston, Behling
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioner Gardner
11.013 Acre R-5 tract on University Dr: Commissioner Hazen moved that denial be
recommended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Livingston and approved with
Commissioner Behling voting against.
8.687 Acre R-3 tract on University Dr: Commissioner Hazen moved that denial be
recommended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gardner and failed by the
following vote:
For: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Hazen, Gardner
Against: Commissioners Sears, Watson, Behling., Livingston
Commissioner Waason moved that this R-3 tract be recommended for approval.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved by the following vote:
Far: Commissioners Sears, Watson, Livingston, Behling
Against: Chairman Maher; Commissioners Gardner, Hazen
AGENDA ITEM N0. 5 Consideration of a preliminary plat - Glenhaven Estates.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be tabled so that an alternate alignment
of the streets could be worked out.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved.
The Commission held a lenghty discussion with Mr. Ardan concerning the possible
alternate alignment of the streets. _-
AGENDA ITEM N0. 6 -- Consideration of a preliminary plat - K.F.O. Phase 3.
Mr. Callaway pointed out that. the developer had supplied three copies of a revised
plat which took care of the density problems which Mr. Mayo had,l.outlined in his
memo. He also advised that an additional 10 foot utility easement would be needed
along the adjacent property line and that the developer had agreed to this.
Commissioner Gardner suggested that, due to the distance between Crest Street and
Cornell, an additional "stub" street might be included to the property to the south.
Mr. Charles Johnson, applicant, pointed out that Crest Street and Cornell Street
already extended to the property to the south and that he had given up two lots in
order to meet density requirements.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved with the provision that necessary
utility easements be added as recommended by the staff.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioners Gardner
and Hazen voting against.
•
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February :.. 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 7
• AGENDA ITEM N0. 7 -- Consideration of a preliminar plat - Resubdivision of Lot 18,
Block 10; Southwood Section 26.
Mr. Callaway advised that the Utility Department had requested that the 20 foot
utility easement along Valley View be increased to 25 feet.
Commissioner Gardner asked if access would be maintained to the park from the
proposed Longmire Court.
Mr. Jerry Bishop, project engineer, said that they proposed to include a pedestriafi
bridge to the park. He also advised the Commission that the overall density on the
project would be about 16 units per acre.
Commissioner Watson. moved that the plat be approved with the additional 5 feet
on the utility easement along Valley View Drive.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Behling and approved with Chairman Maher
abstaining.
AGENDA .ITEM N0. 8 -- Consideration of a revised preliminar plat - Southwood Valley
Sect~nn ~~f'._
Mr. Callaway said that the word "drainage" should be dropped from the utility
easements.
Mr. W.D. Fitch, applicant, explained that Val Verde Street was being split into two
• cul~de-sacs in order to reduce traffic through the subdivision.
Commissioner Livingston moved that the plat be approved with the removal of the
word "drainage" from the easements.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 9 -- Consideration of a revised preliminary plat - Southwood Valley
Section 19_
Mr. Callaway advised that the name of Hilltop Drive would have to be changed on the
final because there was already a Hilltop Drive in Bryan.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved with the name of Hilltop Dirve
changed as required.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner. Sears and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 10 -- Consideration of a Site Plan Permit for the Balcones Apartments.
Mr. Callaway advised that the plan reflected the recommendations of the P.R.C.
Commissioner Gardner asked what the overall density of the project would be.
Mr. Tony Jones, applicant said that the density would be just over 20 units per acre.
• Commissioner Gardner moved that the permit be granted.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved.
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 8
• AGENDA ITEM N0. 11 -- Consideration of a Site Plan Permit for the Southwood Vall
Condominiums.
Mr. Callaway told the Commission that the plan shown conformed to the suggestions of
the P.R.C.
Commissioner Sears moved that the permit be granted.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 12 -- Consideration of a parking plan for Cul epper Plaza Phase 4.
Mr. Callaway said that the changes requested by the P.R.C. had been made.
Commissioner Gardner asked if the indicated landscaping would really be installed.
Mr. Callaway said that the landscaping would be required before certificates of
occupancy were issued.
Commissioner Hazen asked if the property included on this plan would extend to the
property on which the dentist's office was located.
Mr. Robert Todd,. representing Mr. Culpepper, said that the two parking lots would
be connected.
• Commissioner Hazen asked if the drive-through window would be the type which used
loudspeakers.
Mr. Todd said that it would not by this type.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plan be approved.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 13 -- Consideration of a final plat - Resubdivision of Part of Lot
1-F and Lot 2, Block A; Culpepper Plaza.
Mr. Callaway explained that this plat was needed for the project described in Item
No. 12.
Commissioner Gardner asked the status of the access easement on the front of the tract.
Mr. Callaway explained that this was an extension of the access easement which ran the
length of this row of lots. He pointed out that the realignment of the easment was
necessary for the driveway shown on the site plan.
Commissioner Sears moved that the plat be approved.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Watson and unanimously approved.
L_J
•
:~
•
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
Page 9
AGENDA ITEM.NO. 14 -- Consideration of a final plat - Chimney Hill Addition.
Mr. Callaway said that the Public Works Department had asked that a 20 foot utility
easement be included along the common property line with the College Heights Addition
in the C-1 tract and that the word "drainage" be deleted from the utility easement
along the north property line.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved with the conditions requested
by the staff.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 15 -- Consideration of a final plat - Resubdivision of Lot 2,
Block 46; Southwood Valley Section 10-A.
Mr. Callaway said that the final plat was identical to the preliminary which had
been approved at the last meeting.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved.
The motion was seconded. by Commissioner Livingston and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 16 -- Consideration of a final plat - Dragon's Nest.
Mr. Callaway told the Commission that a 20 foot radius should be required on the
access easement to allow for maneuvering of trash collection trucks.
Commissioner Sears moved that the plat be approved with the 20 foot radius on the
access easements as recommended by staff.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 17 -- Consideration of a final plat - Southwood Valle Section 30.
Chairman Maher asked why the undivided tracts were shown as "reserved for future
subdivision".
Mr. W.D. Fitch said that this note gave notification that adjacent tracts were to be
further subdivided. He added that the plat would plat the right-of-way of Welsh Street
and the Georgie K. Fitch City park.
Commissioner Watson moved that the plat be approved.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sears and approved with Commissioner Livingston
voting against.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 1fi -- (lthar hncinacc
Commissioner Hazen asked if some action could be taken to shorten the agendas.
Mr. Callaway said that he would check with the City Attorney on the question.
•
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 5, 1981
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 19 -- Adjourn.
Commissioner Watson moved that the meeting be adjourned.
Page 10
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hazen and unanimously approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M.
APPROVED
C.~Gc.c.G..~.~-1t.
Chairman
•
Attest
Secretary