Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/1982 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES City of College Station, Texas • Planning and Zoning Commission 7:00 P.M. June 17, 1982 MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Behling, I:elly, Fleming, Bailey, Hall, Miller, Hill; also Council Liaison Prause MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Mayo, Director of Capital Improvements Ash, Asst. Planning Director Callaway, Planning Assistant Longley, Zoning Official Kee, Planning Technician Volk and City Attorney Denton for the last portion of the meeting. AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Approval of Minutes meeting of June 3, 1982. Commissioner Bailey made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Hall seconded the motion; motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Hear Visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: A public hearing to discuss the proposed comprehensive plan for • the City of College Station. This agenda item was postponed until later in the meeting because the Planners from Dallas had not yet arrived. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: 82-124: A public hearing on the question of rezoning a 6.76 acre tract on the south side of Southwest Parkwa east of the intersection of Southwest Parkway and F.M. 2154 Welborn Rd from Agriculture-Open Space District A-0 to Apartments Low Density District R-4. Application in the name of Kenneth W. Schick, Trustee. Mr. Callaway explained the request. Public hearing was opened. Ken Schick identified himself as the applicant of the request and explained this request being made at this time because the owners had been waiting for development to begin in the area, and also because the planned density fits the surrounding areas. The contract on this land will be sold to Tony Caporina who will build a .project which will be an asset to the community. No one else spoke. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Kelly made a motion to re- commend rezoning on this tract with Commissioner Fleming seconding the motion. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 5: 82-125: A public hearing on the question of rezoning a 9.30 acre tract on the Southeast corner of Southwest Parkway and Texas Avenue from Single Family Residential District R-1 to General Commercial District C-l. Application in the name of Gerald Farrar, agent. Mr. Callaway explained the request and reported that staff recommended approval with the stipulation that the developer submit a plat to make the area one tract or else to indicate joint access for all lots. The public hearing was opened and Gerald Farrar spoke, identifying himself as the applicant of the request. He explained that this was to be developed into a shopping center, and only one curb cut on Texas Avenue would be requested or even desired. PAZ Minutes 6-17-82 page 2 • Robert Cornish. identified himself and asked why the Comprehensive Plan had not been re- ferred to when addressing rezoning requests. Commissioner Bailey informed him that Mr. Callaway had referred to the plan in his presentation. Kathleen Kenefick then spoke as a citizen concerned with creating another very dangerous curb cut on Texas Avenue and gave the Kroger Shopping Center as an example. Chairman Behling advised that the City would have to request extra lanes from the Highway Department. Councilman Prause indicated that the Highway Department does traffic counts before any- thing is changed. Chairman Behling further explained that the Highway Department has priorities and he has no information concerning where this project stands with the High- way Department. Commissioner Hall indicated that no additional traffic on Texas Avenue would be ideal, but unfortunately that would conflict with the predictions of growth for the City. He would like to include in the recommendation that there not be more than one curb cut on Texas Avenue and one on Southwest Parkway. Mr. Miller agreed. Mr. Hill asked if R-1 zoning would be on the remaining tract in that area and Mr. Mayo informed him that it would not be R-1, but rather a gradual decrease in density from the C-1 there, decreasing to R-l. Commissioner Bailey made a motion to recommend approval of this request with the stipu- lation that these lots be consolidated into one. Mr. Fleming seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: A public hearing to discuss the proposed comprehensive plan for the City of College Station. The Planners arrived, so Chairman Behling went back to Agenda Item No. 3. Sam Wyse, • one of the consultants, presented the Final Draft of the proposed plan for the City. He highlighted some of the information contained in the report and told how some of the recommendations had been arrived at. He explained that there had been 3 alternative plans for future growth; one to the east, one to the west and one to the south. The plan for growth to the south had been the one chosen primarily because growth in this direction had been the trend of the past and would likely be the trend of the future due to several factors, one of which is the expense of providing city services to the area. The public hearing was opened. The following people spoke: 1. Duane Cote: Voiced a complaint regarding the size of graphics provided. Was con- cerned with the traffic pattern presented and the transportation needs of the City. Also worried about the high population and how the people were to get around the City. 2. W.D.Fitch: Asked that copies of the proposed plan be made available at both the new Community Center, and also at City Hall. Also asked that a public announcement to this effect be made. 3. Robert Webb: Pointed out some vast changes in the graphics since May 1982. Won- dered which land use plan would be studied for recommendation. Wondered why one small area was picked out for high density residential zoning. 4. W.D.Fitch: Asked how land use recommendations were arrived at. Mr. Wyse explained that although the plan indicates a certain use for land, it would not preclude uses which were closely related to those recommended; however, those uses which were not • closely related to those recommended would not be the best use of the land. 5. Kathleen Kenefick: Questioned the rating of streets which she read about in the newspaper. She also asked what differences there were between the earlier plan and the most recent recommendations. Mr. Wyse explained that one of the differences was PAZ Minutes 6-17-82 Page 3 the higher density of land use on the newest maps. She then questioned the advis- • ability of development to the south and also asked why additional utility plants were not included in this plan. Mr. Mayo and Mr. Behling explained that the City had directed the Planners to make a plan based on growth to-the south based on the econo- mics necessary to provide water and sewer to the expanded area. 6. Jim Gardner: Presented what he referred to Alternative Plan C and gave details of his plan and the differences between it and the Planners plan, which were mainly concerned with keeping the growth compact and orderly, and with studying what the land utilization is now. 7. Michael Brooks: Agreed with Mr. Gardner and asked how doubling the size of the City's land could possibly be the most economical way to handle a doubling of population. 8. Peter Hugill: Indicated he thought more emphasis should be put on public transporta- tion and bicycle plans. 9. W. D. Fitch: Indicated he thought the population should be broken down into 2 seg- ments; student and non-student. 10. John Motlock: Asked again that copies of the Alternative plans be made available. No one else spoke. Public hearing was closed, with another public hearing scheduled for Tuesday, June 22, 1982 at 7:00 p.m. • Commissioner Hill asked if a bicycle plan could be introduced at this time to which Mayo answered in the affirmative. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: 82-601: A public hearing on consideration of annexation of 52.30 more or less acre tract located on the west side of Texas Avenue adjacent to and south of the current College Station City limits. Request in the name of Area Progress Corporation. Mr. Mayo presented the requested annexation, gave the hearing schedule (June 23 on-site hearing, June 24 City Council hearing with Ordinance for annexation following at a later date to comply with new State law), and reported that staff recommends approval. Public hearing was opened and W.D.Fitch, owner of the property spoke, pointing out that the existing sewer system had capacity to serve this area and indicated location for water- line tie-up to an existing 12" waterline. No one else spoke. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hall asked for strutted that the Commissioi Council would not be taking nexation is finalized. Mr. assured by Mr. Mayo and Mr. issue. clarification ~ would eithe any action on Hall wondered Callaway that as to the Commission's charge, and Mayo in- ~ recommend for or against approval and that the rezoning request to follow until the an- if the rezoning request was premature, and was the City Attorney had been consulted on this Commissioner Bailey moved to recommend approval of the annexation request; Mr. Kelly seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. ezoning a 52.30 scent to and south P&Z Minutes 6-17-82 page 4 Apartments Low Density District R-4 and Commercial Industrial District C-2. Applica- • tion in the name of Area Progress Corporation. Mr. Callaway presented the request and reiterated that the City Attorney had advised the City Council not to rezone until after the annexation Ordinance is adopted. He charged the Commission with making a policy decision concerning whether to continue the existing commercial area further south or to provide a break in the commercial land use as proposed by the consultants in the preliminary plan. Commissioner Miller asked where Rock Prairie Road is in respect to this land, and was answered that it ran along the north- ern part of this land. He then asked Mr. Ash what the status of the continuation of Rock Prairie Road is to which Mr. Ash informed him that the part in Southwood Valley is already under construction and the part east, to the existing Rock Prairie Road will be done as development of the land takes place. When Mr. Ash was asked about the use of Graham Road as an access, he replied that Graham Road is just a gravel, county road. Public hearing was opened and Jim Gardner asked about the 300 foot right-of-way dedi- cation and what the dollar value of that land was. Mr. Fitch replied that the Highway Department pays for 90% of the acquisition. Mr. Fitch, owner of the land in question, then spoke, answering questions from the Commission. Chairman Behling asked how much of the additional land which was not included in this request he owned, and he replied that he owned all but 4 acres all the way to Graham Road; that the City of Bryan owns one acre and a Mr. Arnold owns the other three acres. No one else spoke. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Miller questioned the extension of a commercial zone that far south on Texas Avenue, and suggested that the City look at the area and determine what land use • would be best. Commissioner Hall asked why Area Progress Corporation had not included all the land to Graham Road in this rezoning request, to which Mr. Fitch replied that he had no plans to plat that land at this time. Mr. Miller asked what is on the C-2 land to the north, to which Mr. Mayo replied that nothing is on that land now. Mr. Behling indicated that the size of this tract to be rezoned (52+ acres) would be in its favor. Mr. Kelly informed Mr. Miller that to the best of his recollection, a motel, a cafe and several other businesses were to be on the land to the north. He asked Mr. Fitch if the Handy Man was to be enlarged, to which Mr. Fitch replied that there had been some talk about future land purchase. He further indicated that the motel was still being proposed, but the projects to the north of the road had stalled. Mr. Bailey asked Mr. Fitch what he proposed to do with the tracts still zoned A-0 to which Mr. Fitch replied that perhaps at a later date he would consider putting media m to high density apartments there. Mr. Miller asked again if the sewer could handle that type of density, and Mr. Ash replied that the question was hard to answer at this time without something definite to go on, or adequate time to study the question, but he would think that medium density could be handled, further that the 12" sewer line is deep enough to take capacity to Graham Road as the land use is currently proposed. He reiterated that in looking at the existing and the proposed comprehensive plan, development of this type in this area will not hinder what service we now have. Mr. Hall indicated that we are close to the end of the comprehensive plan and that he would hate to jump into large rezoning when the plan is not yet finalized; that C-2 and R-4 might be against the public's wishes and perhaps the Commission should exercise restraint at this time, and review at a later date when the comprehensive plan is finalized. Mr. Bailey pointed out that we have no idea just when that might happen, as it took 3 • years to finalize the last plan. Mr. Miller asked if we would lose by tabling this item, and Mr. Behling indicated that he certainly did not think we would gain anything and that he would rather the Commission formulate an opinion on this item tonight. P&Z Minutes 6-17-82 page 5 Commissioner Hill made a motion to recommend approval of this request with the condition • that staff study the area making recommendations concerning rezoning the land adjacent to this within theCity Limits. Mr. Kelly reluctantly seconded the motion. Motion carried with 2 members (Hall & Miller) voting in opposition. AGENDA ITEM N0. 8: 82-119: Consideration of rezonin Lot 12 Block B of Colle e Heights Subdivision (303 E. University Dr. from Administrative-Professional District A-P to Planned Commercial District C-3. Application in the name of W. T. Aycock. Mr. Callaway gave background of this request and Mr. Hall asked what staff recommends. Mr. Callaway said staff could see no need for this rezoning due to the existing avail- ability of C-1 zoned land nearby. Mr. Behling cautioned that zoning in this particular area has caused some problems and that the Commission should consider the zone involved and not the use to be made of the land. Mr. Aycock, applicant, identified himself and asked permission to hand out plats and pictures. He told the Commission he wanted to do something with the existing metal build- ing which would be desirable. He said he had checked with his neighbors who had indi- cated no objections to his plans, and further that he had worked with staff to eliminate problems on the site plan. Mr. Miller reminded the Commission that they were to consider the zoning only, and not the use to which the land would be put, because there were no guarantees that plans would be carried out. Mr. Aycock indicated that this would be a matter of trust, and that he would do what he says he will do, and that is to create a washateria at that location. Mr. Hall asked staff if this land were sold separately, would the purchaser be entitled • to a curb cut on the major street. Mr. Mayo indicated that the position staff has taken in the past is that on corner tracts, curb cuts are only allowed on the minor street. Mr. Miller pointed out how difficult a left turn from University Drive into Eisenhower would be. Mr. Kelly then made a motion to recommend C-3 zoning at this location; Mr. Bailey seconded the motion. Motion carried with one negative vote (Miller). Mr. Aycock volunteered to offer that if something would happen to occur which would preclude his building of the .washateria, this land in question would revert back to A-P zoning. AGENDA ITEM N0. 9: 82-230: A final plat - Southwest Place Lot 2A-1 Mr. Mayo explained the plat, indicating that the reason for this plat was so that the restaurant and motel could be sold as 2 separate businesses, but that all were aware that only one free standing sign would be allowed to accommodate both businesses. Staff re- commends approval. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve the plat; Mr. Miller seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 10: 82-418 ~ 82-419: Consideration of arking lot plans for an Auto Parts Store and an Auto Sales Lot 2 separate businesses located at the corner of --- Cooner and Texas Avenue. Mr. Kelly was excused from the Commission for this item. Mr. Mayo explained the site plan and indicated that staff recommends approval with P.R.C. stipulations. Mr. Bailey • asked if the drive in front of the store was designated as a fire lane. Mr. Mayo said that it was not necessary. Mr. Miller asked about parking on the sooner side for the new building and Mr. Kelly indicated that this allowed for the only circulation possible. Mr. Bailey asked if it would 6e possible to include a note on the plat indicating that the vacant lot was reserved for future development. Mr. Mayo indicated that it would not P&Z Minutes 6-17-82 page 6 hurt. Mr. Miller asked if the location of the curb cuts was too close to the corner. • Mr. Mayo indicated they did not cause a problem. Mr. Horn, lessee of the site for the Auto Sales Lot asked to be heard, and said that he questioned the required 8 ft. setback and disagreed that it was necessary. Mr. Mayo explained that it is necessary and that it is the only way old tracts of land can be upgraded to meet current City Ordinance. Mr. Horn also asked for another curb cut off Texas Avenue, and was informed that this was not possible, and that most corner lots have access from the minor street rather than the major street, and that he was fortunate because his business would have access from both streets. Mr. Behling apologized to the Commission and indicated to Mr. Horn that these things should have been discussed at the P.R.C. review the previous week, and Mr. Horn said that he had not understood just what had taken place at that review. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve the site plan with the note to reserve the vacant land for future development. Mr. Miller seconded the motion. Motion carried with Mr. Kelly abstaining. AGENDA ITEM N0. 11: 82-421: Consideration of a parking lot plan for the Sheraton Hotel located on University Drive. Mr. Mayo explained the plan and indicated that this was a revised, or final plan. He further explained that the P.R.C. had recommended 1.8 parking spaces per room, and that the site plan shows 1.7+ spaces per room, which would be acceptable, and that the staff recommends approval. Mr. Behling asked Mr. Carlin, the architect of the project, if he had taken into consideration sight to the right of the curb cut on University Drive, and Mr. Carlin answered that this cannot be established at this time but that it would be taken into consideration as the plan developes. Mr. Behling located the tract in question for the Commission. Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve the site plan with the P.R.C. • recommendations. Mr. Flaming seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 12: 82-528: Consideration of a site permit for the Cornerstone Apartments on the south side of Southwest Parkway adjacent to the existing Willowick Apartments. Mr. Mayo explained the project and located it on a map. Mr. Bailey questioned the lo- cation and number of fire hydrants. Mr. Hill asked about the street behind the project. Mr. Mayo indicated there. were ample fire hydrants located at points designated by the Fire Marshall and that the project had. no access from the rear and the developers were dedica- ting a utility easement at that location. He further indicated that the old road would probably be taken out by property owners. Mr. Miller asked about on-street parking, and Mr. Mayo said that control of parking on the project would be responsibility of the manage- ment, and if a problem of on-street parking occurred, the City would "sign" the street. Mr. Miller made a motion to approve the permit; Mr. Hall seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 13: Other Business. Mr. Mayo explained that the CSISD had turned in landscaping plans to the Planning Depart- ment too late to get on the agenda, but asked the Commission to consider them tonight. Commission agreed. Mr. Mayo then explained the landscaping plan for the College Hills Elementary School and • indicated that it was more than adequate. Mr. Bailey moved to accept the plan; Mr. Miller seconded. Motion carried unanimously. He then explained the landscaping plan for the South Knoll School project. Mr. Hall moved to accept the plan; Mr. Bailey seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. P&Z Minutes 6-17-82 page 7 Next Mr. Mayo explained the A.B.C. Middle School project landscaping plan. Mr. Fleming moved to accept the plan. Mr. Kelly seconded. Motion carried with one no vote (Behling). Ned Walton, construction consultant for the school district, asked to be allowed to pre- sent a landscaping plan for the Southwood Valley Elementary School for the Commission's consideration. Commission agreed. Plan was presented; Mr. Bailey made a motion to ac- cept this plan; Mr. Kelly seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Mayo announced the Subcommittee concerned with zoning in the "Golden Triangle" which also dealt with the Mile Drive petition against the Haney Oil Project would meet at 1:30 on Tuesday, June 22, 1982 in his office. Mr. Bailey announced that he would be absent from the Commission meetings on the last meeting in July and the lst meeting in August. Mr. Behling asked about the progress made by the Development Review Control Committee and Mr. Mayo advised there had been no time to work on the project. Mr. Behling then asked how to go about getting a street renamed and referred specifically to Fed Mart Drive. Mr. Mayo said that this body could make a recommendation to Council. AGENDA ITEM N0. 14: Adjourn. Mr. Hill made a motion to adjourn; Mr. Hall seconded. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVED: Vic irman, Ro elly ATTEST: •