Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/02/1982 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission • September 2, 1982 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT:: Vice Chairman Kelly, Commissioners Hall, Miller, Bailey, Council Liaison Prause; and Chairman Behling who came in late. MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Fleming ~ Hill STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Mayo, Asst Director of Planning Callaway, Planning Assistant Longley and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Approval of Minutes meeting of August lg, 1982. Vice Chairman Kelly chaired the meeting and called for approval of the minutes. Com- missioner Bailey made a motion to approve, Commissioner Hall seconded; motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Hear visitors. No one spoke. (Chairman Behling came in at this time, but Vice Chairman Kelly con- tinued to chair the meeting). AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: 82-241: Final Plat - Division of Kenneth W. Schick 36.182 acre tract located on the southeast side. of Southwest Parkway between Welsh and F. M. 215 . • Mr. Mayo presented the plat and located the land on a map. He reported that all recom- mended changes had been made, and that staff now recommends approval. He informed the Commission the reason this was being submitted is because Tract 3 is being developed by someone other than the developer of Tracts 1 ~ 2, and further indicated that staff believes that the names of the projects on Tracts 1 ~ 2 are reversed. Martin Riley, engineer of the project, informed Commission that Tracts 1 >; 2 are labeled as the deeds are recorded, and that both projects are now under one ownership and are called Willowick. Commissioner Bailey then made a motion to approve the plat with Commissioner Miller seconding. Mr. Behling requested an amendment to the motion which calls for the undeveloped land to be labeled "Reserved for Future Subdivision". The amended motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: 82-436: Consideration of a Parkin. Lot Plan for Southwest Place Shopping Center Lots 2A-2 ~ 2A-3, Block 1, Crawford Burnett League . Mr. Mayo explained the project, indicating the location of the dumpsters as shown will probably be temporary as additional development next door is completed, and stated staff recommends approval. Mr. Bailey questioned the number of fire hydrants and was answered that there are 2. Mr. Behling made a motion to approve the plan with all P.R.C. recommendations being met and with the relocation of the dumpsters if necessary at a later date. Mr. Bailey seconded; motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 5: 82-428: Reconsideration of a Landscaping Plan for a shopping • center located near the intersection of Holleman Drive and State Hwy. No. 6 East Bypass. Mr. Mayo presented the plan, and Mr. Bailey asked about the location of the sign; Mr. Kelly pointed it out. Mr. Behling made a motion to approve the plan with all P.R.C. recommendations being met; Mr. Miller seconded. Motion carried unanimously. PAZ MINUTES g-2-82 page 2 AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: Other business. . Commissioner Hall stated that some developers he had talked with disagreed with the requirement that a detailed landscape plan accompany the site plan when it is presented for approval, and his alternative to this requirement would be to give the developers the option of continuing with the current requirement or to allow them to show on the site plan the areas to be landscaped, but to omit the specific details of that landscaping with the knowledge that Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued without a detailed plan being accepted by the Commission. Mr. Bailey said that this approach would cause double work for staff. Mr.Mayo said that it would be no problem as far as staff is concerned, and that it is his opinion that developers now are required to spend extra money for a landscaping plan prior to having approval of a site plan. He further stated that probably the people who would take the option Mr. Hall mentioned would be those who are confident in the work they do and are satisfied that they can please the City. He went on to explain that as things now stand, many developers present a minimal land- scaping plan which will meet the ordinance requirements and suit the City, and then actually add landscaping later, even before the C.O. is issued. Mr. Hall pointed out that with the landscaped areas designated, developers can plan the location of the sprinkler systems, topsoil requirements, etc., and do the actual landscaping after the project progresses. Mr. Mayo said that he thinks this option would be good for the developer. Mr. Hall then added that possibly a percentage of the site area for land- scaping could be one of the criteria, and so stated in the Ordinance. Mr. Bailey added that he had no real objection to this as long as it made no extra work for staff. Mr. Mayo said it could be extra work, but the real problem would be that the possibility would exist that some developers may forget that approval of a landscaping plan would still be necessary and perhaps start his landscaping prior to presenting the plan for approval. • Mr. Behling said that he prefers the process we now have, and to require at least mini- mal landscaping. If this required amount is not enough to satisfy the City, we should change the standard and then encourage more landscaping than is required. Mr. Mayo suggested that we change the Ordinance to read "a percentage of the site to be landscaped", but Mr. Kelly said that this would open the door to hamstringing the P.R.C. at the time of review of the plans. He said that personal opinions and preferences are what gets the Commission. into trouble, and his suggestion would be to furnish a list of acceptable native trees and shrubs from which developers can choose. Mr. Bailey said that we could require a percentage of the site and in addition, give rules or guidelines to follow. Mr. Miller said that to answer Mr. Hall's question or request, he would prefer a minimal landscaping plan to be presented with the site plan, as is now required. After this discussion waned, Mr. Bailey moved to adjourn; Mr. Miller seconded; motion carried unanimously, and meeting was adjourned. APPROVED: ATTEST: Dian Jones, C' y Secretary / ~~ Roy a Vice Chair •