Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/03/1983 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES • Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS February 3, 1983 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Kelly, Members Bailey, Miller, Hall and Hill (who arrived at approximately 7:45); also Council Liaison Boughton MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Behling and Member Fleming STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Mayo, Asst Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer Pullen, Zoning Official Kee, Asst to Zoning Official Dupies, and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Approval of Minutes - meeting of January 20, 1983 Mr. Hall referred to a typographical error on page 7, 2nd paragraph, and asked the word "town" be changed to "down". Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve the minutes with the change reflected; Mr. Miller seconded. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Hear Visitors No one spoke. • ~ AGENDA ITEM N0. Sign Regulations ~: 83-800: A public hearing on the question of amending Section 8, Ordinance 850, the Zoning Ordinance for the City of College Station. n U Mr. Callaway outlined the proposed changes to the ordinance and explained that staff had received requests from the Commission and Council to make changes in the ordinance con- cerning maximum height, prohibition of certain signs and amortization or abatement of existing non-conforming signs in the City, and further explained the proposed amendments do not include avenues for amortization or abatement of signs, but that the Zoning Board of Adjustment will probably be charged with the decision concerning this. He further stated that staff would recommend approval of the attached Ordinance A tonight as an interim measure, and suggests that further study be done concerning the attached Ordinance before any action is taken on it. Mr. Hall suggested at this point the public hearing be opened. Public hearing was opened. Mr. Mayo stated the City Attorney is currently working on a sign ordinance at the direction of the Mayor concerning the use of flags as subdivision signs. Mr. Callaway again requested Ordinance A be used as an interim ordinance until further study of the entire sign ordinance is completed, and suggested perhaps striking the section concerning flags would be in order prior to approval. Eddie Schultz came forward and addressed Ordinance B, Section 8-E, stating he disagrees with the restriction of "one identifying sign along a major thoroughfare." He said that different sections of a subdivision need to be identified due to their differences and cited examples of patio home sections, townhome sections, single family residences, etc. He said that he also believes that a larger subdivision in acres should be allowed more signs than smaller ones, and stated that he believes that types of signs and numbers of signs are not, and have not been a problem. He stated that beauty and artistic design should also be considered. He reiterated his beliefs and feelings several times, and stated he does not think subdivision signs have been abused in the past, and hates to see a law which would inhibit flexibility. BI PAZ Minutes 2-3 •83 page 2 yMr. Callaway stated that staff is not trying to regulate subdivision signs, but rather to • provide for subdivision signs, as the current ordinance does not address this issue. He said that currently these signs are regulated by "temporary development signs", and staff has not proposed this amending ordinance as a response to abuse. He then spoke of some of the ideas Mr. Schultz presented concerning multi-use developments. Mr. Schultz begged that the City allow for innovative quality to exist, and to allow also for different requirements in different subdivisions. He repeated that he felt there has been no abuse to date, and doubts if regulations are needed. Mr. Mayo referred to billboard-type subdivision identification signs in some cities, and suggested that regulation before problems arise is better than waiting for a problem and then trying to solve it. Mr. Schultz stated again that he is concerned with subdivision identification signs and area identification signs within developments. Mr. Hill arrived at the meeting at this time. • • Mr. Hall asked if the proposed amendment should read "no flags other than those identi- fying subdivisions", and thereby exclude commercial-type flags, and Mr. Schultz said he disagreed with this because some flags are nice, but large numbers of flags around town could be detrimental. He also suggested perhaps height could be detrimental. Mr. Hall pointed out that national or state flags would not be prohibited as the pro- posed amendment is written. Mr. Mi11er asked Mr. Schultz if he was proposing that the City eliminate restrictions on the number of internal and external subdivision signs, and Mr. Schultz answered that it is his belief that this should be dealt with on a project basis. Then Mr. Miller asked if he proposed to exclude the use of billboards to identify subdivisions, but to allow national, state and subdivision flags, and Mr. Schultz agreed that this is what he desires if "quality" is included. Mr. Kelly interrrupted the dialogue and thanked Mr. Schultz for his input and stated that probably a committee will be appointed to further study this proposal. Tony Jones came forward and asked what a political subdivision is, and Mr. Callaway gave as an example, the City of College Station. Mr. Jones asked again about the proposed ordinance A as being an interim ordinance, and stated that Section 8.D-g of the existing ordinance deals with height regulations. Mr. Callaway explained that complaints have been received concerning some very tall signs in the City which do conform to the ordi- nance, and also explained the Council has requested amortization of non-conforming signs within the City. Mr. Jones asked if amortization would be handled jointly by Commission and Council and Mr. Callaway advised that this subject should be turned over to the City Attorney. Mr. Jones then addressed multiple use signs and Mr. Callaway advised this is handled under both the current and the draft ordinance under "Apartment or Townhouse- Rowhouse Districts" signs. Mr. Jones requested that in addressing signs in multi-use developments consideration be given to providing a vehicle for regulation of height and size. Bill Fitch came forward and stated he believes the regulation of one allowed sign on a major thoroughfare is a bit restrictive. He then spoke of a 12 month limitation and explained how many years Southwood Valley has been under development. He suggested that perhaps allowing a development sign for 12 months after the completion of the last sec- tion of a development would be better. Mr. Bailey pointed out that this could become a problem if a development was begun and never completed. Mr. Callaway said this could be controlled by allowing a development sign fora period of 12 months after the approval of the latest section of a development. Mr, Fitch stated that he believed that section 8-H.3 of the proposed Ordinance amendment A could answer Mr. Schultz's problem with some minor adjustments. No one else spoke. Public hearing was closed. P&Z Minutes 2-3 -83 page 3 Mr. Miller asked if the Commission is being requested to recommend for approval either one • or the other of the ordinances presented and Mr. Mayo responded by saying staff is recommending Ordinance A be recommended for approval as an interim measure, and Ordinance B is not for consideration tonight, but rather is being presented for study. Discussion followed concerning banners, pennants, streamers and flags being prohibited, and Mr. Bailey said he had a problem with not ever being able to use gas-filled objects as temporary advertising for grand openings, etc. Mr. Hall asked about the possibility of this ordinance prohibiting the Goodyear blimp from flying over any Aggie football games. Mr. Mayo said the language could be changed to prohibit "attached balloons, etc." Mr. Bailey suggested deletion of all of Section 8-D.12 from Ordinance A. Then Mr. Bailey asked if the Commission believes a 35 ft. sign is high enough and Mr. Miller said- he believes the City needs a reasonable maximum height limitation even if it inconveniences a few people. Discussion fo llowed concerning creating more non-conforming signs than already exist, and Mr. Hill stated he thinks competitive equality is important, whether the limit is 35 ft. or 45 ft. Mr. Hall said the more permanent ordinance then needs to deal with the length of time non-conformity will be allowed and how to phase these signs into compliance. Mr. Mayo pointed out that staff has studied various cities and will work with the City Attorney on this issue. Mr. Miller then made a motion to approve Ordinance A with the condition that Section 8.D-12 be changed to read as follows: "PROHIBITED SIGNS: No attached balloons or other gas filled objects shall be placed within the City of College Station." Mr. Hall seconded; motion carried 4-1 with Mr. Bailey voting in opposition because of the 35 ft. height limit. Mr. Hall asked to send a recommendation to City Council that this be considered a stop-gap measure and is not intended to be a permanent change alone. • Mr. Bailey made a motion to refer Ordinance B to the City Council to appoint a committee of Council members, PAZ Commissioners and members from the business establishment to study. Mr. Miller complimented staff on its efforts and thanked them for giving the City something to work with. Mr. Hill said he still had questions concerning maintenance standards and thinks the committee should study this also. Mr. Miller then seconded Mr. Bailey's motion. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Hall stated emphatically that he believes the City Attorney or his representative should be represented on this committee. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: 83-204: Final Plat - Woodcreek Phase II, Lot 1 Block 1 ~ Mr. Mayo explained the plat and located the land on a map. He stated staff recommends approval of this plat as shown. Mr. Miller made a motion to approve the plat with Mr. Bailey seconding. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 5: 83-404: Consideration of a Parking Lot Plan for a Medical Complex located on Lots 16-21 of Southwood Valley Section 3 on the frontage road between Deacon & Brothers Streets. Mr. Mayo explained the plan, located the project on a map, informed the Commission that all P.R.C. recommendations have been met, and stated staff now recommends approval. Mr. Hall asked if 2 handicap parking spaces are enough and Mr. Jones came forward and answered that none are required, so 2 are more than enough. He further explained that this is the first phase of a larger project, and there will be another building which will be a mirror image of this one at a later date. Mr. Miller complimented the developer . on his landscaping plan. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve this plan with Mr. Hill seconding. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). P&Z 2-3 page Minutes -83 4 AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: 82-451: Consideration of a revised parking lot plan for Lowe's of College Station located on South Texas Avenue in Belmont Place. Mr. Mayo explained this revised plan includes a small outdoor storage area which the Commission had excluded from approval of the original plan some weeks ago, and that staff recommends approval of this revised plan. Mr. Hill commented that some chain-link fences with redwood slats he has seen have deteriorated and wondered what staff's feelings are concerning this one. Mr. Mayo said that this type of fence is not allowed in the City when screen fences are required, but that since this particular fence is not required for meeting ordinance requirements, staff has no problem with it. Mr. Hill asked that staff keep an eye on this fence for deterioration. Mr. Hill then made a motion to approve this plan with Mr. Bailey seconding the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 7: 82-416: Consideration of a revised parking lot plan for an Office Building on Welsh Avenue approximately 500 feet south of Southwest Parkway. 1r. Mayo informed the Commission that the developer has requested this item be deleted from this agenda. AGENDA ITEM N0. 8: Other Business Mr. Bailey announced that a Northgate committee meeting will be on Feb. 9th at 9:30 a.m. Mr. Miller spoke of various cases in the past where projects have been completed with mistakes or errors on the part of the developer and have been overlooked by both this • Commission and the Council.. He stated that it is his opinion that this practice should be stopped, and that these errors should be corrected before Certificates of Occupancy are issued. He stated that he has no intention of overlooking these mistakes in the future as a general practice. He would, however, listen to extenuating circumstances for each case. Mr. Kelly said that staff had been overloaded in the past, but that now there is more available staff to handle problems, and the Commission must begin to support staff more in the future. Mr. Miller agreed. AGENDA ITEM N0. 9: Adjourn Meeting was declared adjourned by a unanimous decision. APPROVED: • ATTEST: City Secretary, Dian Jones ~C.~ Vice 'rman, R y Ke ~~ ~ ,~ r ~j1 , .... c,« ~ -~ i..: •.... ~` V !^/jI ~. J~~ ~ % L ;' ~~~~~t~. 1 ~ l ,'~ , T~-~ ~~3/~'3