Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/17/1983 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission March 17, 1983 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Kelly, Members Fleming, Bailey, Miller & Hall; also Council Liaison Boughton MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Behling and Member Hill STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer Pullen, Zoning Official Kee, Assistant to Zoning Official Dupies and Planning Techni- cian Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Approval of Minutes - meeting of March 3, 1983 Mr. Kelly requested that the Planning Technician include the names of any members of the Commission who did not vote on an item, whether it be because he abstained or perhaps was late for that particular item, but whose name appears as being present at the meeting. Mr. Bailey then made a motion to approve the minutes with Mr. Hall seconding; motion carried unanimously (4-0) (Miller absent during voting). AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Hear Visitors • IJo one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: 83-103 A public hearing on the question of rezonin Lot 14 Block 1 of the Gorzycki Subdivision from Duplex District R-2 to General Commercial District C-l. Application is in the name of Joe A. Ferreri, Inc. dba Ramada Inn. Mr. Callaway explained the zoning request during which time Mr. Miller arrived at the meeting. Mr. Callaway stated that staff recommends approval because the request is in accordance with current and proposed comprehensive plans, the lot dimensions do not meet the district regulations for the R-2 duplex zone and the lot itself is bounded by C-1 zoning and development on 2 sides and is not suitable for residential uses. Mr. Hall asked why this lot could not remain R-2 and Mr. Callaway explained that a commercial parking lot is not allowed in an R-2 district. The public hearing was opened. No one spoke. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Bailey made a motion to recommend approval of this request with Mr. Hall seconding. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Miller abstained). AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: 83-104: A public hearin on the question of rezoning a 6.33 acre tract located on the east side of State Hi hwa No. 6 East Loo a roximatel 200 feet north of State Highway 30 Harvey Road from General Commercial District C-1 to Commercial Indus- trial District C-2. Application is in the name of Frank Thurmond. Mr. Callaway explained the request and located the 2 tracts of land on a map, indicating that staff would recommend that rezoning not receive final approval until a suitable sub- division plat for all 9 acres is approved. Mr. Kelly expressed concern about a commercial project in a flood plain. Mr. Hall was concerned with a commercially zoned area only 245 feet in depth. Mr. Callaway pointed out that if the area in question is rezoned, develop- • ment of it will required a subdivision plat during which time the City can insure types of access easements which would insure development as one tract. Mr. Hall asked if it would be wiser to make this whole area C-2 and Mr. Callaway advised that having the remaining PAZ Minutes 3-17-83 page 2 area zoned C-1 should not be a problem, and that a subdivision plat could cover any prob- . lem areas. Mr. Hall asked if a C-2 project would generate more traffic than a C-1 project, and Mr. Cal- laway replied that it would be difficult to say, but in general C-2 projects develop lower traffic counts according to reference material available to staff. Mr. Hall asked if it would require more truck traffic and Mr, Callaway said that was a possibility, but generally there would probably be fewer cars.Mr.Fleming asked if the approximate 345 foot separation from a residential area was enough to muffle noise, and Mr. Callaway said again he could not say for sure, but that in all probability the noise generated from this project would be less than that generated by the 55 mph truck traffic on the Bypass adjacent to the residential area. The public hearing was opened. Jack Burke, a real estate representative for Payless Cash- ways, Inc, came forward, identified the company and explained how they operate. He then addressed the question of noise, and stated the proposed project would have one saw in the yard area which would be a table-mounted Black ~ Decker model, not unlike many found in private garages. He also related that due to the large orders placed, the numbers of large trucks would be low because they would bring in large amounts of supplies at one time. He said that a total of about 60 people would be employed, 2 being from other communities. He said this land which would have to be rezoned was chosen because their business is 99% retail, and it is important for the business to be close to the customer, and the current available C-2 zoned land is too far away. He predicted the project would have no impact on the residential area either currently or in the future. Mr. Bailey asked if this land would be in the College Station or Bryan School District, and Mr. Callaway answered that he was not sure, but he believes it is in the College Station District. • Mr. Hall asked why it is necessary to have C-2 zoning, and Mr. Callaway explained that lum- ber and building material sales projects are allowed in C-2 zones but not in C-1 zones. Mr. Hall asked why the ordinance had been changed to include these projects in C-2 and Mr. Cal- laway explained the original zoning ordinance which listed these uses in M-2 districts be- . came no longer valid upon revision, and difficulties had arisen with firms proposing ex- pansion to include lumber and building material sales, so a C-2 zoning district was created. Frank Thurmond, owner of all the property in question came forward and stated that C-2 zoning will have no adverse affects on the remaining C-1 property line because the division line between the 2 areas is a natural division, being a creek. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Thur- mond if he understood there could be access problems which might arise. He said he has no present plans for the remaining C-1 land, but when something comes up, he has hopes that any problems can be solved. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the proposed access might have to serve both this project and the 200x200 ft. piece of land which he does not own. Mr. Thurmond stated he believed access would be covered in the platting process, and asked Mr. Kelly if he was stating a fact, to which Mr. Kelly replied that it is only a possi- bility, and further, that access is not controlled by this Commission, nor is it covered in the rezoning process. Mr. Callaway pointed out the g acres must be subdivided into 2 or more tracts. Mr. Hall pointed out that prior to selling the land, it must be platted and cannot be sold by metes and bounds. Mr. Thurmond said he thought anything over 5 acres did not fall into this category, but Commission informed him he is mistaken. Mr. Hall then made a motion to recommend approval of this rezoning from C-1 to C-2 with the staff re- commendations that the entire 9.11 acre tract be platted with access and utility easements as necessary to allow for joint development of the entire tract. Mr. Fleming seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0). • AGENDA ITEM N0. 5: 83-302: PRELIMINARY PLAT - VILLA ON THE RIO GRANDE LOCATED ON THE NW CORNER OF RIO GRANDE AND BALCONES. Mr. Callaway explained the plat and located the land on a map. He referred to the Presub- P&Z Minutes 3-17-83 page 3 mission Conference report and explained the plat shown is the revised plat, and has few- er lots than the plat to which the report refers, but that Lot 15 on this revised plat • does not have the required 100 ft. depth for a single family residence, and that staff would recommend that a ZBA variance for this lot be received before the filing of a final plat. Mr. Bailey made a motion to recommend approval of this preliminary plat with staff recommendation as stated by Mr. Callaway. Mr. Hall seconded, and motion carried unanimous- 1Y (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: 83-410: Consideration of a Parkin Lot Plan - Basic Plumbin Su 1 Office/Warehouse located on Lots 2C&D Block 20, Southwood Valley A. Mr. Callaway explained the plan, pointed out the changes which had been made as requested on this revised plan, and stated that staff further recommends that islands be made a typical 9 ft. in width as requested. After some discussion, Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve the plan with P.R.C. recommendations and the staff recommendation concerning g ft. wide islands. Mr. Fleming seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 7: 83-411: Consideration of a Parking Lot Plan - Grandy's Restaurant located in the Post Oak Square Shopping Center on Harvey Road. Mr. Callaway explained the plan and stated the revised plan meets P.R.C. recommendations, but requested that the islands shown with plus or minus dimensions be required to be with- in 6" of the dimension shown, and stated the applicant is aware of this. He further stated that the Public Works Department has approved the dumpster location. Mr. Miller asked if any additional landscaping was planned, and Mr. Callaway explained that this plan is a part of a larger shopping center which this Commission has already approved. Mr. Hall asked if this project was excluded on the larger plan which was approved and Mr. Callaway • explained this particular tract was shown as "Reserved for Future Development" on that plan. Mr. Hall then made a motion to approve with P.R.C. recommendations and the recom- mendation that the islands be within 6" of dimensions shown. Mr. Bailey seconded, motion carried unanimously (5-O). AGENDA ITEM N0. 8: 83-412: Consideration of a Parkin Lot Plan (Revised) - E-Z Travel Motel located on Texas Avenue ~ Holleman Drive. Mr. Callaway presented 2 plans, the most recent received this night meets all P.R.C. recom- mendations except at an area which would require an island and the relocation of 2 parallel parking spaces from the front of the building to the rear. Mr. Kelly asked about the sign and Mr. Callaway said it would be relocated and would meet all sign Ordinance regulations. Mr. Miller referred to a past meeting when a similar plan for this same motel was reviewed and the discussion which took place then, but Mr. Callaway assured him that if there is a new detached sign, it must meet Ordinance requirements. Mr. Hall asked if the relocation of the 2 parallel parking spaces met with the applicant's approval, and Mr. Callaway said the applicant had expressed agreement to this request on this evening prior to the meet- ing. It was pointed out by Mr. Callaway that the island on the SE corner of the project was not in the P.R.C, report recommendations, nor were the 2 parking spaces due to an over- sight, and the applicant has agreed verbally to each request. Mr. Kelly asked if the appli- cant was aware this land would have to be replatted if the restaurant was ever sold, and Mr. Callaway assured him the applicant knows this. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve this plan with all P.R.C. recommendations and the staff's recommendation concerning the addition of an island at the SE corner, the relocation of the 2 parking spaces from the front of the building to the rear, the removal of all existing detached signs and the addi- tion of one new detached sign which meets all Ordinance requirements. Mr. Fleming 2nd, and • motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mr. Hall then repeated the motion which passed for clari- fication for the applicant. AGENDA ITEM N0. 9: 83-413: Consideration of a Parkin Lot Plan - Furrow Buildin Materials Retail Center located at the NE corner of Hwy 30 and Hwv East Bypass. PAZ Minutes 3-17-83 page 4 Mr. Callaway explained the plan and stated staff recommends the 2 ft. island mentioned in • the P.R.C. to be included if this plan is approved. He pointed out that the revised plan has not included this island along the entrance drive as requested. Mr. Miller asked about the location of the access easement, and Mr. Callaway pointed it out. Mr. Miller expressed a wish that it be farther away from the intersection and Mr. Hall explained that it meets the 200 ft. distance the City requires. Mr. Miller said he thought it should be farther away for the sake of safety. Mr. Kelly asked about plans for widening Highway 30 and Mr. Pullen reported he is not aware of any State Highway plans to do that, but the City has expressed a need for this to be done. Mr. Hall asked Mr. Pullen about the 100 year flood plain and suggested a portion of this tract is sometimes submerged. Mr. Pullen pointed out the flood plain and informed the Commission it is shown in a shaded area on the plans they have received. He then explained how development would be handled. Barry Moore, a representative of the company involved spoke from the floor stating all areas would be at 255.5 ft. or above. Mr. Pullen then spoke of various ways the creek drainage area might be handled, and said that his preference would be for something other than a concrete channel. Mr. Bailey asked what a channel change would do to the corner tract and Mr. Pullen referred to item #4 of the P.R.C. report and the necessity of an agreement with other property owners. Jack Burke, another representative of the company spoke from the floor and said a local engineering firm is working on this now and explained that the 30 ft. drainage easement shown on the plan is not definite, but rather a suggestion based upon information normally used in their Kansas City office. Mr. Kelly asked if the owner of the corner lot has been contacted, and Mr. Burke replied they had been unable to find out who the owner is. Discussion followed after which Mr. Kelly informed Mr. Burke that he believes a Mr. Hoover is the owner. Mr. Hall asked if drainage from the Bypass runs throughthis property and Mr. Pullen said that some of it would. Mr. Hall expressed con- cern about this much paving, the extra runoff created and the affect it would have on the residential areas (Raintree ~ Windwood Subdivisions). Mr. Pullen said the drainage study • will probably have some sort of detention plans and the developer will be required to attain a development permit which is issued by the City Engineer after he approves the plans. Mr. Kelly asked Mr. Callaway what dimensions the remaining C-1 land would have after ac- cess to this tract is taken, and Mr. Callaway told him he did not have the calculations on this. Mr. Thurmond, owner of the land spoke from the floor and stated the remaining lot will be approximately 150 x 200 ft. Mr. Miller again addressed access from the Frontage Road. Mr. Callaway pointed out that this should be handled during the platting process. Mr. Miller then addressed the 35 ft, maximum sign height, after which he (Mr. Miller) made a motion to approve this plan with all P.R.C. recommendations regarding changes plus the addition of a note on the plan stating the sign will conform to City Ordinances and the 8 ft. high fence wi11 have redwood slats. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion which passed unanimously (5-O). AGENDA ITEM N0. 10: 83-503: Consideration of a Site Plan Permit for the Villas of Chim- ney Hill located on Chimney Hill Drive Mr. Callaway explained that staff recommends approval of this plan with the addition of a note indicating the type of groundcover to be furnished prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr. Kelly asked Mr. Pullen to explain the note on the P.R.C. report concerning the drainage easement location, which he did. Mr. Miller then made a motion to approve the plan with all P.R.C. recommendations plus the note concerning groundcover to be furnish- ed prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr. Hall seconded. Motion carried unanimously (5-0) . AGENDA ITEM N0. 11: 83-403: Reconsideration of a Parking Lot Plan - Marion Pugh Office/ • Warehouse located on the proposed Marion Pugh Drive between Luther ~ Jersey. Mr. Callaway explained that this item had been tabled pending a resolution concerning access to a neighboring property (Drew Wood), and said this company would like the curb PAZ Minutes 3-17-$3 page 5 to be left open pending a resolution of access to the Drew Wood property and any access • agreement or arrangement should be referred to our City Attorney because it involves 2 property owners. Mr. Miller asked if the landscaping plan received goes with this plan and Mr. Callaway replied that it does. Mr. Callaway suggested that the curb be changed as necessary to accommodate any changes and further suggested that a certificate of occupancy be withheld until the access problems are resolved, or if desired, the building permit could be withheld until access problems are resolved. Mr. Hall said that this Commission is penalizing this applicant, and it is really not their problem, but rather the other neighbor's problem. Mr. Kelly suggested this item be tabled until the access agreement is reached or curbing is agreed to around the entire parking area. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve with P.R.C. recommendations plus the requirement that a 6" raised curb be placed around the entire parking area (specifically between the area of Drew Wood's property and this warehouse project.) Mr. Hall asked for an amendment to this motion to say that the entire parking area must be curbed or an agree- ment concerning access reached prior to issuance of a C.O. Mr. Bailey refused to have this amendment made to his motion. Mr. Callaway asked if this included the right-hand side of the property between this project and the future proposed project, and Mr. Bailey said it covers what was recommended in the P.R.C. report. Mr. Kelly asked if we couldn't allow the use of wheelstops because it would be temporary and Mr. Callaway said it could be allowed. Mr. Miller said he preferred curbing because "temporary" wheelstops have a tendancy to become permanent. This motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Fleming asked what would keep trucks from jumping the curbing, but no real answer was supplied. Mr. Miller asked what would happen if the Commission required the Building Permit be withheld until an agreement is reached or the area is curbed. Mr. Bailey said the motion which just died would make Drew Wood work harder at reaching agreement. Robert • Schmitt spoke from the audience stating that some kind of agreement has been proposed at this time. Mr, Hall made a motion to approve this plan subject to either an agreement regarding access between property owners being worked out for joint access prior to the issuance of a C.O., or installation of curbing around the entire parking area, (he referred to item #5 of the P.R.C. report). Mr. Fleming seconded the motion. Mr, Kelly said that a letter or instru- ment of agreement or the curb around the entire parking area would be required before a C.O. is issued. Motion was defeated with Hall and Fleming voting for the motion and Miller, Bailey and Kelly voting against it (2-3). Mr. Miller then made a motion to approve this plan with P.R.C. recommendations and with the understanding that a Building Permit will not be issued until either the curbing is included around the entire project (item #5 of the P.R.C. report) or an instrument for joint access which is acceptable to the City Attorney is presented. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion for purposes of discussion, and then clarified that the motion he had seconded required either an agreement to curbing on the site plan or an agreement to access. Dis- cussion followed until the Acting Chairman called for votes. Motion carried 4-1 with Hall voting against. AGENDA ITEM N0. 12: 82-416: Reconsideration of a Parking Lot Plan Revision - Office Building by Jan-Wic Homes, Inc. located on Welsh Avenue. Mr. Callaway explained the site plan which had been revised to handle some of the errors the builder had made. Mr. Miller asked specifically what changes were being proposed from • the site plan which had been approved by this Commission at a previous date. Mr. Callaway explained changes included a 4 ft. to 5 ft. setback (rather than 8 ft.), the narrower driveway and the angled parking. He further pointed out that raised islands are normally P&Z Minutes 3-17-83 page 6 required, and this request includes some which are raised and some which are striped. • The reason for keeping the raised islands is that some are existing and landscaped at this time. Mr. Fleming asked why changes weren't made in December when the developer had been noti- fied of the errors. Mr. McKean of Jan-Wic Homes, Inc. spoke from the floor and stated that the parking lot had already been poured at that time. Mr. Kelly called a 5 minute recess at this time. After 5 minutes the meeting was reconvened, and Mr. Hall asked what this Commission would be allowing which it would normally not allow. Mr. Callaway pointed out the 4 ft. setback proposed is from the property line, which is also the street right- of-way line. He was asked when this trouble was noted and he answered it was prior to November 15th and the alternatives would be to go into the area marked "reserved for fu- ture development" for additional parking and require the 8 ft. setback as the required setback would reduce the number of parking spaces available on this site. Mr. McKean explained the basic problem is the encroachment into the 8 ft. setback. He explained an error had been made and the building had not been placed where it was supposed to be. Mr. Kelly referred to the P.R.C, report dated 5-25-82 and said that item #3 required the 8 ft. setback. Mr. Kelly then asked for an honest opinion and stated the developer just 4 blocks down the street had been made to comply to the 8 ft. setback and another developer had been required to install curbing and he wondered what would happen in the future if this "error" was allowed and the developer did not fulfill the recommendations of the PAZ Commission and the P.R.C. He further said he believed the Zoning Board of Adjustments would have to make a ruling, and he did not think this Commission should recommend approval of this revised plan. Mr. Kelly then asked the City Engineer why he had recommended that this revised plan be approved and Mr. Pullen said that if he had been dealing with anything other than asthetics, he would not have approved it, and at the time of the latest P.R.C. • meeting there did not seem to be a reasonable adjustment to be required. It is his opinion that this decision does not affect the life, safety, general health or welfare of the cit- izenry of the Community, but rather is an error. He explained that at the time this error was noted, there was an infringement on the 8 ft, setback of not 4 ft., but rather a negative 12" - 18", for the green area was into the right-of-way, and he could have said that if it was going to be moved, it could be moved 8 ft., but he had previously found the 4 ft. setback acceptable and he is aiming for consistency. He then referred to a site down the street with the required 8 ft. setback, and to another one which is paved to the property line, with no green area. Mr. Miller asked if he would say the same thing if this project wasn't on the ground, and Mr. Pullen said that he would not, but as it is, it is not a matter which can be easily fixed. Mr. Miller added "...without considerable ex- ~ pense." Mr. Miller asked if Mr. Pullen is asking this Commission to legislate an error and Mr. Pullen said he was not asking this Commission to do anything. Mr. Hall said he wondered if a decision to allow this mistake would actually cause other developers to make the same type of mistake, but he also stated that the measurements of this project did not seem to be very complicated, and wondered how this error happened. Mr. Pullen agreed and stated that one problem staff has had to face is that there have been 2 site plans; an approved plan and the actual plan. Mr. Hall stated the proposed site plan would actually call for moving the curb back and if Mr. Kelly is correct in his belief that there will be a lack of room for manuvering a car in the drive and parking spaces proposed, per- haps it would be safer to leave the encroachment into the right-of-way. Mr. Kelly said the City Attorney has advised him there can be no encroachment into the right-of-way. Mr. Bailey said perhaps the applicant should appeal to the City Council because after reading the conditions to be considered by the Zoning Board of Adjustments which include "unique and special conditions of the land", he could not see how this land has any uni- que and special conditions to be considered. Mr. Miller said unfortunate mistakes like • this one can continue if developers get the impression that this Commission will bend the rules, and then asked why there is a setback rule if we do not plan to enforce it. He further stated that he sympathizes with the developer, but thinks rules are set to be followed. P&Z Minutes 3-17-83 page 7 Mr. McKean asked the purpose of the 8 ft. setback, stated that 1Jelsh Street has a 16 ft. right-of-way instead of an 11 ft. right-of-way, as he believed, and wondered how this 4 ft. setback would hurt the public because he is not in violation to the point of jeo- pardizing anyone entering or leaving this property. Mr. Miller advised he would have a much stronger argument if this project was not already on the ground. Mr. McKean stated he had gained nothing by the existance of the encroachment and what he is asking would not impair the people of College Station. He then cited substantial monetary loss to himself as a problem. He further stated he must have parking in front of the building to have a viable project. Mr. Hall asked what Mr, McKean proposes for the adjacent future project and Mr. McKean replied that it would have a full 3 ft. setback with the 16 ft. right-of- way figured into the planning, Mr, Ha11 said it is his opinion that this Commission must stick with the guidelines and enforce them unless an unusual situation is presented, and in his opinion, this would be an unusual situation; and under the circumstances and in view of Mr. Pullen's statement, he would make a motion to approve this revised site plan. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion for purposes of discussion. Mr. Miller then said he did not think it is in the jurisdiction of this body to legislate things contrary to the rules of the City and that there are other avenues than this body where this should be solved. Mr. Bailey asked the number of parking spaces required for this project and Mr. Callaway answered that 35 spaces are required. Mr. Hall stated that perhaps the City Council would be in a better position to figure the cost and the political implications in many cases, but that this particular case could be solved by this Commission as it is simply a mistake. Mr. Bailey asked if the Commission would be granting a variance, and Mr. Kelly answered that it would not, but rather voting to approve this plan. Mr. Hall asked if this Com- mission has the authority and Mr. Callaway answered that historically the Planning ~ Zon- ing Commission has reviewed site plans and approved with latitude in some cases, but he could not state whether or not those projects were already on the ground. Mr. Miller • asked again what alternatives the applicant would have and Mr. Bailey said that he could appeal to the City Council or go to the Zoning Board of Adjustments. 11r. Callaway informed the Commission that the City Attorney is of the opinion that the only alternative the applicant has is to go before the Zoning Board of Adjustments to request a variance, if this body does not rule in his favor tonight. Mr. Miller said he agreed with this, but Mr. Hall said historically this was not true and that this Commission seems to be charged with this duty. The motion was repeated and an addition made to it to give the option to the applicant to relocate the 4 parking spaces at the rear with staff given the right to determine if they remain there, whether there is actually enough room for them. Votes were cast and motion to approve the site plan was defeated 2-3 with Hall ~ Bailey in favor and Fleming, Kelly ~ Miller opposed. AGENDA ITEM N0. 13: Other Business Mr. Bailey announced the next Northgate Committee meeting for April 6. Mr. Callaway said the Planning Dept. is currently working on an amendment to the Ordinance to establish a separate setback requirement for separate structures in a residential area. Mr. Bailey made the motion to adjourn with Mr. Hall seconding; motion carried unanimously (5-0). APPROVED: ATTEST: 6'~ Roy W. elly, ice airman • City Secretary, Dian Jones r • ldz ~~~ ~i`~ .. }} r-~.,,,. ~ ~~l v~ ~ a ~ ~ ~`' t ~ ~. ~ ~. ( 1 ~~`~ ,~~:1 ,~...~' ~` +,,... ~~ 3~ 7/3'3