Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/05/1984 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission April 5, 1984 7:00 P.M. • • MEMBERS PRESENT: All present. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Mayo, Ass 't. Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer Pullen, Asst. Zoning Official Johnson and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Presentation of Plaques in Recognition of Service to retiring members of the Commission by Mayor Halter. Presentation of Plaques postponed; agenda item deleted. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Approval of Minutes - meeting of March 1, 1984 Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve the minutes with Mr. Hansen seconding. Motion carried 6-0-1 (Martyn abstained . AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: Hear Visitors No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: 84-801: A Public hearing on the question of amending Section 5-M of Ordinance No. 850, the zoning ordinance for the City of College Station revising the District M-2 Heavy Industrial District Regulations regarding permitted uses. Mr. Callaway referred to the draft ordinance and explained that it excludes all C-1 General Commercial uses from the M-2 zoned land in the City, thereby minimizing the crossover bet- ween commercial and industrial zones. He further explained that the current ordinance is non-cumulative in commercial and residential zones, and the benefits of non-cumulative zoning include:(1) It would enable the City's plan and subsequent zoning to anticipate and provide for actual uses; (2) It would allow the City to preserve areas for specific uses (in this case, industrial); and (3) It would eliminate possible conflicts between different categories of uses within the same zoning district. After brief discussion by the Commission the public hearing was opened. No one spoke. Public hearing was closed. Mr. Martyn stated that he believes this is a good ordinance and he will back it. Mr. Hansen asked staff if there had been any feedback from citizens notified of this hearing, either owners of M-2 zoned land, or property owners within 200 feet of land zoned M-2. Mr. Callaway said that staff had only received a small number of questions from property owners within 200 feet, but there had been no opinions or concerns regarding the actual draft ordinance voiced. Mr. Hill asked the total number of acres which are zoned M-2. Mr. Callaway replied that he did not know the actual numbers of acres involved, but went to the zoning map and pointed out the actual tracts involved. Mr. Bailey made a motion to recommend approval of this draft ordinance which deletes C-1 uses from M-2 zoning districts. Mr. Hansen seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. (7-0) PAZ Minutes 4-5-84 page 2 AGENDA ITEM N0. 5: Consideration of preliminary Northgate zonin plan and draft North- • gate zoning district. Mr. Mayo referred to the memo in the packets and briefly explained the draft plan, after which he asked for input from the Commissioners. He explained that he has plans to meet with merchants and people in the Northgate area in the near future to get their input as well. He spoke of problems with utilities in the area which would be faced with any high density development. He explained that this proposed plan takes the non-conformity of most of the area out of its current status and makes it conforming. He said that this plan would also allow development or redevelopment of some of the vacant tracts in the area. He further explained that downzoning of some of the areas will eliminate the exist- ing allowable high density development as more than one lot would have to be combined to be developed into multi-family units. Mr. Bailey asked if the church will be in the C-1 district and Mr. Mayo replied that it would as he has tried to keep the area zoning compact and the church is a part of the Northgate area. He went on to explain that the special commercial zone would eliminate setback requirements, reduce parking requirements and hopefully allow some parking lots to be built which later might allow the removal of all parking requirements and make this area similar to many other "downtown" areas in other cities. Mr. Hansen asked how park- ing lots might be financed, and Mr. Mayo replied that initially there is a possibility that C.D. funds might be used, and hopefully some way can be developed for area citizens to put money back into C.D. funds. Mr. Mayo went on to explain that this plan would include having merchants and landowners in the area to get involved in the available parking, and perhaps even run it. Mr. Bailey asked what is being done to try to maintain the mix of business as it exists today and Mr. Mayo referred to the paragraph in the memo which • addresses limiting high intensity uses, but went on to explain that he is not sure yet just how this will be handled. Mr. Hansen asked if l space per 400 square feet of building would be adequate if the pro- posed parking lots do not go in for several years. Mr. Mayo said that this requirement would limit development to very small businesses. Mr. Mayo went on to explain that a landscaping ordinance for this area would have to be written which would be completely separate from the landscaping ordinance for the remainder of the City. Mr. Bailey asked if attempts had been made to enter into negotiations with TAMU and Mr. Mayo said that very little serious thought had been given to that at this time as in the past any attempts have been futile. Mr. Hill said he would like to see a very definitive parking impact study made and would like also to see an iron clad decision on parking made before an ordinance is passed. He went on to say that he does not see any reason for any special financial consideration to be given these people that is not given to other citizens in the City. He cautioned that the assumption must not be made that a parking lot will be built until there is something concrete. Mr. Hill questioned the use of the phrase "historic significance" in the memo, explaining that he wonders what the historic value of this area is. Mr. Mayo said that historically, the problem is that most of this area is not subdivided or developed according to almost any of our currence ordinance, and most of the lost do not have the area on the ground, therefore it is impossible to provide parking and landscaping to meet our present ordi- nance requirements. He speculated that if the City can accomplish what it aims to, at some point in time this area may actually become an historic district which would include the preservation of buildings as well as the restoration of others. Mr. Martyn said that referring to the historic significance of the area is fine, but some day someone is going • to start building over there where buildings have been razed or burned down, and he won- dered how that would be handled if the "historic construction" is gone. Mr. Hill said he has mixed feelings about letting businesses develop without setbacks, etc., on vacant lots. He sand that he questions why the City would allow buildings to be built to specifications developed 40-50 years ago in 1884 or 1985, unless it's just to develop a rather compact, PAZ Minutes 4-5-84 page 3 contiguous business district. Mr. Mayo explained that hopefully a definition of the • character of the area will be developed, and any new development will be in character with Mr. Bailey said that Northgate is there and on the ground, but that some buildings have been destroyed and cannot 6e rebuilt under the current ordinance, and the City is making an attempt to make the vacant lots usable without increasing the intensity of use in the area, and suggested forgetting the "historical value" and find a way to use the vacant land to generate some tax money for the City. Mr. Hill said he would prefer a down- grading of intensity of use to perhaps 80i of what is currently there should the time come to replace or change uses, which would perhaps allow some setbacks, etc., but • generally disagreed to the idea of committing the City to this intensity of use of this particular area in perpetuity. the area. Mr. Martyn asked if this would be to perhaps encourage development of vacant tracts, and if this is the case, perhaps the City could have more authority over site plan approval in the future. Mr. Miller explained that this is an attempt to make something good of a very difficult situation. Mr. Bailey said that he had been under the impression that the ordinance would be written specifically for existing buildings, and vacant tract development would be under the current ordinance. Mr. Mayo replied that the current ordinance would not allow any building in character with what exists in the area because of the requirements it imposes. Mr. Hill asked if "in character" means to develop something which looks like what is already there, and then asked what the desirable characteristics of the Northgate area are,. and wondered if this "char- acter" should be duplicated in the future.He went on to say that he sees nothing desirable enough there to be duplicated. He then asked what would happen if a whole block is razed or burned down and wondered why the City should allow redevelopment to such an intensity as is already there. He stated that if there is some possible alternative to this prop©sal which would be more desirable, he thinks it should be pursued. Mr. Miller said that this plan shows promise and perhaps a "straw vote" from the Commission would be in .order. Mr. Mayo replied that he is not asking for any action, but is primarily asking for input or direction. Mr. Hill asked that any suggestions be passed along to staff for inclusion. PAZ Minutes 4-5-84 page 4 • AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: FINAL PLAT - REGENCY SQUARE (84-207) Mr, Mayo presented the plafi, Mr, Bailey made a motion to approve with Mr. Kelly seconding. Motion carried unanimously (7-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 7: FLNAL PLAT - SOUTHWEST PLACE (84-208) Mr. Mayo explained this. plat, also explaining the proposed uses of these lots. Mr. Martyn made a motion to approve with Mr. Hansen seconding. Motion carried unanimously (7-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 8: FINAL PLAT - FOXFIRE PHASE IV (84-209) Mr. Mayo explained the plat and included the information that the land is in the E.T.J. Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve the plat with Mr. Hansen seconding. Motion carried unanimously (7-0). • AGENDA ITEM N0, 9: FINAL PLAT - PARK PLACE (84-210) Mr. Hansen asked to be excused from participation on this item. Mr. Mayo explained the plat, stating that the rezoning of this land to C-l had been conditional on a plat being filed to consolidate the lots. We stated that this plat does this and also controls access to the land. Staff recommends approval of this plat as shown. Mr. Bailey made a motion to approve with Mr. Martyn seconding. Motion carried 6-0-1 (Hansen abstained). AGENDA ITEM N0, 10: FINAL PLAT - CHIMNEY HILL RETAIL PLAZA (84-211) Mr. Mayo located the land as being in the FedMart project, explaining the plat is for the pur- pose of subdividing out the corner tract, but existing access areas into the shopping center will be used.. Mr. Miller made a motion to approve the plat with Mr. Hansen seconding. Motion carried unanimously (7-0). AGENDA ITEM N0, 11: Establl.sh arkin re uirements for car dealershi to be located at Southwest Parkway and SH Frontage Road. ($4-408) Mr. Mayo explained the purpose of this agenda item is for the Commission to establish parking requirements for this proposed dealership as is required by ordinance. He ex- Plained the location of the project, stating that staff recommends a parking requirement of l space per 250 square feet of sales building and l space per 100 square feet of service building, with the bays being counted as spaces. He further explained that staff does not recommend an employee parking requirement, but has adjusted the requirement accprding to square footage. He then stated that the plan as shown by the applicant • would meet these recommended requirements. Mr, Mayo went on to inform the Commission PAZ Minutes 4-5-84 Page 5 that should it determine that these recommended parking requirements be approved for • this project, staff plans to incorporate these same requirements for all car dealerships in the revised zoning ordinance which is now being prepared. Discussion followed concerning the location of this project and how the site will be affected 6y the location of the extension of Southwest Parkway. Mr. Mayo pointed out that the Commission is not approving this site plan, but rather establishing parking requirements, and that it is his opinion that the Project Review Committee may have to look at a new site plan on this site in the future, because a portion of this property will probably be taken with the extension of the street. He went on to say that the plat on this property is being held until the exact location of Southwest Parkway is determined. Discussion followed concerning how a determination was made to recommend the required parking for this project, with Mr. Kelly expressing his opinion that the requirement of one space per 100 square feet of service building is an excessive require- ment. Mr. Bailey then made a motion to require 1 parking space per 250 square feet of sales building and 1 parking space per 100 square feet of service building, with the bays counting as parking spaces for this project. Mr. Miller seconded the motion. More discussion followed concerning how spaces wilt be designated for customer parking and those which will be used for show spaces with Mr. Mayo expressing an opinion that this will probably control itself, and if there are no spaces available for customers, they will leave. Mr. Kaiser asked if this motion addresses only this project, or all in the future also. Mr. Hill stated that the motion addresses only this project, but that staff has indicated they will include this requirement in the revised ordinance should the Commission approve this project tonight. Motion as stated above carried unanimously • (7-0) . AGBNDA ITEM N0. 12: Other Business Staff was asked if any determination had been made on the sight distance triangle at the corner of Glade and Southwest Parkway and Mr, Callaway advised the Commission that the City survey crew had checked this corner and had determined that it is in compliance with ordinances, but an additional investigation is being done by the Engineering depart- ment. AGENDA ITEM N0. 13: Adjourn Mr. Kelly made a motion to adjourn with Mr. Miller seconding. Motion to adjourn carried unanimously (7-0). APPROVED: David B. Hill, Chairman ATTEST: • City Secretary, pian Jones PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION • • GUEST REGISTER i ,/ DATE ..~ ~ ~5~ NAME ADDRESS 1. ~ / Q 4 . "~7)/.J/1,/~~ ~-,~~14.1~,,~ /~38 `~ - !7 ~GI%i~/~8~2.2ui- ~ . 5 • ~1?~ ~~~11~-c Wiz-- ~ ~~ ~ ~c~ ( ~ r. 9. 10. il. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16: 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23• 24. 25.