Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/06/1984 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTBS • CITY OF COLL$GE STATION, TBXAS Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 1984 7:00 P.M. MBMBBRS PRBSBNT: Chairasn Hansen, Members Stallings, Brochu MacGilvray, Tongco and Raiser MBMBBRS ABSBNT: Member Martyn STAFF PRBSBNT: Assistant Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer Pullen, Zoning Official Kee and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA ITBM NO_ 1_ Approval of Minutes _ Meeting of Nove~ber 15: 1984. - Mrs. Stallings made a motion to approve the minutes with Mr. MacGilvray seconding. Motion carried unanimously (6-0). AGENDA ITBM NO_ 2: Hear Visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITBM NO_ 3s 84-805_ A public hearing to consider an ordinance replacing Section 8 of Ordinance 850 of the City of • College Station: Texag: relating t_o signal generally regulating their locations height: and areal and providing for an effective date_ Mr. Hansen explained that due to problems with the proposed ordinance at the time the packet was prepared, the final draft ordinance was not, and is still not available. He indicated that the public hearing will be opened tonight, the public will be invited to speak, and the public hearing will remain open through the next meeting of the Commission on December 20th to allow further discussion after review of the proposed ordinance is possible. The public hearing was opened. Jim Gardner came forward to indicate interest in the new ordinance and stated he is looking forward to seeing it when it is available to the public. No one else spoke. Mr. MacGilvray then made a motion to table this item while leaving the public hearing open. Mr. Brochu seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0). AGENDA ITBM NO_ 4: 84--127: A public hearing on the guestion of rezoning approxi~ately 4.4744 acres of land on the south side of University Drive: approximately 1200 feet east of Bast Tarrow Street formerly _FedMa_rt Drivel f_r_om Administrativ_e_-Pro_fessi_onal District A=P to General Commercial District C_1_ • Mr. Callaway located the tract, pointed out area zoning and uses, and stated the tract is now vacant. He then referred to the Land • Use Plan which reflects this area for High Density Residential uses. He stated that C-1 development at this location is not consistent with either the City's development policies or the approved Land Use Plan. He pointed out that this request does not provide for a buffer to the west (zoned R-3) and then pointed out that there seems to be ample land to provide a buffer. In answer to a question, he then pointed out the location of the future extension of Lincoln Street. Mr. Hansen asked if this request is back before this Commission as the result of a unanimous suggestion from the Council and Mr. Callaway replied that although he was not present at that particular Council meeting, the question Council had seemed to be the amount of C-1 land and the lack of a buffer. The public hearing was opened. Damon Tassos, representative and part owner of Cedar Creek Ltd. came forward and handed out a scale drawing of his zoning proposal. He stated that when the Council brought up the need for a buffer, he thought the ? foot high brick wall between the condos and the garden homes, and the 150 ft. lot depth of the garden home lots would suffice. He then indicated that his plans now would include a fence of some sort between the existing condo project and the A-P zoned land, with the A-P land acting as a buffer between the condos and the requested C-1 zoning. He then stated if the depth of the A-P tract would be increased, he would not be able to build a restaurant on the remaining C-1 land. He then spoke of his hopes • for development of a restaurant. Mr. MacGilvray asked how the 125 foot depth of the A-P tract was reached. Mr. Tassos explained that it was the result of studying what would be needed for development of the restaurant he wants and this reflects the remainder of the larger tract of land. Mr. Tassos then brought another drawing forward which showed that there would be room for 2 buildings and the required parking for those buildings on the A-P tract as he proposed. Jack Goebel spoke from the audience and explained the type of office building which would be developed on this tract. No one else spoke and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Hansen said that he would rather see all of this land zoned as C-1 rather than squeezing in this small A-P tract. Mr. MacGilvray stated that this narrow A-P tract might, indeed, be hard to develop, and that he, too, wondered if all C-1 would not be better than this proposal. Mr. Kaiser stated he is concerned with zoning a tract of land (in this case the proposed, remaining A-P tract) which could not be developed, therefore creating legal problems. Mr. MacGilvray pointed out that tract is already zoned A-P. City Bngineer Pullen asked Mr. Callaway if parking for A-P projects could be developed in C-1 tracts, and Mr. Callaway • replied that might be a possibility if both tracts remained under one ownership, but that he could not answer definitely without 2 having a site plan to review. Mr. Callaway continued by stating • that 200 feet has been used as a buffer area in the past, but that is not policy nor is it covered by ordinance, further stating that the proposed 125 feet complies with lot width requirements. Mr. Pullen stated that if the C-1 tract could be used to develop parking for the A-P project, then the A-P tract would easily accommodate a building. Mr. Callaway reminded the Commissioners that the C-1 request is what is being considered at this meeting. Mr. Kaiser reiterated that he is concerned that this 125 ft. tract which is being used for a buffer might be an "unbuildable" tract, and the A-P zoning of it night be struck down. Mr. Tassos then tried to clarify his conceptual plans for the A-P tract. Mr. MacGilvray said this request violates the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Brochu pointed out that creating a C-1 zone at this location might cause more C-1 zoning near this location, and it seems to him that the suitable zoning on this land is in question tonight. Mr. Kaiser said that the Lincoln Street extension would create a major intersection to the east of this land, and that intersection would be the proper location for commercial development, adding that perhaps this tract would then be a natural extension of commercial development/zoning at the intersection. Mr. MacGilvray then asked staff if it had considered the low density residential zoning at that future major intersection. Mr. Callaway pointed out that the extension • of Lincoln Street will create an intersection of a collector street and a major thoroughfare, and the City's development policies limit C-1 zoning to major intersections. Mrs. Tongco interjected the statement that if this entire large area were under the same ownership, some kind of comprehensive zoning could be done, but as things are, that cannot be done. Mr. Kaiser stated that he does not think the proposed 125 ft. of A-P zoning represents the "adequate buffering" requested by Council. Mr. Brochu asked just what is everybody trying to buffer, pointing out that the existing High Density development represents a buffer to the single family zoning, and the A-P buffer would be an additional buffer, thus creating a very large buffer. Mr. Callaway agreed that the City's development policies discuss the use of higher density development as an appropriate buffer. Mr. Kaiser made a motion to deny this C-1 request for the following reasons: (1) It is against the development policies of the City; (Z) It is not in compliance with the approved Land Use Plan; (3) Although the extension of Lincoln Street may in the future create a major intersection where C-1 development would be appropriate, it is not now appropriate at this location; and, (4) He fears that an A-P tract as small as this might create problems this City does not need. Mr. Brochu seconded this motion to deny the request. Votes were cast and the motion to deny carried • unanimously {6-0). 3 AGBNDA ITEM NO_ 5_ 84-_1291 A public hearing on the guestion of rezoning ?_99 acres of land on the north side of Southwest • Parkway approximately 400 feet west of Welsh Street: from Apartments Low Density District R-4 to Apartments Medium Density Digt_rict_ R_5. Application i_s in the name of Alan R_ Sumner. Mr. Callaway located the tract, pointed out current area zoning and uses (sub3ect tract is vacant), and informed the Commission that this area is shown as High Density Residential on the Land Use Plan and that this request would allow an additional 63 units over that allowed in an R-4 zoning district. He added that this request complies with all area development and the City's development policies. The public hearing was opened. Gary Rsymond came forward as a representative of Alan R. Sumner Interests of Richardson, Texas. He stated they want to develop very nice apartments and want to increase the density allowed to cover offering more amenities in a more economical manner. He passed out some "very conceptual" plans and offered to answer any questions the Commission night have. Various questions regarding the proposed height of the units, availability utilities and market studies were asked by the Commission and answered by Mr. Raymond. No one else spoke and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Hansen indicated that this request is compatible with surrounding zoning districts. Mr. Kaiser said he has no problem • with this request, but he is intrigued with the request to develop apartments when the market is currently saturated. Mr. Brochu made a motion to approve this request with Mrs. Tongco seconding the motion. Motion to approve the request carried unanimously (6-0). AGBNDA IT$M N0. 6s 84_237_ Final Plat -_ alenhav_en Bgtates Phase V X1_914 acresZ Mr. Callaway located the land, explained that this final plat conforms with the approved Preliminary Plat and stated staff recommends approval. Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to approve this plat with Mrs. Stallings seconding the motion. Motion carried unanimously (6-0). AGBNDA IT$M NO_ 7: $4-_238_ Final Plat -_ Glenhav_en Bstates - P_hase VI X4.370 acres - Mr. Callaway located the land, explained that this final plat is consistent with the approved Master Preliminary Plat, informed the Commission that all the land is zoned A-P, and stated that staff recommends approval of this plat as submitted. Mrs. Tongco made a motion to approve the plat; Mr. Brochu seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0). AGBNDA ITBM N0. 8s 84-_239s Final Plat _ Woodson Village 5th • Installment Section 2 X6_25 acres 4 Mr. Callaway explained the subdivision plans, located the land on • a map and stated staff recommends approval with Presubmission Conference conditions. Mr. MacGilvray stated that some of the lots seem to be totally within the flood plain and Mr. Pullen pointed out that the right-of-way has been platted but is not yet built, that the plat shows both existing flood plain and proposed flood plain, and further that reports regarding flood plain development must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of any building permits. Mr. Hansen questioned item g5 on that report which refers to the lack of a Letter of Guarantee from the developer and Mr. Callaway stated that is an option of the developer, adding that all infrastructure must be in place and accepted by the City prior to filing the plat. Mr. Pullen added that the only flooding problem has been with the sanitary sewers in that area, and that problem has recently been rectified. He also stated that the drainage channel will remain "natural". Mr. Hansen asked if there are any other items on the report which are outstanding and Mr. Callaway replied that he is not aware of the status, but added that individual departments must review the plat and the construction drawings prior to acceptance. Don Garrett spoke from the audience after being granted permission and identified himself as the engineer on this project and stated that all items have been taken care of. Mr. Callaway replied that item ~6 regarding lot size on a specific lot has not been taken care of and that the Zoning Board of Adjustment would have to grant a variance if this plat is approved as submitted. • Mrs. Stallings then made a motion to approve this plat with Presubmission Conference report conditions. Mr. Brochu seconded the motion which failed as a result of a tie vote with MacGilvray, Tongco and Kaiser voting against the motion. After the voting, Mr. Hansen asked for an explanation from the Commissioners who voted against this motion. Mr. MacGilvray said that the Zoning Board of Adjustment is charged with the responsibility of taking care of existing problems and should not have to handle problems involving something which is not even off the drawing board. He added that he sees no reason for not meeting ordinance requirements on a clear piece of ground. Don Garrett of Garrett Bngineering, the firm that prepared this plat asked to speak, and the Commission granted permission. He stated that this property has been before the Commission snd the Council before, that everything meets requirements except this one lot, and even that lot has more square footage than is required. He went on to state that some months before, a Preliminary Plat on this property was approved with no questions regarding lot size, so this final plat has been prepared, based on the approval of that plat. He informed the Commission that all construction plans must be approved by the Bngineering Department prior to submitting a final plat for approval, that this requirement has been done, and that he does not understand this action now. He stated emphatically that he believes any • problems which arise should be handled at the time the preliminary plat is reviewed, and that new problems should not be 5 raised after a final plat has been prepared and submitted after the time and expense taken to do so. Mr. MacGilvray asked just • when the preliminary plat had been before the Commission for approval and Mr. Garrett replied that it had been some months before, perhaps October or November.(Files reflect that P&Z ruled on this plat 1/20/83.) Mr. Hansen asked staff if there had been this problem then, and Mr. Pullen replied that he did not recall. Mr. Kaiser advised that this is a good example for the need of the 2 step system. Mr. Garrett replied that if the same plat is to be torn apart twice, then developers should not have to have construction plans approved prior to submitting the final plat. He then added that even though perhaps he should not say this that this identical plat has been to court recently. Mr. Callaway explained that the Zoning Ordinance requires that lots in R-1 Single Family Zoning Districts must have a lot depth of 100 feet, and this lot has a depth of only 93.44 feet which might be contributed to the fact that it is on a cul-de-sac. Mr. Garrett replied that a house could still be built on that lot. Mr. MacGilvray pointed out that the Presubmission Report states that the PKZ Commission grants variances to lot sizes, but it should say that the ZBA handles this function. Mr. Callaway agreed with Mr. MacGilvray and suggested that the Commission rule on this plat and leave the variance up the the ZBA, perhaps attaching a recommendation for that body. Mr. Hansen said that a final plat is not subject to a ZBA variance and this commission could approve the plat/variance. Mr. Kaiser stated emphatically that he disagreed and further that this plat does not conform to the City's ordinance requirements and whether or not a house can be built on the lot has nothing to do with it. Mr. Hansen said that approving a preliminary plat and then not approving an identical final plat is not being fair to the applicant. Mr. MacGilvray stated again that the ZBA can grant a variance. Mrs. Tongco stated if that is the case, she would be willing to change her vote. Mr. MacGilvray asked if there is any reason for a variance request not going first to the ZBA and both Mr. Callaway and Mrs. Kee replied there is no good reason. More discussion followed as to what might be done to rectify the problem of this lot depth, with Mr. Kaiser stating that mistakes might be made, and certainly have been made, but he sees no reason for the City to have to bear the brunt of all mistakes when one can obviously be avoided. Mrs. Toagco made a motion to approve this plat on the condition that the Zoning Board of Adjustment grants a variance to the lot depth required, and also subject to the Presubmission Conference report conditions. Mrs. Stallings seconded this motion which carried by a vote of 4-2 with Mr. Kaiser and Mr. MacGilvray voting against the motion. AGBNDA ITEM N0. 9_ 84-_31bt Master Preliminary Plat -_ Division of Ken W_ 5chick_1 Trustee: 8.74 acre remainder of 29_62 acre tract • Mr. Callaway explained the plat, pointing out that all conditions 6 on the Presubmission Conference report must be met submitting a final plat, and staff would recommend • this plat with that condition. Mr. MacQilvray made approve this plat subject to the condition that all listed on the Presubmission Conference report must to submitting a final plat on this property. Mrs. seconded this motion which carried unanimously 6-0. prior to approval of a motion to conditions be met prior Stallings AGgNDA ITBM NO_ 10_ Other business Mr. Callaway requested a day and time be set for a P&Z workshop to study and discuss the sign ordinance. Monday, December 1?, 1984 at 2:00 P.M. was chosen. Mr. Raiser announced that the Supreme Court has recently reached a decision to uphold the City's position on parkland dedication, and remanded the case back to the lower court. No other business was discussed and the meeting was adjourned. APPROVED: ---- ---------------------- ve Hansen, Chairman • ATTBST: --Y ~"' /~-~--- -------------------- Dian Jone City Secretary • 7 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NAM'" 2. 3. 4. s. 6. 7. 8. 9. to. ~~ 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. GUEST REGISTER DATE December 6, 1984 ADDRESS ~6/~ ~ ~, ~ i 6 `700 ~'m ~ . S. fr" '! ~A r~ ~"/ 1/ ~. ~ ern ~~ ~~.~,~ (~~- ~ ~~~~~, -~, t. f" 25.