Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/20/1986 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission• CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission February 20, 1986 7:00 Y.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman MacGilvray, Members Stallings, Brochu, Wendler, Paulson (arrived late}, and Council Liaison Tongco MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Kaiser and Member Dresser STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director of Planning Callaway, City Attorney Locke, Assistant City Attorney Elmore and Planning Technician Volk AGBNDA ITEM N0. 1. Approval of Minutes - meeting of February 6, 1986. Mr. Wendler made a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Brochu seconded the motion which carried unanimously (4-0). AGBNDA ITEM N0. 2. Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGBNDA ITEM N0. 3. 86-102: A public hearing on the question of rezoning Lot 2 Lakeview Acres located on the north side of Millers Lane, approximately 400 feet east of Texas Avenue, from R-1 Single Family Residential to C-1 General Com'ercial. Applicant is W. C. (Cully) Lipsey, Trustee. Mr. Callaway described the tract, pointed out that this lot is under the same' ownership as an adjacent part of Lot 1, which is zoned C-l, explained area zoning and land uses, and informed the Commissioners that the subject tract includes re:;idential uses with the balance being vacant. He then stated that the Land Use Plan reflects this area as commercial with office commercial uses to the east, reminding them that commercial zoning has already been established to the north and to the south of this tract. He stated that staff recommends approval of this request as the request is in compliance with the land use plan as well as being consistent with area zoning patterns/action. He pointed out that staff's only concern with this request is that approval of it will move an existing R-1/C-1 conflict eastward, however expl<~ined that staff does not consider this to be a serious problem as the conflict already exists and carp be eliminated in the future by establishing the A-P buffer as planned to the east of this property. He then pointed out an alternate would be to est.abl.ish A-P zoning on Lot 2, but staff does not believe that would be the best way to handle buffering. Mr. Wendler asked if any adjacent property owners had voiced concern over this request after receiving notification and Mr. Callaway replied that he had been contacted only by one adjacent property owner. Configuration of the intersection of Millers Lane/Texas Avenue/F.M.2818 was discussed with Mr. Callaway informing them that the Millers Lane side of that intersection will not be developed like the F M 2818 . side of the intersection, that Millers Lane will not be able to handle the • amount of traffic that F.M.2818 handles even after widening takes place, but will carry a traffic load similar to that of Southwest Parkway. Mr. MacGilvray asked if there is any advantage to a common ownership of land in a rezoning request and Mr. Callaway replied that information was given only as a fact, and the only advantage • would be that there would be twice the amount of frontage to work with in developing the land. Mr. Paulson arrived at this time. The public hearing was opened. Switzer Denson, 2502 River Forest, Bryan, came forward, explained that he i.s a partner in the ownership of this land and further explained that at the time this partnership purchased the land, it was believed that it had already been zoned to C-1. Fie then stated that because the land is located along Millers Lane, which is scheduled for widening and connection to Dartmouth, it is prime commercial property. He indicated that right-of-way for the widening of Millers Lane had already been dedicated. John Jordan, 117 Millers Lane came forward, stated he owns part of Lot 3 on the east side of the subject lot, that he lives there and has plans to continue to live there, so basically opposes this request. He went on to explain that there is a lake on his lot, the source of water to which has been cut off by excavation and fill of the land to the north of his tract, therefore the only source of water for his lake now comes from the runoff from land to the west of his lot, and he fears this runoff will be stopped, or if it continues to run into his lake after commercial development. of the tract, will be water of a poor quality. He also explained that he is aware of plans to widen Millers Lane, and further that he has already dedicated right-of-way for that project. Mr. Wendler asked if a buffer zone was required on Lot 2 between the commercial development and Mr. Jordan's lot would he be amenable to the change to which Mr. • Jordan replied that A-P zoning adjacent to his resi.denc;e would be acceptable, but residential development would be preferred. Discussion followed regarding how excavation had happened in the flood plain on the land to the north of this area, with Mr. Paulson explaining that as he under::tands it, the developer of that land had begun to haul in fill dirt without having a permit, but the City had shutdown that operation. He further explained that he does not think that developer is living in this area anymore and that the land has been forclosed on now. City Attorney Locke addressed the two separate statements from the public concerning their "dedication of right-of-way" for the widening of Millers Lane, explaining that the City has purchased all right-of--way it has for that project, and no land was given to the City. Clint Bertrand, 120 Millers bane came forward to state that he has no seriou:> opposition to this request, but that he does believe a buffer is appropriate between commercial development and developed residential land. Mr. Jordan came forward again to state that he has no idea what impact the widening of Millers Lane will have on his residence, but that he does prefer residential development, but in lieu of that, a buffer on Lot 2 would be better than having commercial development right next. to his residence. He added that if the vaaue of his residence is destroyed by the impact of a wide street and commercial devE~lopment, he may change his mind in the future, but at this time, he lives here and is addressing an existing situation. • Mr. Denson came forward again to point out that there is existing commercial zoning directly across Millers Lane from Lot 2, and this rezoning would "square off" a P&Z Minutes 2-20-86 Page 2 commercial area. He added that there is not enough land for a buffer zone on Lot 2. • The Commission and staff discussed the types of buffers and minimum widths of buffer zoning districts, Mr. Brochu asked if the City had any recourse in getting tr-e unlawful landfill corrected to the north of this property. City Attorney Locke stated that because the City participates in the Federal Flood Insurance Pro€;ram, it could seek an injunction against the party who carried in fill. She explainE~d that the Engineering Department would have to evaluate the situation and advise tre~r as to the best solution. Mr. Paulson pointed out that the party who caused the problem is no longer in this area, or even in this state as far as he can ascertain. Mare discussion followed concerning the appeal of establishing a buffer zone, what kind of buffer or screening would be adequate between C-1 and R-1 development;s, with City Attorney Locke stating that there is a possibility that a utility easemE~nt which is normally 20 feet in width could be utilized for a greenbelt buffer. Mrs. Stallings then made a motion to approve this request. Mr. Brochu seconded the motion. Mr. Wendler stated he disagrees with this request, and further that he does not believe the required 6 foot screening fence would be an adequate buffer. Further discussion followed regarding the requirement of the Engineering Department of compliance to the P.R.C. Drainage Statement, with Mr. Paulson pointing out that the City actually has no way to enforce this requirement. if a party wishes to dei'y instructions, as no ordinance addresses that requirement. Council Liaison Tongco asked from the audience if a 50-60 foot buffer of natural woods would be buffer enough. Mr. MacGilvray concurred that would be better than pavement adjacent: t.o the property line, but added that he does not have a good width to suggest. City Attorney Locke stated if that requirement is going to be included with a rezoning • recommendation, she would like to have the opportunity to address the issue i:hrough a memo, and for the rezoning to be considered at a later date unless the owner of the land is interested in establishing that sort of buffer voluntarily. Votes were cast on the motion to recommend approval of this request, with the' motion failing by a vote of 2-3 (MacGilvray, Wendler and Paulson against}. Mr. Wendler then offered a motion to table this item to allow time for the ittter•ested parties to satisfy the questions of adequate buffering and drainage to adjacent lots. Mr. Brochu seconded the motion to table; motion carried unanimously (5-~0}. AGBNDA ITgM N0. 4. 86-103: A public hearing on the question of rezoning Lot 1 Block One Walden Pond Townho'es subdivision (21.64 acres) located on the north side of F.M.2818 approximately 350 feet west of Holleman Drive, from R-4 Low Density Apartments to R-5 Medium Density Apartments. Applicant is Guy Hing, Jr. Mr. Callaway explained the request, if approved, would increase the overall density of this apartment project from the current 346 units allowed with R-4 zoning to 519 with R-5 zoning. He pointed out the northern portion of this tract is developed multi-family residential (104 units} with the balance of the tract being vacant, as is much of the land in the area. The Land Use Plan reflects the area as medium density residential, and the Engineering Department has indicated utilities in the area are adequate to handle the increased density, therefore Mr. Callaway explained that staff recommends approval of this request. He further explained that revised site plans of the project will be required since there will probably be a change in plans. • Stephen King representative of the applicant came forward and offered to answer any questions the Commissioners may have. Mr. MacGilvray asked him why the request is being made f'or P&Z Minutes 2-20-86 Page 3 increased density of the project and he explained that the apartment trend seems to be • toward smaller units, and their plan is to build smaller units of the same high quality as has been built in the existing phases of this project. No one else spoke and motion to approve this unanimously (5-0}. AGBNDA ITBM N0. 5. Addition Phase Two Mr. Callaway explained that this final. plat is consistent with, and represents a portion of a preliminary plat which was previously approved, and staff recommends apF~roval. Mrs. Stallings made a motion to approve this plat with Mr. Wendler seconding the motion. Motion to approve carried unanimously (5-0). AGBNDA ITBM N0. 6. Other business. Mr•. Brochu asked the City to address the issue of the land in the flood plain. which has been disturbed and is located to the north of the tract in Lakeview Acres which was discussed early in this meeting. His specific desire is to get action to reverse the disturbance which has resulted in diverting the runoff. Mr. MacGilvray handed around a draft copy of the Wellborn Road Study and asked for all Commissioners to study and either comment in writing before the next meeting, or be prepared to comment at the meeting of March 6, 1986. AGBNDA ITBM N0. 7. Adjourn. Mr. Brochu made a motion to adjourn; Mr. Wendler seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0). APPROVF,D -~ s Chairman, Ronald Kaiser • ATTEST: the public hearing was closed, afterwhich Mr. Wendler made a request and Mr. Brochu seconded the motion. Motion carried '~ ~~ ~l ~ " 86-~-4$: Final Plat - Lot 5R Block One Schick (420 feet north of SWPkwy on east side of Wellborn Rd.) City Secretary, Dian Jones P&Z Minutes 2-20-86 Page 4 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GUEST REGISTER NAME 3 • '~ r 4 . b--7.~~.% k~ ,z~. o~ ,%~ ,!- ~~ --~-- c (• ,~ IS ' d' ~' .~ .~- 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. • 24. 25. /~, ~ , DATE l^CL~2U A R 5~ ~O , ~~8~~ ADDRESS G ''~ ~- %,' r~ ~_~ ~ ~, ~ -~ ~, -~ ~ ~_ ;_,~ .ice" ~, ~t ~ ~. 3 ~ . r~..:,~-, ~1~~ C~-~~~y, ~t-~:~.~... ~~~~~' ~1~ t~~'.h-~ ~z'Lr~ fir- 5 ,- ~~~ l ~>.Z'' ~-, ~,,1 C -rte ~>~, ~~~~~ , r ,, ~ - '~-- ~/ _, , ~, __ _ ~,. t