Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/16/1986 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission January 16, 1986 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Kaiser, Members Stallings, Dresser, MacGilvray, Wendler and Paulson; also Council Liaison Tongco MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Brochu STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director of Planning Callaway, Assistant City Engineer Smith and Planning Technician Volk AGBNDA ITBM N0. 1. Approval of Minutes - meeting of Deceaber 19, 1985. Mr. Paulson made a motion to approve the minutes; Mr. Wendler seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0). AGBNDA ITBM N0. 2. Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGBNDA ITBM NO. 3. 86-100: A public hearing on the question of • rezoning a 54.99 acre tract (the proposed Devonshire Park subdivision) located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Rock Prairie Road and Texas Avenue (SH6) from Agricultural-Open District A-0 to Coasercial-Industrial District C-Z. Jerry Bishop & Associates, applicant; Joe A. Ferreri, owner. Mr. Callaway pointed out the location of the land on a map on the wall, then explained area zoning and land uses. He informed the Commission that the adopted Land Use Plan reflects the area at the intersection of Rock Prairie Road and Texas Avenue as commercial and medium density residential, with the commercial uses located along the north side of Rock Prairie Road and the medium density residential uses along the south side. He went on to explain that the areas to the south and east of the subject tract are reflected as low density residential, and the subject tract is in the area planned as a medium density residential buffer between commercial uses to the north (across Rock Prairie Road) and low density residential uses to the south and east. He pointed out that establishing C-2 zoning on this entire tract will push commercial zoning well into areas planned as buffers and low density residential, and then providing adequate buffers around the C-2 tract would push the "buffer" zones even further into areas planned for low density residential uses. He went on to explain that a commercial area along the west side of Texas Avenue was planned to extend south to Graham Road, however in May, 1985, a 10.? acre C-2 district was established along the west side of Texas Avenue south of Graham Road, with an R-6 area established to serve as a buffer between the C-2 district and • planned low density residential areas, as well as to provide a "breaking point" for commercial zoning to the south. 1 P&Z Minutes 1-16-86 • He pointed out that the location of commercial zoning on the portion of this tract at the intersection of a major and a minor thoroughfare would be consistent with the City's development policies for commercial locations. He indicated that the realignment of Rock Prairie Road is included in the City's thoroughfare plan, with the intersection of Rock Prairie Road and Texas Avenue being moved to the north, aligning with the portion of Rock Prairie Road on the west side of Texas Avenue, and the portion of Rock Prairie Road between Texas Avenue and the point at which the realignment begins will remain as a collector street. He said staff is concerned with the request because rezoning a tract this large would provide for a much larger commercial area than planned for this location, and if approved, commercial uses would intrude into areas planned for medium and low density residential uses. He explained that establishing C-2 zoning only on the western portion of this tract would not be inconsistent with development policies with respect to location, as long as the commercial zoning does not extern in a strip to the south along Texas Avenue. He reminded the Commission that a preliminary plat has been approved for this tract which included a 5.98 acre tract at the intersection of Texas Avenue and Rock Prairie Road. He explained that the eastern boundary of this proposed 5.98 acre tract is at the same depth off Texas Avenue as the C-1 zoning district on the north side of Rock Prairie Road, and staff recommends that any commercial zoning granted in this area be limited to that depth, with the balance of the area zoned medium and low density residential in accordance with the land use plan. Mr. MacGilvray asked if pushing the buffer areas further from the intersection is • bad and Mr. Callaway replied only because doing that would make a larger commercial area. Discussion followed regarding the C-2 and R-6 zoning on the west side of Texas Avenue from this tract, how the area along Graham Road appears to be developing, location of the city limits, as well as the preliminary plat previously approved for this 55 acres. The public hearing was opened. Larry Wells of Bishop & Associates came forward as a representative of the owner of the land and passed around brochures which he explained represent the owner's plans for developing the area. (A copy of this brochure is included with these minutes.) Mr. Wells stated that at the time another rezoning request was being considered, an area resident stated during the meeting that it was his opinion that commercial development/zoning may well have less impact on a residential area than a medium/high density apartment "buffer area" in that the commercial development would generate less noise, traffic and general impact on the area than an apartment complex occupied by students. He added that a precedent had been set at that time, when the request to rezone land from low density residential to commercial, with no stepdown buffering, was approved. (Area referred to is the northeast corner of the intersection of Southwest Parkway and Wellborn Road, Ordinance No. 1561.) Mr. Wells continued with his presentation by explaining that the approximate center of the developed area of the city is SH30, but in the future when full development of the city takes place, the center of the city will be located approximately at this intersection. • Mr. Wells the explained that Lick Creek is a natural buffer to areas to the south, and the future extension of Bird Pond Road (which will become a major street) where it meets Rock Prairie Road will create an isolated area, and if stepdown zoning is required, it could be accomplished in the small area between the subject tract, and 2 P&Z Minutes 1-16-86 • the extension of Bird Pond Road to the east, and Rock Prairie Road and Lick Creek to the south. (Mr. Wells had a map on the wall which reflected the areas he referred to in his presentation.) He then went on to say that water and sewer demands for C-2 development would be approximately the same as those for medium density residential development, and that Rock Prairie Road will have an 80 foot right-of- way which can readily handle any traffic generated by the proposed type development. Mr. MacGilvray questioned Mr. Wells regarding his statement that someone had made a statement that they preferred commercial development over apartment development next to low density residential uses. Mr. Wells replied that when the rezoning request regarding land at the northeast corner of the intersection of Southwest Parkway and Wellborn was being considered, someone made that statement. M.r. Kaiser asked if Mr. Wells was making a direct quote, and Mr. Wells replied that he was not, but that one resident had given that opinion in the past. Mr. Kaiser asked Mr. Wells if he is suggesting commercial uses right next to low density residential uses as a policy planning guideline and Mr. Wells replied that development could be controlled without stepdown zoning, although it would be difficult for the city to control. He explained that it could be done in this subdivision because of the larger acreage of the tracts which would provide more open space, unlike the development which has taken place at the regional mall. Mr. Kaiser then pointed out that the proposal made in the brochure may never take place, and this Commission must keep this in mind, and consider whether or not the • subject tract is a good location for C-2 zoning/development. Mr. Wells said that he believes that sometimes the Comprehensive Plan is used as an exact tool, and sometimes it is used as a plan, and that in this instance, he believes the subject land is in a good commercial location because of the location of the streets which will be carrying heavy traffic in the future. He pointed out that Bird Pond Road will become a very important north/south corridor when the frontage road becomes a one-way road. Mr. Kaiser said that in his opinion, Mr. Wells has presented a very persuasive argument for further study of the area from the existing developed area of the City to the Industrial Tract at the southernmost city boundary, as well as exemplifying why this whole area should not be left A-0 indefinitely to be zoned on a piecemeal basis. No one else spoke. The public hearing was closed. Discussion followed concerning what uses could be allowed in C-2 zoning districts, the location of the city's largest C-2 zoning district now, the fact that many of the Commissioners had believed the preliminary plat approved for the subject land was for residential development, with Mr. Callaway explaining that the staff report for that plat had indicated the size of the lots were not large enough for residential development, and that zoning of the land would have to be established before the land was final platted. • Mr. Paulson said that he had always envisoned this area developing similar to the area along Graham Road. Mr. Kaiser asked if staff is indicating that C-2 zoning is not inconsistent with the plan, and Mr. Callaway replied that at the intersection there is a tract which is the same depth as the existing commercially zoned area on 3 P&Z Minutes 1-16-86 • the north side of Rock Prairie Road, and staff does not think some C-2 zoning at this location would be inappropriate. Mr. Paulson said he thought commercial zoning should be put in one "lump" rather than to create "strips". Mr. Wendler stated that he thinks the strongest point Mr. Wells made for rezoning this to commercial is the fact that the extension of Bird Pond Road, the location of Lick Creek, Texas Avenue and Rock Prairie Road create an "island". Mr. Kaiser stated the Commission has been looking at the area in a piecemeal matter, and it should be looking at it in a larger content. He added that it is difficult to envision buffering, etc. when studying one tract at a time, and he recommends that a broader study of this area be done. He then asked if staff opposes this request. Mr. Callaway replied that staff opposes any extension of commercial zoning into areas reflected as residential on the adopted Land Use Plan. Mr. Kaiser asked if there had been consistency in the application of the plan across Texas Avenue from this tract and Mr. Callaway replied that rezoning had been consistent with the plan and the policies of the city. Discussion followed concerning the zoning in the Woodcreek subdivision, with Mr. Kaiser reiterating that he has concern with what should take place between this area and the southernmost city limits. Mr. MacGilvray said he has concern regarding the project being proposed on this land. Mr. Kaiser instructed the Commissioners that those plans should be looked at as idealistic plans, but the P&Z should actually consider the merits of the rezoning request, including buffering, development policies and the comprehensive plan itself. He added that in the past, this Commission has avoided putting commercial zoning adjacent to low density residential zoning. Mr. Paulson said this land is undeveloped and has never been • zoned to other than A-0, and asked why the buffer can't be moved out. Mr. MacGilvray said it might be even better if it were moved out. Mr. Kaiser said that Rock Prairie Road will be an arterial and it makes sense to establish commercial zoning at that type of intersection, although it is not necessary to estab:ish commercial zoning at every intersection of that type. He went on to say that he can see the merits of C-2 zoning at this location, but he is bothered by the amount (55 acres) and the buffering aspects, but added that as Mr. Paulson has pointed out, the buffering could take place off this site. Mr. Paulson said he has no problem with the location or the acreage involved with this request, as in the past the city has rezoned many small tracts which added together have made large areas. Mr. Dresser said there is so much land zoned A-0 that he has trouble visualizing what the larger area will look like. He explained the Land Use Plan should be studied from Barron Road to Rock Prairie Road, because it now looks like it is all getting zoned commercial. Mr. Kaiser reminded the Commission that they must look at the options for this request: to approve, to reject or to table the request to give the applicant the opportunity to work with staff in working out something acceptable to all parties. Mr. Callaway stated that staff has no objection to examining alternatives for this tract or even for a larger area. Mr. Dresser said part of the problem is that the city does not zone except by application. Mr. Kaiser said that when land is annexed into the city it comes in as A-0, but: he believes the city should not leave it zoned A-0 indefinitely, and pointed out that this Commission can initiate rezoning. Mr. Paulson said he would not like to table this request because it could delay planned projects, and he believes the city would be better off if action was taken on this request with the larger area to be studied later. Mr. Kaiser disagreed, stating that he would prefer to give the • applicant the greatest flexibility, and perhaps tabling this request would do that, that is to work with staff on possible alternatives. Mr. Callaway explained that this item will not be heard by the council until February 13th, therefore it could 4 • P&Z Minutes 1-16-86 be tabled at this meeting and be acted on at the next P&Z meeting on February 6th without interrupting the advertised schedule. Mrs. Stallings the made a motion to table this item. Mr. Dresser seconded the motion. Mr. Wendler said he would like to see the addition of a stipulation to this motion to table to the effect that the applicant must get together with staff and look at the entire area of the island which will be created between Rock Prairie Road, Bird Pond Road, Texas Avenue and Lick Creek. Mr. Kaiser said he agrees with Mr. Wendler, but would like to add to that stipulation that the addition of buffering, either on this site or off this site, should be considered. Mr. Dresser said the applicant has provided this Commission with his concept of buffering, and appears to be ahead of us. Votes were cast on the motion to table and carried by a vote of 5-1 (Paulson against). AGgNDA ITBM N0. 4. 86-101: A public hearing on the question of rezoning 2 tracts of land (10.83 acres) located on the south side of Harvey Road (SH30) across the street from the intersection of Stallings Drive and Harvey 8oad, frog Adainistrative-Professional District A-P to General Cosaercial District C-1. Janes B. Jett, applicant; Mayfield-Wilkerson-Jefferson Partnership #3, owner. Mr. Callaway explained the request and located the subject tracts on a map on the wall. He pointed out area zoning and existing land uses, adding that this area is • reflected as office-commercial along Harvey Road with high density residential uses to the east, south and west, therefore the requested C-1 zoning would not be in compliance with the plan. He went on the explain, however, that since the adoption of the plan in 1982, there have been several changes in conditions in the area, including establishment of 36.69 acres of C-1 zoning and 15.52 acres of A-P zoning in 1984, and in 1985,$.95 acres of A-P were rezoned to C-1 adjacent and to the south of subject tracts. In addition to these zoning changes since the adoption of the plan in 1982, the proposed width of the Holleman Drive extension has been changed from 39 feet in a 60 foot right-of-way to 47 feet in a 70 foot right-of-way (a commercial street section with sidewalks on both sides}. He went on to point out that at this time there are no land use or zoning conflicts associated with this request; that all adjacent tracts are currently zoned C-1 or R-6. He added that the subject tract has adequate depth and area for commercial zoning. He then explained that although the request is not in compliance with the adopted land use plan, the changes made in area zoning since the adoption of the plan have created a large commercial area south of this tract extending along Holleman Drive from Texas Avenue to the East Bypass and that this tract is adjacent to a portion of that commercial area, and although it does not have access to Holleman Drive now, a proposed extension of Stallings to Holleman would provide access to the Holleman Drive area. He further explained that approval of this request will not substantially change area zoning patterns or the total amount of C-1 zoning in this area. Therefore, staff finds the current zoning to be in compliance with the land use plan, but the requested zoning is consistent with area zoning and recent rezonings in the area. He pointed out that the C-1 zoning district would have greater traffic generating potential than the existing A-P • zoning, but the extension of Stallings as referenced in the application would provide for alternative access to Holleman Drive. 5 P&Z Minutes 1-16-86 He then informed the Commission that staff recommends that any approval of this request be contingent upon the extension of Stallings Drive as referenced by the applicant on the rezoning application. Mrs. Stallings asked who would pay for the extension of Stallings Drive and Mr. Callaway explained that under current practices, the developer pays for streets, but in some instances the city participates in certain costs, adding that this determination is made by the Engineering department. Mr. Kaiser stated that this tract was discussed during the discussion of the last rezoning request in the area regarding impact on the flood plain and floodways. Mr. MacGilvray stated he would have liked to have a copy of the minutes of previous rezoning requests in the area to help refresh his memory. The public hearing was opened. Jim Jett, agent for the applicant came forward and gave a brief synopsis of the background of rezoning requests in the area, then listed his reasons for requesting this zoning district as being changes in the way the area will be developed due to the size of the Holleman Street extension, as well as economic factors which include making the extension of Stallings while the contractor is at the location working on the extension of Holleman. He explained that there will be substantial changes to the flood plain in this area, but the plan is to line up the creek with the City's portion of the project via open structures and not via a concrete structure. He added that he would accept staff's recommendation regarding rezoning this area conditionally, subject to the extension as proposed on the application of Stallings Drive. He said that condition would not pose a problem to him as he does not own the land, and would not purchase it without the rezoning, and if it is rezoned, he plans to extend Stallings Drive. He concluded by staying that the highest and best use of this land is commercial, and with the location of the mall on one end, and the university situated at the other end, this area will become the "downtown" of College Station. Discussion followed between Mr. Kaiser and Mr. Jett regarding who would bear the cost of the extension of Stallings Drive if rezoning was granted with that condition. Mr. Jett stated that as far as he has found out to date, only flood control will allow any participation, but he is not ready to state that he will bear the entire cost of the street. Mr. Kaiser stated he would not want to encumber the City Council with the cost of building a street because it was made a condition to rezoning. Mr. Jett said that he is not ready to capitulate yet, but the only ordinance he can find under which he can get any help has to do with flood control, but reiterated he is not ready to commit to the entire cost at this time. Mrs. Tongco asked from the audience how may feet of frontage this land will have on SH30 if it is combined and Mr. Jett said there would be 936 feet of frontage with 70 feet of right-of-way taken away for the extension of Stallings. He clarified by stating that basically that street cuts the land in half with the creek just to the east of Stallings Drive, and there would be no access on the southeast corner due to the location of the creek. No one else spoke. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Kaiser stated he is uncomfortable recommending rezoning contingent upon Stallings Drive being extended and further that he believes this Commission must • give maximum flexibility to both the City and the developer. Mr. Dresser asked if there would be any liability incurred with a rezoning of that type and Mr. Kaiser said that Mr. Jett has said he might use that contingency, thus creating unfair 6 P&Z Minutes 1-16-86 • bargaining power to him, and further that the City may be required to bear the cost. Mr. Callaway explained that this contingency was only considered by staff because of the traffic impact commercial zoning might cause, but staff has not recommended that contingency to be essential in the rezoning, but rather has been mentioned as a possibility to consider. He further explained that he does not know if this contingency rould cause an expense to the City, but that he would refer the question to the Legal department for advice prior to the public hearing before the council. Mr. MacGilvray said he does not think this kind of contingency would cause a problem to the city, and further that if this Commission believes C-1 should be granted only if Stallings Drive is extended, that information should be passed along to the council for their consideration. Mr. Kaiser said that he had previously voted in opposition to commercial zoning on the tract to the south of this land because of the impact on the flood plain, adding that he believes flood plains should be considered amenities and should be saved and not paved. He added that C-1 development could cause significant changes in the flood plain whereas A-P development might not. Mr. Wendler said that he would agree except that he believes this area will eventually become the downtown area of the City. Mr. MacGilvray said that combining the land into one parcel might give the developer more opportunity to work with the flood plain. Mr. Kaiser again stated that we should recognize the amenities of a flood plain and t:ry to • retain them and not "fix" them with development and concrete. Mr. Paulson then made a motion to approve this rezoning request without the contingency of the extension of Stallings Drive. Mrs. Stallings seconded the motion. Mr. MacGilvray voiced disagreement with leaving out the contingency, but Mr. Wendler stated that the inclusion of that stipulation may well affect the cost of the land. Mr. Jett asked to come forward to address the contingency, and stated that he is in favor of this contingency, adding that he does not think it would encumber the city with costs of developing the street because as far as he has ascertained, ordinances preclude him from getting money for development of this street from the City. Mr. Paulson said he would be amenable to an amendment to the motion, or would withdraw the motion. He then withdrew the motion. Mrs. Stallings then made a motion to approve this rezoning request with the contingency that Stallings Drive be extended through to the Holleman Drive extension. Mr. Wendler seconded the motion. Mrs. Tongco asked if another condition could be attached, that being the orignal contingency would remain only upon favorable advice from the Legal department. Mr. Callaway replied that staff would contact the Legal department for advice prior to council consideration. Votes were cast on the motion to rezone this land to C-1 contingent upon the extension of Stallings Drive to the extension of Holleman Drive, and the motion carried by a vote of 5-1 with Mr. Kaiser voting against it because of the flood • plain situation. 7 P&Z Minutes AGBNDA ITEM N0. 5. 86-Z00: University Park Section II. 1-16-86 Final Plat - Replat Lot 3 Block V Mr. Callaway explained that the preliminary plat had been approved with the notation in the minutes that the developer is put on notice that both tracts on this plat would be treated as one far purposes of signage, and that staff recommends approval of this final plat with the stipulation that a note to that effect is included on the plat. Mr. Paulson made a motion to approve this final plat with the stipulation that a note is included on the plat regarding signage. Mr. Dresser seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0). AGBNDA ITEM NO. 6. 86-201: Final Plat - Phoenix Addition Phase I. Mr. Callaway explained that plat, adding that staff recommends approval of the plat as shown. Discussion followed concerning the church which is planned for this tract, afterwhich Mr. Dresser made a motion to approve the plat. Mr. Paulson seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0). AGBNDA ITBM N0. 7. Other business. Mr. Callaway said the second draft of the Wellborn Road study has been given to the committee members. He then invited the Commission to participate with staff when it begins to take a closer look at the large area on which rezoning was tabled tonight. Mr. Wendler expressed interest. Mr. Paulson said that he believes the area from Graham Road to Rock Prairie Road to Wellborn Road to Greens Prairie Road should be studied by a committee in the near future. Mr. Kaiser agreed, stating that an area this large should not be considered on an ad hoc basis. Discussion followed after Mr. Dresser expressed confusion regarding this body taking the initiative in rezoning land. Mr. Callaway attempted to explain how that would work, adding that whoever initiates rezoning, the request is considered in public hearings. Mr. Dresser said that he is somewhat confused as rezoning has not been the result of the other two studies done by committtees recently, and then stated that he definitely believes the Comprehensive Plan should be more developed in addressing this large southern portion of the city. Mr. MacGilvray said that he believes the staff should be "pro-active" and this Commission should be "re-active", adding that he does not have great confidence in the Plan, and has less confidence in it the further south you go. He suggested that it would be very instructive to take the plan and superimpose it over the actual owner/land use. He stated emphatically this body is unprepared for requests of the nature of that considered tonight. Mr. Kaiser stated he had asked staff for a report from the Industrial Foundation regarding that large area referred to as the Industrial Park, but has had no information forthcoming. He added that he is aware of several earlier plans for development of the area, but he does not: know if those plans are still applicable. He then stated he would take the responsibility of reporting this body's conversations to staff and the city council regarding this area. . Mr. Kaiser then reported that staff is in the process of updating complete information regarding the location of all active Conditional Use Permits which have been granted and maps will be prepared in the future to show that information. 8 P&Z Minutes • AGBNDA ITBM N0. 8. Adjourn. 1-16-86 Mr. Paulson made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Wendler seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0}. APPROVED: ATTEST: ------------------------------- City Secretary, Dian Jones • • ~---r,~~ -----/ =~~--- , Chairman, Ronald Kaiser 9 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GUEST REGISTER .~ s~ DATE ~.~'~.-~~.; ~ ice'' . NAME --~ ,, ADDRESS /~'!if. ~~ ~, 4. ~ ~, ~~~`~ tt ~ ~ , ~ ;~, ~~ ~~ <- ~ 8. 9. 10. 11 . 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.