Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/1986 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission~9.TNUTES • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and 7,oning Commission September 18, 198G 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Kaiser, Members Stewart, Brochu, MacGilvray, Sawt.elle and Wendler MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Dresser STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director of Planning Call-away, Assistant Gity Attorney Elmore, City Engineer Pullen and I'lann:ing Technician Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. l: Approval of Minutes - meeting of September 4, 1986. Mr. Wendlrr made a motion to approve the minutes as presented; Mr. MacGi-lvray sec~ondecj the me>tion which carried by a vote of 5--0-1 (Brochu absent at last meeting;. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: 86-803: A public hearing on the question of granting Project Plan Approval for a proposed project in a C-N • Neighborhood Business District located on Lots 12&13 Block T University Park II, located at the northwest corner of the intersection of University Drive and Spring Loop. Proposed project is a small shopping center. Applicant is Mack Randolph. Mr. Callaway explained the proposed project, pointing out that. the C-N district. regulations require approval of both site plan and proposed use by the Commission. He continued by explaining that. this proposal provides for a 4200 square foot Irelghbor'hood shopping center; the only use proposed at this time is a convenience store with gasoline sales, with the balance of t:he center, app. 1700 square feet-., remaining as lease space. Mr. Callaway stated that staf'f' recommends approval of t.h:is proposal. with P.R.C,. conditions, and would further recommend that this Commission approve categories of uses for the lease spare to preclude the necessity of additional hearings to consider future tenants for the remaini-ng lease spaces}. Mr. Brochu referred to the proposed second curb cut from Spring Loop to this projcrct. which is shaded in on the site plan. Mr. Callaway explained that location and number of curb cuts are determined by the City Engineer who has determined in this case thai. there will be only one curb cut allowed to this project. He added that the applicant ;-end owner ~=ire appealing this determination to the City Council, but tr,e action taken by the Conunisson tonight does not require conslderati-oil of the outcome of that ~~ppeal . Mrs. Sawte~lle and Mr. MacGilvray both expr•e=ssed concern regarding the location of l}Ic gasoline pumps and the number of parking spaces which necessitate so much pavement on this site. Mr. Callaway explained ghat. the number of parking spaces supp:Lied on:Ly meets ordinance requirements. 1 Mr. Kaiser then re--explained that uses in a C-N zoning d:ist.rict are to bc~ approved by this Comnri-scion, as well as site plans. He added that if only a convenience stare is • approved at, this location tonight., any other use (tenant} in the remainder of this facility will have to come back before this Commission for approval. He summarized by stating t}Iat in his opinion, it woulc} be appropriate for other uses at this lacation to be appraved at this meeting. The public hearing was opened. Charlie Burris, architect and applicant for owner, Mack Randolph, came forward and offered to answer any questions the Conunission might have. Mrs. Sawtelle mentianed the appearance of congestion on this site, and Mr. Burris explained that he agrees that the site is rather tight, but informed her that he had worked with City staff and this plan meets all criteria of the City. Mr. Wendler asked why he or the owner are asking far the additional curb cut. Mr. Burris explained that, although are no actual tenants for this s:it.e, that curb r.ut wound allow adrive-through window for a fast food pickup facility if the space was 1-eased to that, type of tenant.. No onE: else spoke. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Brochu stated t.h.at, he has no problem with this project, and added that he was a hart of a special canmtittee which studied this area and made the determination that this site might be appropriate Por commercial development. Mr. Callaway read from the ordinance the li-st of other uses wh:ic:h are allowed in C--N di.strict.s. Mr. Broc:hu then made a motion to approve this praject wii.h P. R. C,. recalnm~endations, with uses to be limited to those listed in the C-N zoning distri-ct requirements in Ordinance 1638. Mr. Stewart. seconded the motion. Mr. MacG:ilvray said he is stall bothered by the C0ngeStlOIr on the site, that 28 parking spaces seem excessive for a • project of this nature, and the :location of the gas pumps might, make thE~rm easy to hit. Mr. Brochu pointed out ordinance requires the number of parking spaces shown; Mr. Wendler st.at.ed the lacation of the gas pumps is nat. unlike any other convenience. store in this City. Votes were cast and the motion to approve this project with P.H.C. rec?ommendations and uses to be limited t.o thaw for C -N zoning c}istr ict.s listed in Ordinance 163$ carried unanimously (6--0). AGBNDA ITEM N0. 4: 86-112: Reconsideration of the question of rezoning a 15.44 acre tract of land located west of Dartmouth Drive, east of the extension of Cornell Drive and north of the Brentwood subdivision from R-2 Duplex Residential to Planned Unit Development (P. U. D.) No. 2. Applicant is Bill Scasta for owners David & Kelli Lewis. (Item tabled at meeting of 9-4-86}. Mr•. Wendler made a matian to take this item from its tabled po:~>ition; Mr. Br•ochu seconded the motion which carried unanimously {6-0). Mr. Kaiser explained that although this i-s not. a public hE~ar:ing, he will :invites };c;th Mr. Scasta and any citizen from the immediate neighborhood to offer- brief comments. Mr. Callaway briefly explained the d:iffer•ences bet~,~een this proposal and then pr•opos~rl which was tabled as the last meeting, adding that staff recommends approval of this proposaa w:it.h the c:ond:it.ions listed in the I'resubmission Conference report, and the 5 conditions listed in the staff report which are (1)Final submission must. include provisions far a Homes Association; (2)Stages of stage construction must. be ref•le~~tF-:d on the final development plans; (3)Actual Land Use Intensity Rati-o calculations must • be provided :Par each structure prior to const.ruct.ion; (4)All site development, mu~-;i comply with standards establi-shed in Ordinance 1638; and, (5}Final submission should include complete site p.l.ans far all lots within that. stage, or if' not ava.ilab]e, thc~ P&L Minutes 9-18-86 Page `? final site plan fc:~r each lot. should be approved by the Cc>mmisson prior t~~ issuance of building permi_ta. Discussion followed concerning who would be responsi.bl.e for the commons ,area or any part of the project which x'emains undeveloped and what control over neglect the City will have:. Mr. Callaway explained that any Homes Association agreement. must be reviewed and approved by the City's legal department, and although he could not answer the question at. this meeting, he can make a note to have. the question of responsibility addressed at the final stage. He then explained that the City's code has provisiory.s for control of weeds, trash, etc., and perhaps these issues could be addressed under those regulations. Assistant. City Attorney Elmore: came forward and explained that. the City :has ordinances requiring owners to maintain their yards and property. She replied as well in answer to a questicm that the City would incur no liability regarding maintenance c,f this privately owned proje<,t should it not be maintained to standards established, and upon receipt of a compaint, the City would begin action to take c<,s•e of any maintenance problem. Bi.aa Scasta, aI>plicant, came: forward at: the request; of the Commission and stat.c'd that Mr. Callaway had explained this proposal thoroughly, and the only addition he had would be to stat;e that. there is a possi.bi_lity that the project will be developed in stages rather than all at one time. Alymer Thompson, a resident: 01' the. adjacent single family neighborhood came forward and stated that although the neighbors he has been able to contact have no real problem w:i.th this proposal, they do have a question ~.ibout whether a screen fencE.~ wi:Ll • be required. Mr. Callaway replied that although a fence is not included on the site plan, it; can be addressed on the final plans. One of the. Commissioners point:ecl out. that the screen fence is mentioned under item ncmlber 4 of the Homes Associaton agreement submitted w:it.h thc: application. Mr. Wendler made a motion to approve this rezoning request, lI1ClUdlIlg all the conditions listed on the Presubmi.ssiari Conference report and the recommendations made by staff. Mrs. Sawtelle seconded the motion. Mr. MacG:i.lvray offered an amendment to the motion which would include the requ:iremc~nt of the sr_reen fence between t}tis project and the adjacent Brentwood subd.ivisicxx, bc.ct. withdrew his amendment. after being reminded that the fern:e was included i.n t;he proposed HomE>s Association agreement. Mr. MacGilvray then referred to the name changes :included with t.hi.s revised proposal, and c:larifiecl his comments regarding the name of the project and street. names made at the previous meeting. Votes were cast an t:he motion offered by Mr. Wendler, and the motion carried unanimously (6-0}. AGENDA ITEM N0. 5: Other business. Mr. Kaiser mentioned t:he P.R.C. schedule supplied by the Planning Department, and asltE:d for members to e:ontact Mrs . Volk i f they have any problems . • P&7 Minutes 9--18-86 Page 3 AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: Adjourn. • Mr. Rrochu made a motion to adjourn which Mr°s. Sawtelle seconded. Mot.icn to adjourn carried unanimously (6-0}. ATTEST: City Secretary, Dian Tones n LJ APYHO D: Vi-.e Chairman, Dan MacG'lvray Y&7. Minutes 9-1 f3- $6 Page 9 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GUEST REGISTER • DATE Se tember 18, 1986 NAME ADDRESS .' 2 . f~'~ ~* ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,, 3 ~ ~ 5. 6. 7. 8. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. • 24. 7.5. 9. 10. *** REGISTRATION FORM *** (FOR PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION) Name ~~ / ~~ l ~;"~• Address -~-ii ~..~~ House No. IF SPEAKING FOR AN OR Date of Meeting ~~tJ ~~;~.~'~'~ ~ ,~ j~~ ..'~ Commission Agenda Item No. ~~J ' ..' ~ ./~ if r / r'~ !/ /' ~- % a .~-"«_ Street City GANIZATION, Name Hof Organization: dl M ~ ~~.= And , Speakers Official Capacity: SUBJECT ON WHICH PERSON WISHES TO SPEAK l~ ~~.r~ ~ ~~ 1 Please remember to step to the podium as soon as you are recognized by the chair; hand your completed registration form to the presiding officer and state your name and residence before beginning your presentation. If you have written notes you wish to present to the Commission, PLEASE FURNISH AN EXTRA COPY FOR COMMISSION FILES. The Commission will appreciate each speaker limiting an address on any one Item to flue minutes. Thank you for your cooperation.