Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/02/1987 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 1987 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: All present including Council Liaison Jones. Member Dresser arrived late. None Interim Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer Pullen, Zoning Official Kee and Planning Technician Volk AGBNDA ITBM N0. 1: Approval of minutes - seeting of March 23, 1987. Mr. Wendler made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Brochu seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-0). AGBNDA ITBM N0. 2: Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGBNDA ITBM N0. 3: 87-102: A public hearing on the question of rezoning a 5.75 acre tract of land located on the west side of • S.H.6 approximately 1200 feet north of Barron Road. Applicant is St. Francis Bpiscopal Church for the Protestant Bpiscopal Church Council of the Diocese of Texas, frog R-1 Single Family Residential to C-1 General Coa~ercial. Mr. Callaway located the acreage which had been a part of what had been planned to be the (now abandoned) Courtland Subdivision. He cited area zoning districts and uses, pointing out that the subject tract is vacant. He added that the adopted Land Use Plan reflects high and low density residential uses in the area of the subject tract, with commercial uses reflected in the area south of Barron Road. He stated that the requested zoning is not consistent with the land use plan, although a commercial district was established for land adjacent to this tract in 1983. He went on to state that staff believes that consideration of this request by the Commission and Council includes a policy decision with respect to continuation of that commercial zoning district north along S.H.6. Mr. Callaway then referred to conditions the Commission considered when the commercial zoning and other low density residential districts were established adjacent to this tract as being the trees and brushy area along the existing Bryan Electrical easement which crosses the tracts which were considered to be a sufficient buffer to separate the residential and commercial zoning districts. He stated that locating a commercial zoning district adjacent to a residential zoning district would not comply with the development policies included in the Comprehensive Plan, and staff would recommend that any commercial zoning established on the subject tract be limited to the area east of the utility easement. (Mr. Dresser arrived at this • time.) The public hearing was opened. Jim Hoelster, 6404 Windwood Drive, a representative 1 for the applicant, came forward and explained that the land was purchased before the • existing adjacent commercial zoning was established, with the thought in mind to establish a church to be a part of the subdivision on the tract. He stated that since the development plans for the subdivision have fallen through, local parishioners have purchased land in a better location for building a new facility, and now the Diocese is going to sell the subject tract. He went on to explain that the commercial zoning on the adjacent tracts to the south and the existing nightclub across the highway from this tract make the tract impossible to sell as low density residential, and thus, this request has been made to establish commercial zoning on the tract to bring possible future uses more in line with conditions already in the area. Mr. Hoelster then addressed staff's recommendation to keep commercial zoning to the east of the utility easement, stating that in his search of records, he can find none which establish an easement across this property, but in any case, the Church would prefer to have the entire 5+ acres zoned C-l, rather than to split it into Z separate zoning districts. Discussion followed regarding why a different location has been chosen for the church, with Mr. Hoelster replying that the subject tract was purchased by the Diocese and the tract where the church will actually be built was purchased by the local mission. He replied to questons regarding the Diocese now asking the local mission to help get the zoning problem solved before breaking ground on the new church. Mr. Kaiser paraphrased what he believed Mr. Hoelster meant as being that the Diocese will not give financial assistance to the local mission until the subject tract is rezoned. • Jim Hughes, 1020 Francis Drive came forward, stated he is a member of St. Francis Episcopal Church, which is actually a mission which was founded in 1983. He stated that the subject tract was already under contract when the C-1 zoning was established on the adjacent tracts, and that the local mission had nothing to do with the purchase; that the Bishop of the Diocese in Houston had made the deal. He went on to state that he thinks the subject tract is unsuitable for a church due to the surrounding zoning and established uses. He added that the local mission has since found a more suitable site. Mr. Kaiser explained that this Commission would like for the applicant or a representative to explain what conditions have changed in the area which would make this land more suitable for commercial zoning than it is for residential zoning. Mr. Hughes stated that this is a rather narrow tract of land compared to the area already zoned C-1, and he does not think rezoning this small tract would cause a race to establish additional commercial zoning between it and the main area of the City of College Station. He explained that there is not a lot of commercial development in the area and the nightclub directly across the street (highway) does not make it conducive to developing single family residences on the tract. No one else spoke. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Brochu stated the nightclub across the highway may not be there forever. Mr. Callaway informed the Commission that the property owner adjacent to this tract has indicated his willingness to change some of the zoning on his property to allow some C-1 zoning on this tract. He went on to explain that some changed conditi<~ns might • be that the zoning established in this area was based on a subdivision plat which was reviewed and approved, but since that time those plans have been dropped, and it is not likely that the subdivision will be developed as previously planned. He P&Z Minutes 4-2-87 Page 2 suggested then that perhaps the City should reconsider the zoning in the entire area • which was planned to be included in the Courtland subdivision, as it is still all under one ownership as far as he is aware. Mr. Kaiser stated that he does not believe this Commission should speculate on what others may or may not agree to. Mr. Dresser asked the acceptable depth of C-1 zoning and Mr. Callaway explained the ordinances require 100 foot minimum depth, but the City's policy has been to discourage anything less than a 400 foot minimum depth. Mr. Kaiser stated that at the time this land was zoned, the Commission chose to follow the creek and its natural buffering, and the transmission line, rather than to force the 400 foot minimum depth. Mr. Stewart said that with the power line bisecting the tract, it seems to be a difficult tract to develop. Mr. MacGilvray stated that in his opinion, R-1 zoning at this particular location does not seem right. Mr. Stewart and Mrs. Sawtelle both questioned the lack of a buffer between R-1 and C-1 zoning which has been established in this area. Mr. Kaiser stated that this entire question could be set aside until a re-evaluation of the entire area is made. Mr. Stewart said that in the past this Commisison has spoken about how much undeveloped C-1 zoned land there already is in the City, and now it is being told this C-1 request is being made in order to get a higher appraisal so the land can be sold. Mr. Kaiser stated he is not convinced that due to changed conditions this tract should be C-1, but added that he is willing to examine the entire area to determine the best land use, and finalized by stating that he would be inclined to act unfavorably toward this particular request at this time. Mr. MacGilvray stated that he believes that if this land had not been held by the • church at the time the other land was zoned, it would have been zoned to a higher intensity district than R-1, but because the church would have had to get a Conditional Use Permit anyway, it was not included in those rezoning requests. He then asked if the Church has considered any other zoning districts. Mr. Hoelster answered from the audience that all the commercial property in that area was zoned C-1 after the church was committed to buy the tract, so conditions have changed since the adjacent zoning was established. He then stated that the owner, (the Bishop or Diocese) would prefer a positive recommendation from the Commission to the Council, but would have to deal with whatever decision this Commission makes. He then stated that if the Commission were to act upon staff's recommendation, and recommend R-lA zoning for the area to the west of the transmission line, he believes all parties would simply have to be satisfied. Mr. Stewart asked for clarification, i.e., is the applicant's representative indicating the applicant's willingness to accept C-1 and R-lA zoning on this tract, with the transmission line dividing the districts. Mr. Callaway responded before Mr. Hoelster could reply, stating that staff has not considered any other zoning districts other than that requested on the application, but he would believe that R-lA zoning on the western part of the tract would probably allow for more flexibility for the owner on the land to the west of the transmission line than the existing R-1 zoning. Mr. Kaiser stated the Commission seems to be playing "the zoning game" without knowing if staff and the applicant have even discussed this latest proposal. Mr. Wendler asked what the effect of tabling this item would be and Mr. Kaiser stated that he believes the applicant would prefer some finality to take to Council. • Mr. MacGilvray then made a motion to rezone this entire tract to C-l. Mr. Wendler seconded the motion which failed by a vote of 2-5 (MacGilvray & Wendler for}. P&7 Minutes 4-2-87 Page 3 Mr. Stewart then made a motion to rezone the property east of the transmission line • to C-1 and to leave the remainder of the tract R-l, as it is. Mr. MacGilvray seconded this motion. Mr. Brochu asked why R-1 was being chosen over R-lA and Mr. Stewart replied that since staff had not made a recommendation for that part of the tract, he would rather leave it as it is. Mr. Callaway stated that there are several residential zoning districts which would be more appropriate than R-1 or R-lA for that remaining portion of this tract, but staff is not ready to make any recommendations since it has not talked to the property owner. Mr. Dresser stated that statement does not help this Commission in making a decision. Mr. Callaway replied that he does not think the owner has taken the time to consider any residential zoning at all on the tract. Mrs. Sawtelle reminded the Commisson that it cannot speculate on how the land will be used. Mr. Dresser stated that it is up to this Commission to decide appropriate zoning. Mrs. Sawtelle agreed, but stated she does not think this is a good time to make that decision. Mr. Wendler said that this Commission is leaving a small tract of land approximately 2 acres in size that is virtually landlocked, and that should be a zoning consideration. Votes were cast on the motion to rezone the land east of tie transmision line to C-1 and to leave the remainder of the tract R-1 with the results being 2-4-1 (Stewart & MacGilvray for, Wendler abstaining). Mr. Brochu then made a motion to deny this request. Mrs. Sawtelle seconded the motion which failed by a vote of 3-4 (Dresser, Wendler, MacGilvray & Kaiser against). Mr. Dresser said he would prefer to go with C-1 and R-lA. He explained that the owner • of Courtland subdivision has changed his mind about developing it and there will now be no Courtland subdivision there, but that he believes that the arguments given in 1983 for establishing the existing zoning on those tracts is still valid, and that the transmission line would still be considered the required buffer between zoning districts. Mr. Kaiser asked what has changed in the area to make a change from R-1 to C-1 zoning and Mr. Dresser replied that the church had its property before the neighboring land was rezoned to the existing zoning pattern. Mr. Hoelster requested permission to speak and it was granted. He stated that C-1 zoning to the east of the transmission line with the remainder of the tract as R-lA is being considered because it would then be compatible with the adjacent zoning districts, and added that the owner would rather see the combination of C-1 and R-lA than to see the entire request denied. He added that leaving that small area zoned R-1 would create an isolated residential area. Mr. Dresser then made a motion to rezone the portion of this tract from the transmission line to S.H.6 from R-1 to C-l, and to rezone the portion of the tract from the transmission line to the western property line from R-1 to R-lA. Mr. MacGilvray seconded the motion. Mr. Wendler stated that he thinks in an effort to be helpful, this Commission might be creating a problem for the church. Mr. Kaiser stated that the Commission must consider very carefully that if it rezones land to something unsuitable, it has created a problem. Votes were cast on the motion to rezone the tract to C-1 & R-lA and at the first count the motion apparently failed, but upon having a recount, Mr. Brochu changed his vote to a favorable one, and the motion carried by a vote of 4-3 with Mr. Stewart, Mrs. Sawtelle and Mr. Kaiser voting against the motion. P&Z Minutes 4-2-87 Page 4 • AQBNDA ITEM N0. 4: 87-802: A public hearing to consider project plan approval of a proposed business in a C-N Neighborhood-Business zoning district. The business under consideration is Precision Tune of B-CS to be located at 601 Highway 30. Applicant is Henry A. (Hank) Taylor. Mr. Callaway explained that this Commission must consider both the site plan presented and the use proposed, adding that the site plan the Commission received is the one revised to meet P.R.C. conditions and staff recommends approval of both. Mr. MacGilvray asked if, when the Neighborhood Business zoning district was formed, this use was the type of thing the City had in mind. Mr. Callaway explained that although the ordinance lists several uses, it also contains the statement that other uses can be considered by the Commission, and further explained that each proposal in a C-N zoning district must be judged individually on its own merit at a particular location. Mr. Brochu asked if approving this use would be setting a precedent for uses in other C-N districts and Mr. Callaway replied that it would not. The public hearing was opened. Larry Wells, agent for the applicant, came forward, offered to answer any questions, and requested approval of this project. Mr. Dresser asked how the noise and appearance of this project would compare with the gas station/convenience store next door. Mr. Wells replied that he thinks this project will be just as attractive, and that he does not think this project would cause a noticable increase in the decibel level at this location. Mr. Kaiser asked if this project would be serving the neighborhood or the entire city and Mr. Wells replied that because this neighborhood is mostly high density residential, it would be an I • excellent location for this type of project, but of course, other citizens of the community would be welcome. The applicant, Hank Taylor, was invited forward and was asked if the purpose of locating his business here was to serve the neighborhood and Mr. Taylor said he would prefer to serve both the neighborhood and the entire community. Mr. Dresser asked Mr. Taylor to address the issues of noise and appearance as he has concerns about both, and Mr. Taylor replied that he does not think this business will be particularly noisy, and that he assures the Commission that it will be attractive in appearance. Mr. MacGilvray asked how the business will function and Mr. Taylor replied that it will function both by appointment and by drop-in, and that it would encourage customers to wait to have the work done rather than to leave their autos there. The public hearing was closed. Mr. MacGilvray asked how much C-N zoning is near this location and Mr. Callaway replied that the adjacent Tenneco store and this project share the same district on separate lots. He went on to explain the purpose of the C-N zoning district was to provide small sites for convenience to neighborhoods, but added that he does not think this is a typical C-N zone as it is located on a very busy thoroughfare. Mr. MacGilvray expressed some concern for safety at this location. Mr. Brochu made a motion to approve both the site plan presented and the use proposed for this location. Mr. Stewart seconded the motion which carried unanimously (7-0). :~ P&Z Minutes 4-2-87 Page 5 • • • AGBNDA ITBM N0. 5: 87-203: A 8esubdivision plat of Lots 11 & 12, Block Three, B'erald Forest Phase 6. Mr. Callaway explained that this replat simply provides for a realignment of boundary lines between 2 lots. Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to approve this replat. Mrs. Sawtelle seconded the motion which carried unanimously (7-0). AGBNDA ITBM N0. 6: Discussion of Goals, Objectives and Developaent Policies for the IIpdate of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Callaway referred to the copies of the existing goals and objectives, the revised goals and objectives and other development policies which have previously been distributed, and stated that staff is requesting discussion,comments,or direction so it can continue to work on the update. He suggested also that a workshop be scheduled for discussion in the not too distant future. Mr. Dresser reminded staff that he had requested additional information regarding what goals, objectives and development policies are currently covered by existing ordinances, and stated that until he gets that information, he will not be prepared to discuss the subjects of this agenda item. Mr. MacGilvray stated that he was quite impressed with the studies undertaken by the city to the north which resulted in "Bryan Forward", and suggested that College Station could use that document to implement the updating of our Comprehensive Plan as well as to implement and foster cooperation between the two cities. AGBNDA ITBM N0. 7: Other business. Mr. MacGilvray read a poem entitled "The Calf Path" by Sam Walter Foss in honor of the imminent departure of Mr. Kaiser, the current chairman of the P&Z. AGBNDA ITBM N0. 8: Adjourn. Mr. MacGilvray then made a motion to adjourn which Mrs. Sawtelle seconded. Motion to adjourn carried unanimously (7-0). ATTEST: APPROVED: i ~-_~ _ Q~ ----' ~- .. ~, ~. City Secretary, Dian Jones P&Z Minutes 4-2-87 Page 6 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GUEST REGISTER . DATE April 2, 198 NAME ADDRESS ~~ R ~~' r 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. I1. i 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. . 24. 25.