Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/07/1988 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 1988 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Brochu, Members Colson, Dresser, Sawtelle and Stewart MEMBERS ABSENT: Members Moore 8 Wendler STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer Pullen, Planning Assistant Johnson and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Approval of Minutes - meeting of December 17, 198?. Mr. Stewart made a motion to approve the minutes. Mrs. Sawtelle seconded the motion which carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: 88-100: A public hearing on the question of rezoning Lots 1-6 and 22 Block 11 Boyett subdivision from C-1 • General Commercial to C-NG Commercial Northgate. Applicant is Don E. Anz. Owner of property is the Gity of College Station. Mr. Callaway explained the request is to expand the G-NG zoning district to include the subject tracts which are the site of the old City Hall. He stated the buildings on the site are vacant, there are City-owned vacant lots to the north, a residential area comprised primarily of apartments to the east, commercial and apartment areas to the south and Texas A8:M to the west across Wellborn Road and the railroad. He pointed out that the area is reflected as commercial on the adopted land use plan, and it is currently zoned C-1 General Commercial. He briefly reviewed engineering comments which note that the 2" waterline serving the tract is not adequate for fire protection, and the existing sewerlines will need to be upgraded. Mr. Callaway commented that the requested zone change would provide for an expansion of the Northgate special district, and although it does not provide for a substantial change in permitted uses, it would include R-6 uses and provide for reduced setback requirements. He caent on to state that staff has no objections to the range of uses that the requested zoning would allow at this location, and after consulting with the Legal Department regarding whether or not this request should actually be considered since it would involve changing the boundaries of a special zoning district which is not found in any other part of the City, it was determined that the request could be made. He emphasized the fact that the real issue is not one of uses allowed, but rather whether or not the special zoning district should be expanded. The public hearing was opened. Don Anz, applicant and owner of Deluxe Burger Bar and La Taqueria, who also recently leased the subject land from the City, came forward • and stated that he wants to put a restaurant in the old City Hall, and would like to do it with the least amount of expense possible, and he believes changing the district to G-NG wauld cut down on his expenses. He stated that he would have plenty of parking on the site, so he would not be adding a burden to an already existing parking problem in the area, but he would like to put in a gravel lot behind the • building similar to the one behind the Deluxe Burger Bar. Mr. Colson stated that although he thinks the idea is a good one, he wanted to point out there is already a parking problem in this area, and part of the land included in this request is already being used for parking for La Taqueria. Mr. Anz replied that there will be 65 spaces available on the land he is leasing, and eventually he will probably be able to work out some kind of arrangement with the owner of the gravel lot behind Deluxe Burger. Mr. Dresser asked how development in the C-NG district can be less expensive than it is in a C-1 district, since many of the items listed as changed or changing conditions on the application will have to be carried out anyway. He went on to state there are avenues to take to request variances to certain requirements that this Commission cannot consider, and then asked staff if setbacks must be met before the building can be used. Mr. Callaway replied that the setback problem must somehow be resolved, adding that the building is now considered a non-conforming structure and the change of use in the C-1 district would require taking a request before the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Dresser said that is exactly what he is getting at; that it is a non-conforming use now, but there is a procedure to deal with that if the user wants to deal with it. He added that in addition to the use, there are parking lot standards which apparently the applicant does not propose to meet. Mr. Anz replied that it is his intention to finish about one-half of the lot in a manner similar to the "Mudlot" (a commercial parking lot) further to the east. • Mr. Callaway interjected that the surface of a parking lot is an issue separate from zoning, and should be addressed when the project is proposed and reviewed by the P.R.C. He added that just because a parking lot is in the Northgate zoning district does not mean that the surface does not have to be the standard blacktop or concrete surface. Mr. Dresser agreed, adding that the surface of a parking lat has nothing to do with the Northgate zoning district, and there is an avenue to deal with it, just as there are avenues to follow regarding the electric drops, setbacks, etc. which are mentioned on the application, but which have nothing to do with the Northgate zoning district. Bill O'Brien, contractor for the groposed subject project came forward and spoke of the existing meters, electric drops and type of service which will be required for the project, and how they relate to setback requirements in the Northgate district. He also mentioned that there is a possibility of proposing some type of landscape barrier to discourage vehicles from cutting across the corner of the property. He stated that he would pref°r to operate in the C-NG zoning district in order to avoid having to go to various boards to request variances, and it appears to him to be easier to redevelop existing facilities in the C-NG district. He said that by making this tract G-NG would bring all restaurants owned by this one person under the same rules, which would make them easier to manage, and perhaps sell in the future. He stated he would also like to postpone a hard surface for the parking lot until the proposed restaurant starts to pay, but he would try to make it look as good as possible with as small an expense as he could manage. No one else spoke. The public hearing was closed. • Mr. Stewart said that in the C-NG zoning district there are no prescribed regulations regarding parking lots, so there would be no reason to even include a parking lot. PAZ Minutes 1-7-$8 Page 2 Mr. Brochu stated there are no set ordinance requirements for parking in the C-NG • district, but parking requirements are set on an individual case-by-case basis by the Project Review Committee, and it is not automatic that there is no parking requirements for projects in the C-NG zoning district. He went on to remind everyone that this issue tonight goes beyond this specific project, and how the future is affected must be taken into consideration. Mr. Brochu then read the Purpose statement from the Zoning Ordinance regarding the C- NG Commercial Northgate: "The area described herein is determined to be unique and to contain some historic significance; therefore, this special zoning district shall apply only in this area and shall incorporate regulations designed to aid development and redevelopment in a manner compatible with the character of the area...". He explained that this particular rezoning issue is different in that approving it would be re-creating a special zoning district which was created only after a very detailed, lengthy study. Mr. Gallaway agreed adding that when considering this request, the Commission should look at whether or not the special Northgate zoning district should be changed. Mr. Brochu said that he has a real concern with changing this district, adding the question of whether the C-NG district is the proper zoning for the specific tract must be addressed, but if the district configuration is changed in this instance, what is to keep still another restaurant located just over the bo der from requesting equal treatment. He stated that the Commercial Northgate zoning district was meant to address a specific character of a specific area, and he does not think changing the boundaries of this special district for one project is a wise thing to do. In addition, he stated that he does not see anything in the application which addresses • a good reason for a zoning change since all proposed plans can be carried out under the existing G-1 General Commercial zoning district. Mr. Stewart agreed caith Mr. Brochu and added that most of the variances which would be required could be handled with one application. Mr. Dresser reminded everyone that this Commission does not recommend anything to other boards regarding variances, nor does it answer far anything those boards or the P.R.C. does, but he does want the applicant to know that there are places to address the problems mentioned. Mr. Stewart stated that he thinks Mr. Dresser is right, and he just wanted to point out that rezoning this particular piece of property is not the proper avenue to take, and there are other ways to address the problems. Additionally, Mr. Stewart wanted to remind the applicant that the area is already congested, and he would caution him not to add to the congestion. Mr. Brochu said this particular piece of property is a large one and a lot can be done with it - there seems to be room to grow, whereas the properties in the C-NG district mostly cannot be changed. Mr. Colson stated that this is an old, existing building which is non-conforming, and perhaps should be in the C-NG zoning district, and suggested that he would prefer to give C-NG zoning on 2 lots, and to leave the rest zoned C-1. Mr. Stewart asked Mr. Brochu if this Commission can do that and Mr. Brochu said he believes it can, but pointed out that may not be what the applicant wants. Mr. Colson said that he does not believe an area can be aligned permanently with something on one side of a line in and the identical same thing on the other side of the line out. Other Commissioners disagreed with Mr. Brochu pointing out that the G- NG district is well defined and not just a line on paper. Mr. Stewart expanded that idea, stating that "Northgate" has always been considered the area close to the north PAZ Minutes 1-7-88 Page 3 gate, and close to University Drive, and this location is neither, and he personally • has never considered it as being in "Northgate". Mr. Stewart went on to state that he would feel more comfortable considering this request if there were not other ways to use the property. Mr. Stewart then made a motion to deny this request. Mr. Dresser seconded the motion which carried by a vote of 4-1 (Colson). AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: 87-217: Final Plat - Replat of Haney Highway Six Addition. Mr. Callaway explained that this replat is for purposes of easement abandonment and rededication for the Haney Highway 6 subdivision, and has been prepared as part of the rezoning activity underway on the tract, and also fulfills the City's part of the agreement. He went on to explain that there is the possibility that this plat may be changed prior to official filing, to change the lot lines, but at this time, staff is recommending approval of this plat. Mr. Brochu asked if the previously considered rezoning is conditional on this plat and some other agreements between owners and Mr. Callaway replied it is still conditional on the filing of a plat which is agreed to by owners, and also to certain deed restrictions agreed to by owners of this subdivision and the residents along Mile Drive. Mr. Dresser asked why the various required signatures do not appear on this plat and Mr. Callaway replied that the City prepared this plat in accordance with its part of the agreement, but the owners of the subject land have not yet signed the plat. Mr. Brochu asked why this Commission is considering this plat if, in fact, it may not be the official final plat of the land and Mr. Callaway replied • that it represents part of a 3-party agreement; with the City agreeing to prepare Mr. Dresser made a motion to approve this plat as presented; Mr. Stewart seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0). this plat which fulfills the City's part of the agreement. Mr. Brochu asked what impact this plat would have on Tenneco, adding that no statement from Tenneco has been presented to this Commission. Mr. Callaway replied that Tenneco must sign the plat because the easement crosses its property, and a representative from the group requesting the plat/rezoning has indicated Tenneco is agreeable and will sign the plat. AGENDA ITEM N0. 5: Other business. Mr. Callaway referred to a document handed out prior to the meeting which represents action taken by the Commission (as understood by staff} toward revising the Goals Objectives of Plan 2000, and stated the only section left is that covering Citizen Participation, which will be included on the next agenda. In response to a question from Mr. Brochu, Mr. Callaway stated that staff has had no response from Aldersgate Methodist Church to the letter sent by staff regarding the additional, unapproved gravel parking lot on the site, but assured the Commission that staff will follow-up within the next couple of weeks if it continues to receive no response from the church. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: Adjourn. • Mr. Colson made a motion to adjourn; Mrs. Sawtelle seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0}. PAZ Minutes 1-7-88 Page 4 APPROVED: • • C] ------------------- Chairman, David Brochu ATTEST: City Secretary, Dian Jones PB:Z Minutes 1-7-88 Page 5 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GUEST REGISTER DATE January 7, 1988 NAME ADDRESS 1. 2. 3- 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.