Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/07/1992 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 7:00 P.M. May 7, 1992 • MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Sawtelle, Vice Chairperson Colson, Commissioners Esmond, Hawthorne, Hall, Smith and Mariott. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner Kee, Planning Technician Thomas, Staff Planner Kuenzel, Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan, Transportation Planner Hard, Development Coordinator Volk and Planning Director Callaway. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of the minutes from the meeting of April 16, 1992. Vice Chairperson Colson moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of April 16, 1992 as corrected by Mr. Smith. Mr. Mariott seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing to consider a conditional use permit request by the Bryan/College Station Islamic Community to locate an Islamic Center on Lots 11, 12 and 13 of Block 2 in the Tauber Addition. (92-706) Staff Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report stating that the Commission has reviewed this site at three separate meetings in that took place over the past three years. The hearing were held on the following issues: Apri120, 1989 P&Z approved the use only; October S, 1989 P&Z approved the site plan with the condition that a fence be provided; October 18, 1990 P&Z approved a new conditional use permit and accompanying site plan were required because the applicants changed the building from one to two stories. • The conditional use permit that was granted in 1990 has expired because there has been no building permit issued. The site plan contains some minor changes from the one that was approved in 1990. Mr. Esmond questioned staff as to the condition of approval in 1990. Was there not a condition that prohibited the use of outdoor speakers or gongs? Staff Planner Kuenzel stated that she was unaware of any such conditions; however, she would review the minutes of the previous meeting to be certain. The applicant has requested to continue the use of the duplex in order to lease to students; however, they will provide more parking for the duplex. • Chairperson Sawtelle opened the public hearing. Nabil Safwat, representative of the applicant, approached the Commission and offered to answer questions pertaining to the conditional use permit request. He stated that there is an average of 75 members depending upon the student population. There are five prayer services throughout the day; however, most of the people only attend the prayer services in the evening. The tower shown on the site plan is only a few feet above the second floor. The tower is an architectural symbol for a religious facility and will not be used for any practical purposes. Dale Fox of 2904 Aztec, approached the Commission and explained that he owns 23 of the 28 Normandy Condominiums located across the street from the site in question. He is opposed to the conditional use permit because of two items: -- the church will only cause more congestion in an area where traffic is already at a maximum; on-street parking is always occupied by students; and, -- the values of surrounding properties will decrease. Mr. Fox stated that a special on the television program "20/20" proved that surrounding property values would decrease when a religious facility was allowed to locate in a residential area. The same thing that is currently happening in Los Angeles is happening here in College Station. If this church is allowed to operate near the Normandy Condominiums, Mr. Fox suited that he will have to declare bankruptcy. He agreed to obtain a copy of the "20/20" documentary for the Commission to review if they would postpone action on this item. Charles Szabuniewicz of 3801 Fifth Street in Bryan, approached the Commission and stated that • he owns five units adjacent to the property in question. He stated that he is concerned with parking and additional traffic. If the use were to expand, there would not be adequate ofC- street parking. Vehicles are already parking in the grass; with the addition of this facility, the City is only adding to an already congested area. Mr. Safwat stated that this facility will increase the property values because members of this church will probably want to rent in this area. Hshan Moharan approached the Commission and explained that he is a graduate student at Texas A&M. He stated that he lives in this area and would like to walk to the proposed Islamic Center for prayer services. The present condition of the proposed site is not well kept and needs to be better maintained. The building will raise the property value as well as provide for maintenance of the site. Currently there is no place to pray and services are being held in various apartments and homes. The building will help bring the community together and provide some understanding of the Islamic religion. Chairperson Sawtelle closed the public hearing. Mr. Hawthorne questioned staff as to the traffic impact of this type of development. Staff Planner Kuenzel stated that the site plan meets off-street parking requirements for any church. There is not much that can be done for the traffic congestion short of a complete redevelopment of the area. Mr. Hall questioned the applicant as to the possibility of removing the duplex to provide • additional parking for vehicles or bicycles. P & Z Minutes May 7, 1992 Page 2 • Mr. Safwat stated that the duplex is a source of income for the organization. At this time, there is not enough money to build a larger building or increase the parking lot. The church would like to keep the duplex as long as it is economically viable. If maintenance costs get too high, the church may look at demolishing the structure. All parking requirements have been met on the current site plan. Mr. Smith stated that if parking is such an issue, then students parking in this area may take over the proposed parking lot and make it unavailable to the occupants. There are not many places to walk around the building. Chairperson Sawtelle agreed and stated that a sidewalk was considered with the previous conditional use permit request; however the site plan submitted does comply with the ordinance. Vice Chairperson Colson moved to grant a conditional use permit to the Bryan/College Station Islamic Community to establish an Islamic Center on Lots 11, 12 and 13, Block 2 of the Tauber Addition. Mr. Hawthorne seconded the motion. Mr. Esmond stated that the site is very close; it meets minimum City standards. The question is whether it is in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. There are land owners present that say it will be detrimental to the neighborhood. Mr. Fox has offered to provide additional information and the Commission has not answered him. The proposed Islamic Center is more of a commercial operation in a clearly residential area. There is existing traffic congestion in this area and poor access locations to this site. By granting this use permit, the Commission will only make these existing problems worse. • Vice Chairperson Colson stated that he was not sure if this was more of a residential area or a church area. He added that he is still unclear of how a church could possibly have a detrimental effect on surrounding land values. Mr. Esmond replied that the Commission has not studied this issue and he would like to have the opportunity to do so before taking action on this item. Mr. Hall stated that churches generate as much traffic as commercial uses. This church will generate more traffic because it meets five times a day everyday of the year. This will definitely add to congestion whether it's vehicle, pedestrian or bicycle traffic. Vice Chairperson Colson stated that the Commission cannot zone areas for churches. This church needs to be located close to campus because of the number of students that attend. There will always be congestion in areas close to campus. Chairperson Colson called the question of the original motion to grant the conditional use permit. The motion passed (6 - 1); Mr. Esmond voting in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public hearing to consider a final replat of Lots 6 and 7 of Block 8A in the College Park Subdivision. (92-201) Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report recommending approval of the proposed final plat. This replat is at the corner of Ayrshire and Angus Streets. The right-of- way for Galloway Avenue was approved for abandonment by the City Council on January 23, 1992. This replat complies with the City's comprehensive land use plan, transportation plan, • development policies and zoning ordinance. Fourteen surrounding property owners were notified of this plat with 15 inquiries. P & Z Minutes May 7, 1992 Page 3 Chairperson Sawtelle opened the public hearing. David Mayo, representative of the applicant, approached the Commission and explained that the proposed final plat reflects the current condition of the property. There are three separate dwelling units on this property. The street alignment changed after the original plat was filed so the original right-of-way is no longer needed. There are no proposed changes to the property itself. Earl Bennett of 500 West Dexter approached the Commission and explained that he wants to preserve the character of the neighborhood. He is concerned with the development of smaller lots at the intersection of Welsh and Guernsey that would not keep in character with this neighborhood. He is opposed to the development of smaller lots with smaller structures that would ultimately provide rental property. James Bassett Senior of 303 West Dexter approached the Commission and explained that he is not opposed to the final plat as long as the duplexes are not being separated by a property line. Chairperson Sawtelle closed the public hearing. Vice Chairperson Colson explained that he understood the concerns of the visitors; however, the Commission cannot consider what type of structure can be built on these lots. Mr. Mariott moved to recommend approval of the final plat of College Park, Lots 6 and 7, Block 8A as submitted. Vice Chairperson Colson seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). • AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a final plat of Kapcbinsld Hill Subdivision. (92-203) Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report recommending approval of the proposed final plat. A presubmission conference was held for this replat on April 23, 1992. The applicant has addressed all comments made at that time with two exceptions. Staff requested that the scale of the drawing be increased to make the replat more readable and that a cross access agreement be provided between this property and Brazos Square. The applicant feels that the redrawn plat is more readable even though it is not drawn to a larger scale. Staff has not received confirmation of the cross access easement between this property and Brazos Square. The Commission has the authority at the plat stage to determine what constitutes a building plot for the determination of signage. To be consistent with previous actions, lots 1 and 4 would constitute a building plot and lots 2 and 3 would constitute a building plot. This means that lots 3 and 4 would not be allowed a freestanding sign. Staff recommends approval contingent upon the filing of this cross access easement and owners signatures on the plat. Representative of the applicant Roy Hammons approached the Commission and explained that entire plat will comply with the crass-access agreement. The two additional lots will not be allowed curb cuts onto Texas Avenue., He understands that the Brazos Square property owner has no problem with the proposed access agreement; however, he has not seen an executed document. The worst thing that could happen is that Target could file a unilateral agreement providing access if the Brazos Square property owner refused to provide access. Mr. Hammons added that he is currently working on the revised driveway configuration for Brazos Square Shopping Center; however, the owner of the center has not approved the plan. The revised final plat should be more readable than the plat submitted originally. If the plat were to be drawn at a larger scale, it would have to be drawn on two sheets. Mr. Hammons concluded that not all of the property owners have signed the plat; however, he has submitted a fax to • staff stating their desire to have this plat approved. The only reservation is that they would like to have the cross access easement filed as a verbal metes and bounds document defining their use and dimensions as well as a plat to match the description. P & Z Minutes May 7, 1992 Page 4 • Mr. Esmond stated that the "P.U.E." designation is somewhat confusing since there are both public and private utility easements on this plat. He would suggest that all public and private utility easements be identified. Vice Chairperson Colson stated that the Commission cannot consider the cross access agreement at this time; it should have been considered prior to the completion of this project. There should be an option available to the applicant if this agreement cannot be obtained. Senior Planner Kee explained that the City Council asked for this agreement prior to the original plat. The development policies state that this type of agreement can be required. The City will probably not hold up this final plat if Brazos Square refuses to participate in this agreement; however, this should not be a problem. Mr. Haskins of Culpepper Realty, the owner of lot 3, approached the Commission to discuss future signage in this area. He proposed that lot 4 be restricted to a low profile sign and lot 1 be allowed to have 383 feet of frontage to allow 200 square feet of freestanding signage. The H.E.B. sign is currently a 17 x 7 freestanding sign with 4 additional sign cans. The proposal will allow this sign to have only 2 additional sign cans and place a low profile sign on the additional lot. Mr. Haskins added that he would make the same request on Lot 3 to restrict this lot to a low profile sign and allow Target the existing freestanding sign. Senior Planner Kee explained that the Commission has the discretion to determine at the plait stage what constitutes a building plot for signage purposes. It appears that Mr. Haskins is entering into the area of a variance request; the Commission does not have the authority to grant such a variance request. She stated that she is unsure if when separate building plots arc established if the Commission can then limit signage to the various lots; this would have to he clarified by the legal department. Chairperson Sawtelle stated that she would agree to a low profile sign on lot 4; however, she would not want to see a freestanding pole sign. Mr. Esmond stated that this development is definitely two building plots. The proposal presented and the low profile sign is acceptable. If this information could be reference on the plat, it would eliminate any confusion in the future. Vice Chairperson Colson moved to recommend approval of the final plat of Kapchinski Hill Subdivision with the condition that a note be placed on the plat stating that the cross access agreement is encouraged and the Commission would recommend that lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 be considered separate building plots so that lots 3 and 4 be limited to low profile signs; if this is not acceptable legally, the Commission would recommend that lots 1 and 2 be designated as separate building plots and lots 3 and 4 could then proceed to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for a variance request. Mr. Hawthorne seconded the motion. Mr. Esmond moved to amend the motion to include that the scale presented be approved and that all public and private utility easements be clarified. Mr. Colson seconded the amendment which passed (6 - 1); Mr. Hall voting in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Hall stated that he is opposed to allowing low profile signs on lots 3 and 4. The existing Target and H.E.B. freestanding signs should accommodate new businesses on this site. Lots 1 and 2 should be considered as two separate building plots and Lots 3 and 4 should be limited to signs attached to the buildings or to the existing signs. • Chairperson Sawtelle called the question of the original motion recommending approval which passed (6 - 1); Mr. Hall voting in opposition to the motion. P & Z Minutes Mr~y 7, 1992 Page S • AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration of a preliminary plat for the Oakgrove phase of the Springbrook Subdivision. (92-304) Chairperson Sawtelle informed the Commission that presentations on items five and six would be given simultaneously and voting on these items would be done separately. Senior Planner Kee presented the staff report of the preliminary plat of Oakgrove located on the southwest corner of the Springbrook Subdivision. The area is bounded by Barron Road on the south and the future Longmire extension on the east. The Subdivision Regulations say whenever possible, street jogs with centerline offsets of less than 125' shall be avoided. The offset between Falcon Way and Cardinal Lane is 110' as proposed. Staff encouraged the developer to try to increase this offset if possible. The applicant has since increased this offset distance to 114'. Sidewalks may be required along residential streets at the discretion of the Commission. Staff recommends a sidewalk along the north side of Cardinal Lane and the east side of Robin Trail. Depending on the location of proposed utilities, additional easement or right-of-way may be needed. The property drains into the South Fork of Lick Creek, which is located along the northern boundary of this property. Adequate space is provided to contain 100 year flood flows. Future maintenance of this creek will be addressed between the developer and the City with details determined as construction documents are prepared for final plats. The drainage impact study shows that all new drainage facilities that carry water to Lick Creek will be placed underground. The 100-year flood elevation was established and all lots are located outside that elevation. The subdivision will have no adverse impact on the downstream properties. Staff agrees with the developer that there should be no on-site detention required. This preliminary plat has been changed from the master preliminary plat that was previously submitted. There have been no additional impact studies submitted relative to traffic. This preliminary plat included thirteen additional acres and twenty-seven additional lots. St~tfl feels . that all planned collectors and minor arterials will accommodate these additional lots. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat with the condition that sidewalks be placed along the north side of Cardinal Lane and the east side of Robin Trail. Cardinal Lane needs only a 50' right-of-way. The Commission should recommend whether to accept the offset between Cardinal Lane and Falcon Way as proposed. Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report for the final plat of Cypress Meadow located west of the State Highway 6 frontage road and north of Barron Road in the Springbrook Subdivision. A preliminary plat of this area was approved by the City Council on March 26, 1992. The final plat as submitted closely follows the approved preliminary plat. The final plat complies with the City's comprehensive plan. Drainage from this subdivision is generally in the southerly direction with flow into the South Fork of Lick Creek. The applic~int will clear a 15' path along the north side of the creek and construct a 10' wide stabilized path for pedestrian and emergency vehicular access to the creek for maintenance. The final plat is located outside the 100 year flood plain. Lots 9 - 11 and 27 - 33 are all located adjacent to the 100 year floodplain and have minimum finished floor elevation requirements stipulated on the plat. Oversize participation requests will be made on Longmire Drive and the primary sanitary sewer line constructed with this phase. Sidewalks are required by ordinance on one side of Eagle Avenue. A sidewalk is required on one side of Hawk Owl Cove because of action taken by the Commission and Council at the time of the preliminary plat for this subdivision. The applicant has requested that he not be required to build that portion of Longmire Drive shown on this final plat. He has requested to enter into a development agreement with the City to provide for monetary compensation for the construction of Longmire Drive through this area at some future date. Staff recommends approval of the final plat with the conditions that a 5 utility easement be added as requested in the Project Review Committee meeting and that the • Commission make a recommendation with regard to the timing of installation of Longmire Drive. P & Z Minutes May 7, 1992 Page 6 • Staff recommended that the Longmire extension be installed as follows: all of that portion west and adjacent to Cypress Meadow including the bridge be installed at the time of Cypress Meadow Phase II or within a reasonable time frame to assure its completion if Cypress Meadow Phase II is not completed. The portion of Longmire from the bridge to Barron Road could be constructed with the phase that is first considered for a final plat. Mr. Esmond stated that the master preliminary plat failed to show any subdivision of the unplatted area. He questioned staff as to what the traffic impact study concluded with regard to internal circulation. Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan stated that the unplatted area was included in the impact studies. The Commission will probably see similar or revised impact studies if the development changes from what was originally submitted. Transportation Planner Hard stated that internal circulation is provided with the bridge structure and access to Barron Road. Eagle Avenue should ultimately connect with the proposed north-south arterial which would provide ample internal circulation. Staff is recommending that Longmire end at Barron Road. Mr. Esmond expressed concern with the internal circulation especially with regard to access to a sub-standard Barron Road. When the State Highway 6 frontage roads go one way, there will still be a circulation problem. People will have to travel away from town to get back into town. Longmire is important to the subdivision to provide internal circulation. Mr. Esmond questioned staff as to a reasonable time frame for the installation of Longmire. Assistant to the City Engineer stated that staff and the applicant had agreed to three to four • years or the installation of Cypress Meadow Phase II, whichever comes first. Mr. Esmond questioned staff as to the benefits of aligning Falcon Way and Cardinal Lane instead of the proposed 114' centerline offset. The Falcon Way cul-de-sac could be reconfigured in order to maintain the same number of lots and align with Cardinal Lane. Transportation Planner Hard stated that traffic should not be very heavy on these residential streets. Staff sees no problem with the proposed 114' offset. Applicant Dan Bensimon approached the Commission and stated that these two areas arc separate subdivisions. The proposed offset is only 11' less than ordinance requirements. Thcrc will not be much traffic in this area and most vehicles will not be travelling between subdivisions. The alignment of Cardinal Lane and Falcon Way is not possible because of the location of the creek. Mr. Bensimon added that he has agreed to build Longmire, dedicate the necessary right of way and post the required amount of security; however, the timing of installation is the issue. If the street is built now before the subdivision is fully developed, the extension will become a maintenance problem for the City. Mr. Esmond slated that Cardinal Lane looks a lot like Barthelow with no place to turn around. Transportation Planner Hard explained that the intent is that Cardinal Lane be extended and remain as a residential street. A collector street is not needed because Eagle Avenue to the north will be a collector and south of that is a minor arterial. Cardinal Lane serves sixty lots which is a typical residential street. There should not be much movement in this area except for the people who live there. • Engineer Mike McClure requested that sidewalks be placed on the west side of Robin Trail instead of the east side as proposed by staff. P & Z Minutes May 7, 1992 Page 7 Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan agreed and stated that staff had no problem with sidewalks being located on the west side of Robin Trail. Vice Chairperson Colson moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat for the Oakgrove phase of the Springbrook Subdivision with the condition that sidewalks be placed un the north side of Cardinal Trail and on the west side of Robin Lane; the 114' offset between Cardinal Lane and Falcon Way is acceptable. Mr. Hawthorne seconded the motion. Mr. Esmond moved to amend the original motion to place a condition of approval on the preliminary plat to increase the right-of-way along Cardinal Lane from fifty feet to sixty feet. The motion died due to lack of a second. The original motion passed unopposed (7 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a final plat for the Cypress Meadow phase of the Springbrook Subdivision. (92-204) See item number 5 for presentation and discussion. Mr. Esmond moved to recommend approval of the final plat for the Cypress Meadow phase of the Springbrook Subdivision with the condition that a five foot utility easement be continued along Lots 50 and Lots 36 - 39 and with the staff recommendation that Longmire be installed with three to four years or the Cypress Meadow Phase II development, whichever comes first. Mr. Mariott seconded the motion. Mr. Hawthorne moved to amend the original motion to include a condition of approval to provide a sidewalk along the west side of Hawk Owl Cove. Vice Chairperson Colson seconded the amendment which passed unopposed (7 - 0). The original motion to recommend approval passed unopposed (7 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Consideration of the Master Development Plan and Master Preliminary Plat for Pebble Creek Phase II. (92-302) Senior Planner Kee presented the staff report for the master development plan for the entire Pebble Creek Subdivision and the master preliminary plat for Pebble Creek Phase II. At build- out, the entire subdivision will contain approximately 2,000 lots. Phase two consists of 126 single family lots, a future location for villas and the location for the clubhouse facility. Greens Prairie is shown as a major arterial with Rock Prairie as a minor arterial. Two additional. minor arterials are shown going through this area; one providing a connection from Greens Prairie to Texas Avenue and the other providing east-west movement from Texas Avenue to Rock Pr~iirie. One north-south collector is shown where Marsh Boulevard currently exists. The tralfic imp~ict analysis indicates that the existing and planned roadways for and surrounding the development can accommodate the amount of traffic to be generated by the subdivision. However, it indicates that the subdivision does not have internal circulation, but does not recommend a connection between the east and west sections of the subdivision. The impact study provided ample reasoning to support its recommendation that an east-west minor arterial, as shown on the Thoroughfare Plan, was not the best location for this thoroughfare. Staff is in general agreement with all of the findings and recommendations of the traffic impact analysis with the exception of the lack of the east-west connection between the two sections of the subdivision and the proposed classification of the roadways in the subdivision. Sidewalks are required along one side of Augusta Circle and both sides of Champions Boulevard. Sidewalks may be required along Stonebriar Circle at the discretion of the Commission. The drainage impact study provided that detention facilities will be provided throughout the subdivision to meet the • requirements of the drainage ordinance. Existing ponds and proposed ponds throughout the subdivision will be designed to provide the detention wherever possible. Applicant has indicated that they will be requesting some areas without detention, which still meeting the requirements of the drainage ordinance. P & Z Minutes May 7, 1992 Page S • Senior Planner Kee stated that the master development plan includes 65 acres that is currently owned by the City of College Station. The developer is currently negotiating for the purchase of this additional acreage and this area will become a part of the subdivision as shown. The master plan as proposed does not provide for east-west movement between Rock Prairie and State Highway 6. Staff recommends this connection for the following reasons: (1) will reduce congestion by providing improved internal circulation, (2) will provide alternate routes for emergency vehicles, (3) will provide continuity in the internal street system for service delivery and maintenance, and (4) will provide the greatest traffic efficiency (provide residents the opportunity to get where they want to go by the shortest possible route). Although the thoroughfare plan shows this connection to be a minor arterial, staff is in agreement with the impact analysis indicating that the spacing between minor arterials would be more appropriate at 7,000 feet, which would place it at either Nantucket Drive or Snug Harbor. Therefore, the connection needs only be a collector. Staff also recommends collector sic streets rather than residential streets in two locations due to the high number of dwelling units that will utilize these streets. Staff recommends that consideration be given to bikeways within the subdivision. Senior Planner Kee stated that the master preliminary plat complies with the master development plan, the comprehensive plan and development policies and with the minimum • standards established in the zoning ordinance. The subdivision regulations require minimum residential street radii to enable adequate maneuvering room for service vehicles. The applicant is currently working on revising a portion of this plat in order to meet ordinance requirements. Staff recommends approval of the master development plan and master preliminary plat with the following conditions: (1) provide for an east-west collector on the plan, and (2) change two residential streets to collector streets on the plan. Applicant A. P. Boyd approached the Commission and stated that the proposed east-west connection is premature. If additional land cannot be acquired from the City of College Station, the connection may not be needed. He added that he would agree to work with staCC on the details of this connection at a later date. Transportation Planner Hard stated that the thoroughfare plan shows an east-west connection in this area. Staff has not determined on an exact location and is willing to work with the applicant on preferred locations. Mr. Boyd stated that the City should participate in the costs of providing this connection because the City will benefit the most from the connection. The City has over 500 acres in this area while the Pebble Creek development has only 175 acres. Development Services Director Ash approached the Commission and stated that the park was originally set up as a 500 acre wilderness park. There are no future development plans for this • park. The connection would allow residents of Pebble Creek to access this wilderness park. The connection will benefit the residents, the developer and the City. This document does nut have to retlect the actual location of a connection; however, the Commission can suggest that staff look into the location of a connection if this is desired. P & Z Minutes May 7, 1992 Page 9 • Mr. Hall moved to recommend approval of the master development plan of the Pebble Crcc;k Subdivision with the following notes: (1) a collector street be noted for future consideration with City participation in the bridge or equivalent dollar amount as done with other developments, and (2) the two residential streets shown be changed to collector streets as recommended by staff. Mr. Hall added that the applicant and the City need to agree at an early date on what will be required cost wise. Mr. Mariott seconded the motion which passed (6 - 1); Mr. Colson voting in opposition to the motion. Mr. Mariott moved to recommend approval of the master preliminary plat of Pebble Creek Phase II with staff recommendations of requiring sidewalks along Champion Drive and Augusta Circle and with the condition that the applicant reconfigure the area in question so as not to require a variance to the subdivision regulations. Mr. Hall seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Other business. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Adjourn. • Vice Chairperson Colson moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Coning Commission. Mr. Hawthorne seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). APPROVED: /~ ~~! Chairperson, ancy Sawtelle A ATTESTS f `~ ;" ~,7~~,,~:a ~;i1l;i~ „ Plafining Technician, Natalie Thomas • P & Z Mlnutes May 7, 1992 Page 10 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GUEST REGISTER • NAME. /~ ~ .~ 4. 5• 6. ~• 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23• 24. 25• ~ -, L.~~" / DATE ~ ~ /~ y., ~ I<~~ .-,~ ADDRESS U \ > ~ /I /' i ~ ~ I ~- r ~ ~-~ ~ ~) ;~ <- ~ f-;; ~ , ./ r ~~ _. A ~. ~. \---~ x.