Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/1995 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES Planning & Zoning Commission • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS June 15, 1995 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Hawthorne and Commissioners Lightfoot, Garner and Lane. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Hall, Gribou and Smith. STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee, Senior Planner Kuenzel, Assistant City Engineer Morgan, Planning Technician Thomas and Transportation Planner Hard. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: The Consent Agenda consists of non-controversial or "housekeeping" items required by law. Items may be removed from the Consent Agenda by any citizen, City staff member, or Commissioner by making such a request prior to a motion and vote on the Consent Agenda. • (1.1) Approval of minutes from the meeting of May 18, 1995. (1.2) Consideration of a final E.T.J. plat of the German Acres Subdivision. (95-220) Consent agenda items 1.1 and 1.2 were approved by unanimous consent. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing to consider a conditional use permit for the College Station Junior High School located at 900 Rock Prairie Road to allow portable classroom buildings. (95-704) Senior Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report and informed the Commission that the Project Review Committee reviewed the proposal on May 31, 1995. The Committee recommended approval of the proposed use and site plan with the condition that the replaced landscaping be shown on the site plan. Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. Representative of the applicant, Lisa Cantrell of JCL and Associates, Inc., approached the Commission and offered to answer any questions pertaining to the conditional use permit request. Chairman Hawthorne closed the public hearing. • Commissioner Lightfoot moved to grant a conditional use permit for the College Station Junior High School located at 900 Rock Prairie Road to allow the addition of portable classroom buildings with the staff recommendations. Commissioner Lane seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public hearing to consider a conditional use permit request for the A&M Consolidated High School located at 701 F.M. 2818 to allow portable classroom buildings. (95-705) Senior Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report and informed the Commission that the Project Review Committee reviewed the proposal on May 31, 1995. The fact that the buildings are to be located in such a visible space prompted discussion regarding possible screening of the corner. The applicant would like to put in as little landscaping as possible now due to the fact that within the next two to three years, the school will be expanding and the entire site will be redeveloped. In light of this pending reconstruction, the Committee recommended that a time limit of four years be placed on the approval of the buildings. At the end of such time, either the buildings should be removed or adequately screened. Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. Seeing no one present to speak in favor of or in opposition to the conditional use permit request, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Garner moved to grant a conditional use permit for the A&M Consolidated High School located at 701 F.M. 2818 to allow the addition of portable classroom buildings with the staff recommendations. Commissioner Lane seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing to consider a Zoning Ordinance amendment pertaining to multi-family parking requirements. (95-802) Commissioner Lane moved to remove this agenda item from the table. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion. Senior Planner Kuenzel informed the Commission that in March of this year, the City staff presented a report on recent multi-family development and pointed out problems associated with both duplex and apartment development. Staff reminded the Council that the Community Enhancement Study is also assessing the same problems and will eventually make recommendations. The staff presented Council with the option of either waiting a year for the completion of that study or considering an interim Zoning Ordinance amendment that would prevent a repetition of past problems until the study is complete. The Community Enhancement Parking Focus Group is in the process of addressing both the current ordinance requirements that govern new development as well as finding ways to ameliorate existing sites. Staff was directed to focus on the development that is anticipated to occur within the next year to ensure that the new developments meet more modern standards. Staff met with several people of the community including builders, bankers, architects and apartment owners/managers before drafting the amendment on April 5, 1995. The draft came before the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 20, 1995 and was tabled. The Commission expressed a desire for additional input from interested parties and for information relating to incentives for voluntary compliance with guidelines. Such incentives are to address both existing and new development. The questions of incentives will require more time and resources than are available for the time being. The Enhancement group will explore these ideas and staff will be involved in the meetings to ensure that the group studies these options. Staff put together a task force and included representatives from all interested parties, including several members of the Parking Focus Group. On May 9, 1995, the task force met to give staff initial input regarding possible solutions. On May 25, 1995, staff returned to the group with recommendations for an ordinance amendment. The group responded favorably to most of the suggestions and, with one change, recommended approval of the amendment. P & Z Minutes June 15, 1995 Page 1 of S Senior Planner Kuenzel stated that essentially, the group made two decisions: • (1) That the existing regulations governing 3-plex, 4-plex, and apartment complex developments are currently adequate to cover any development that might occur within the next year. There is strong indication that the current parking requirement, which has changed significantly since 1980, may be too high. (2) The site requirements for duplexes need to be changed to make sure that there is adequate off-street parking and to set standards for site design. Senior Planner Kuenzel stated that in order to meet these two goals, the task force recommended the following: (1) Relate the number of spaces required for apartments to the size of bedrooms, not simply to the number. Bedrooms that are up to 132 square feet tend to have single occupancy. Therefore staff recommended that two bedroom units with smaller bedrooms be required 1.25 spaces per bedroom. The additional half space per unit will cover occasional dual occupancy despite the size, and any visitor parking. (2) Increase the number of spaces required on a three bedroom duplex to three spaces per unit. (3) Allow flexibility of design of parking pads but require the following: .7 -- T-type Parking: Require an 8' green space/setback between the property line and the first part of the parking pad. Require an additional 8' setback between the parking pad and the dwelling unit. Allow a 15' rear setback as opposed to a 20' to gain more buildable lot area. -- Rear Alley Parki»g: Maintain current ordinance incentives (smaller lot width and 15' as opposed to the 25' front setback). -- Rear Parking: Provide incentive to allow a front setback of 15' if parking is in the rear. -- Side-Line Shared Parking.• Provide incentive to allow a front setback of 15'. The number of spaces required can also be reduced to two spaces per unit if the drives are a minimum of 24'. (4) Require a minimum of 500 landscaping points per duplex building for each site. L~ Chairman Hawthorne opened the public hearing. Seeing no one present to speak in favor of or in opposition to the ordinance amendment, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Garner moved to recommend approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment pertaining to multi-family parking requirements with the staff recommendations. Commissioner Lane seconded the motion. Commissioner Lightfoot expressed concern that there is no clear advantage of using aBand-Aid for a problem that we are going to address once the Dr. Graham study is complete. He stated that the City should start enforcing the current restrictions instead of placing more restrictions on development. Commissioner Lightfoot stated that he is not against the amendment; however, he does not see the advantage of adopting it. P & Z Minz~tes June 1 S, 1995 Page 3 of S r • • • Commissioner Garner stated that the ordinance amendment will put aBand-Aid on the new construction and address the aesthetic issues for now. The purpose of the interim ordinance is primarily for duplex development. The ordinance amendment may not be the answer; however, it is a solution that the task force, comprised of builders and developers, agreed with. Chairman Hawthorne stated that he agrees with Commissioner Lightfoot in that he is not opposed to the ordinance amendment entirely. He expressed concern that the amendment be monitored so that it is truly an interim ordinance for a certain period of time. Chairman Hawthorne stated that he did not know how to solve the existing problems unless the City Council was willing to allocate more funding for code enforcement. The motion to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment with staff recommendations passed unopposed (4 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration of a driveway variance request for a new home at 8401 Spring Creek in the Emerald Forest Phase Nine Subdivision. (95-803) Transportation Planner Hard presented the staff report and informed the Commission that the applicant is in the process of building a house on a corner lot in Phase Nine of Emerald Forest. The home will front Spring Creek and the garage will be accessed by Crystal Oaks. It will have two, two car garages which explains the applicant's desire for a larger driveway. Staff worked with the applicant to develop a design that would accommodate the home's four car garage and still meet the City's driveway ordinance. The applicant did not find the design acceptable and is requesting a curb cut of 40' on Crystal Oaks which exceeds the ordinance requirement by 12'. Staff recommended denial of the variance request due to the following considerations: (1) While this 40' wide residential driveway will not pose a safety problem, staff is compelled to deny the request in order to remain consistent with previous decisions of other similar requests. (2) Although the ordinance allows some staff discretion, staff feels a variance of 12' is beyond their discretionary authority. Staff has agreed to an additional 2' which would allow fora 30' driveway opening. Chairman Hawthorne asked if anyone was present to address the Commission concerning to the variance request. Seeing no one, Commissioner Lane moved to deny the driveway variance request for a new home at 8401 Spring Creek in the Emerald Forest Phase Nine Subdivision. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Other business. Commissioner Garner informed the Commission that the parking requirement issue is only a small part of what the Enhancement Group is working on. The ordinance amendment may be a Band- Aid to address the existing problems; however, the Enhancement Group is looking at many futuristic solutions to these and other problems. P & Z Minutes Jude 15, 1995 Page 4 of S ~~ AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn. Commissioner Lightfoot moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4 - 0). APPR ~~~ Ch irman, Kyle Hawthorne C] ,r ~~ATTE ~, ,%' /i VII, V,7o~ ~~~,~ ~~ Planning Techn~ian, Natalie Thomas P & Z Minutes June 1 S, 1995 Page S of S i• ~J ~CanninB ~' ZoninB Commission Guest register ~ ~ Date 'J~(j~J(Q 41 ~ifrncc 7 2. 3. 4. S. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. IS. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. ~' ~ i~1.,~t~~ ~51~ ,~ C • ~ ~ i ~. ~ x