HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/02/2000 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
March 2, 2000
7:00 P.I.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Hrin, Commissioners Floyd, Warren, Parker,
and Mooney.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Chairman Rife.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Member Mal n y.
STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner McCully, Staff Assistant haran a, Development
Coordinator Ruiz, Graduate Engineers Tondre and Thmspn,
Transportation Planner Hard, Staff Planner Hitchcock, Staff Planners
Jimmrsn, Hitchcock and Anderson, Director of Economic and
Community Development F utz, and Assistant City Attorney N m it .
AGENDA ITEM N. 1: Hear visitors
There were no i s itr s present wishing to address the Commission.
Th e foLlo i g items were approved i y common consent,
AGENDA ITEM N. : Consent Agenda.
Agenda Item No. 2.1: Approved the minutes from the Workshop M ting held on February 3., 2000.
Agenda Item No. 2.2: Approved the minutes from the Workshop M ting held on February 1 , 2000.
Agenda Item No. 2.3: Approved the minutes from the Regular Meeting held on February 17, 2000.
Agenda Item No. 2.2: Consideration of a Final Plat for the Business Center at College Station, Lots 1 &
2, Block 5, consisting of 56.125 acres located adjacent to Lot 1, Block 6 (00 -32). This item was
removed from the consent agenda by Commissioner Warren and seconded by Commissioner Mooney.
This item was heard and discussed after Agenda Item No. 3.
REGULAR AGENDA
P&ZMinutes March 2, 2000 Page I of 5
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public hearing and consideration of a rezoning for approximately 2.08
acres located on the northwest corner of Holleman at Harvey Mitchell. (00-31
Senior Planner McCully presented the staff' report and pointed out that in December 1 999, the applicant
requested C -1 zoning on the subject property in combination with a request for duplex zoning on the
property immediately to the north. The Commission recommended denial of the entire request with a
recommendation to not allow a wavier to the 180-day waiting period. She explained that at the
December meeting she was under the impression that the Commission did not feel that this site would be
suitable for commercial development at that particular time. The City Council lat denied the -1
request. She said that Council seemed to favor some type of neighborhood oriented commercial
development in this area that woul serve the relatively large amount of apartments that currently
surround this site. There are currently two vacant tracts that are zoned for neighborhood commercial
uses in this area, one being a C -1 tract allowing a wide range of commercial uses (located at the corner
of wellborn and Holleman), the other is zoned PDD specifically for a neighborhood shopping center In
the Melrose Subdivision (located at Luther and Jones Butler). She thought the Council felt this
particular site should also be developed as neighborhood retail, but to assure the orderly development of
such uses, the developer should return with a PDD request and therefore denied the C -1 portion of the
request without prejudice. The applicant is now requesting the PDD request. She felt that the
development policies would support commercial development as long as that commercial is limited to
neighborhood uses, and as long as the site plan restricts access to Holleman only, allows no vehicular
access between the commercial site and the residentially zoned areas, and buffers are provided between
this site and the R-5 and R-2 zoned areas to the immediate north and west. The proposed development
plan addresses all of staff's concerns; therefore Staff recommends approval of the request.
Commissioner Floyd asked Ms. McCully to expand on the policy that designates commercial
development at intersections of major road ways.
Ms. McCully pointed out that Holleman is shown on the Thoroughfare Plan to continue south of Harvey
Mitchell. She explained that when Staff is considering rezoning requests they consult the Thoroughfare
Plan in addition to the Land Use Plan and development policies to determine whether the proposed
zoning is compatible with stated goals. The mason commercial is placed at intersections of major
roadways is to implement the step -down zoning approach, which helps avoid strip commercial.
Commissioner Falser asked how many service stations were within a half -mile distance of this site to
service the neighborhood. He said that he knew w of a couple on wellborn and one on Harvey Mitchell at
Dowling Road.
Ms. McCully said that there were none within this neighborhood, which she felt was the mason Council
suggested the PIED. She said that the adopted development policies are used to determine whether or
not Staff could recommend approval. She suggested that the development policies be reviewed if there
is concern, but this would need to be done separate from any rezoning request. She believed that this
request was in compliance with the existing development policies, although technically this request was
not in compliance with the Land Use Plan.
Acting Chairman Horin opened the public hearing.
Mr. Elrey Ash, Ash &Brown Engineering (3800 South Highway 6), was present to represent the
applicant and to answer any questions regarding this request.
P&ZMinutes March 2, 2000 Page 2 of 5
Commissioner Warren asked if uses, other than the gas station, had been considered. Mr. Ash
responded that the applicant's desire is to have a convenience store with gas station, dry cleaners, and
other uses oriented to neighborhoods. Mr. Ash said that the applicant felt this location was good for this
use because it would serve the neighborhood. He felt that putting convenience stores at this type of
location opposed to actually within the neighborhood would be more beneficial. The site is being
oriented to avoid negative impacts (such as lighting) on surrounding neighborhoods.
Commissioner Floyd asked for Mr. Ash to define neighborhood that this store would serve. Mr. Ash
responded that since he had worked as the Director of Development Services for over twenty years, he
said that he has had trouble with defining neighborhoods for years. For this request he determined that
Harvey Mitchell Parkway and Wellborn Road and possibly Luther Street bound this neighborhood. H
pointed out that the only access to this site would be n Holleman, which would male this development
more accessible to primarily the neighborhood. Mr. Floyd asked why this development was being
oriented towards the traffic on Harvey Mitchell and not to the neighborhood. Mr. Ash stressed that this
was a majo entrance into the neighborhood.
Commissioner Kaiser asked for the number of planned gasoline pumps. Mr. Ash said that the plan was
for six islands.
Acting Chairman Hrlen closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Parker moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request. Commissioner Mooney
seconded the motion.
Commissioner Falser said that he was opposed to the motion because this use is not consistent with the
Land Use Plan, no demonstrated need for a gas station at this location, and because this change would
pose a health, safety and welfare risk to the surrounding neighborhoods. He felt this represented an
intrusion In aesthetics, and he felt aesthetics were legitimate concerns. He also felt this use would
clutter a gateway into the City.
Commissioner Floyd said that he asked if this use would need a conditional use permit to allow for
development. Ms. McCully said that this use is included with the associated site plan and would not
return to the Commission for consideration. The proposed development plan would be attached to the
rezoning ordinance. She said that since this would be the only time the Commission would see the
development/site plan, this was the opportunity to add conditions or restrictions (lighting, additional
buffers, etc.).
Commissioner Floyd said that was struggling with the number o f gas stations needed in this community.
He did not feel that all neighborhoods need gas stations and did not see the evidence to convince him
otherwise. He said that he was more concerned with the site plan rather than the zoning. His
understanding was that this was the direction Council want to g, and would life to concentrate more on
the site plan at this point.
Commissioner Warren said that she was not convinced that gas stations needed to be so close to
neighborhoods.
Commissioner Parker said that he did not have difficulty with the proposed development plan and
stressed that the development would have to be in accordance with this plan.
P&ZMinutes March 2, 2000 Page 3 of 5
Commissioner Mooney said that he liked the site plan. The site plan is proposing trees instead of
shrubs. He said that this area is quickly becoming a very congested area and he said that he saw the
need for this use, because there is not another convenience store until you get into Bryan.
Acting Chairman Horlen called for the vote, and the motion to approve the Pf -B request with the
associated site plan passed 4 -; Commissioners warren and Kaiser voted in opposition to the motion.
AGENDA ITEM NO. .4: Consideration of a Final Plat for the Business Center at College
Station, Lots 1 & 2, Bloch 5, consisting of 56.125 acres located adjacent to Lot 1, Bloch 6. (00-32)
This item was removed from the consent agenda.
Staff Planner Jimmerson approached the Commissioners and pointed out that there was an error on the
Staff Report., the correct legal description is Lots 1 and 3, Bloch 4. She pointed out this item was
removed from the consent agenda because of the discussion during the workshop because Staff wanted
to change a staff condition adding a note to the plat. Turing the Workshop Meeting, Assistant City
Attorney Nemclk said that this note could not be added to the plat but could be handled in a
Development Agreement.
Ms. Jimmerson told the Commissioners that Legal Staff was in agreement with approving the plat as
submitted with no changes to Staff conditions at this time.
Commissioner Mooney moved to approve the plat. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion, which
passed unopposed 6-0.
AGENDA ITEM NO. : Update to the C nuTdssi n of any new Minor or Amending Plats
approved by Staff.
Senior Planner McCully told the Commissioners that there was one minor plat approved at the Staff
level, which was Grand oafs Subdivision. This plat consisted of shifting a lot line.
AGENDA ITEM NO. : Discussion of future agenda items.
The following items were discussed for future agenda items:
Vision for Iorthgate.
Definition of "neighborhoods ".
Land Use Plan along the Harvey Mitchell Parkway corridor.
Development within the floodplain; long -term implications; 1 -foot rise rul e versus o -foot rise.
Wolf Pen Creep Subcommittee update.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Adjourn.
Commissioner warren moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Commissioner Kaiser seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 6 -0.
P&ZMinutes March 2, 2000 Page 4 of 5
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
hain an, Wayne Rif
Staff Assistant, Debra Charanza
P&ZMinutes March 2, 2000 Page 5 of 5