HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/02/1989 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES
• CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Planning and 7.oning Commission
March 2, 1989
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Dresser, Members Colson, Michel,
Moore, Davis and Esmond {who arrived late).
Councilman Gardner also attended the meeting.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Sawtelle and Council Liaison
STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer
Pullen, Senior Planner Kee, Assistant City
Attorney Banks and Planning Technician Volk
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes - meeting of February 16,
1989.
Mr. Colson made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Michel seconded
the motion which carried unanimously {5-0).
AGENDA ITEM N0. 2. Hear visitors.
No one spoke.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: 89-700: A public hearing on the question of
• granting a Conditional Use Permit for a Child Day Care Center in
the residence at 1200 Winding Boad. Applicants are Christopher ~
Janette Dale.
Senior Planner Kee explained the request, showed slides of the subject residence and
surrounding neighborhood, and stated the applicant has been caring for 12 children
for the past several years, and only recently became aware of the necessity of
receiving a Conditional Use Permit from the City to make her home care operation
comply with all city, state and county requirements. She added that the applicant is
planning no change in her operation, but simply wants to legally continue doing what
she has been doing for the past several years. Mrs. Kee also informed the Commission
that staff has identified no problems with this request and has received no
objections from neighbors either before notification of this request or since receipt
of that notification.
The public hearing was opened. No one spoke. The puhlic hearing was closed.
Mr. Moore asked what the applicant would have to do if the Commission granted this
use permit for a maximum of 12 children, and she determined she wants to expand her
operation in the future. Mrs. Kee explained that a limit can be set by the
Commission, and then in the future, if the applicants wants more she can re-apply for
approval just as is being done at this meeting.
Mr. Moore then made a motion to approve this request far a conditional use permit for
a maximum of 12 children to be cared for at this daycare facility. Mrs. Davis
seconded the motion which carried unanimously {5-0).
•
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: 89-302: {Revised) Master Preliminary Plat -
• SouthWOOd Valley Section 24.
Mr. Callaway explained the plat, located the land and pointed out the differences
between the plat under consideration tonight and the most recent revision of the same
land which was approved in 1984. Those changes include changing the configuration of
the streets along the northern side of Deacon Drive from one outer loop-type street
with 2 interior intersections to 4 long cul-de-sacs. Another change is being
proposed in the southeasterly area of the plat along where the extension oi.' Welsh Street
had been located. That area is now changed from 2 short cul-de-sacs entering the
subdivision from Welsh Street, to a proposal of a cul-de-sac entering the area from
Deacon Drive with the lots oriented along that street, rather than the 2 short
streets which have been deleted from this proposed plat.
Mr. Callaway then pointed out to the Commission that this proposed plat al:~o deletes
any continuation of Welsh Street toward the south, and designates in that area a
large tract of land carrying the label "Area Progress Corporation".
Mr. Callaway continued his explanation by stating this proposal may be affected by
some sections of the Subdivision Regulations, those being:
Section 8-G.1 Street Layout, which states "Adequate streets shall be provided
by the subdivider such that the arrangement, character, extent, width, and
grade of each shall conform to the comprehensive plan of the city and shall be
considered in their relation to existing and planned streets, to the
topographical conditions, to the public safety and convenience, and 'to their
appropriate relationship to the proposed use of the land to be served by such
• streets." (The Comprehensive Plan shows Welsh to continue beyond Deacon to Rock
Prairie Road.
Section $-G.2. Relation to Adjoining Street Systems, "Where necessary to the
neighborhood pattern, existing streets in adjacent or adjoining areas shall be
continued, in alignment therewith. Where adjoining areas are not subdivided,
the arrangement of streets in the subdivision shall make provision for the
proper projection of streets into such areas."
Section 8-G.8. Principal Streets on Master Plan, "Where a subdivision embraces
a principal street as shown on the master plan of the city, such street shall
be platted to maintain continuity in the approximate location as shown, and of
the type indicated. In certain cases the city may have constructed :a street
through the area to be subdivided, in which case the subdivider shall develop
the necessary street intersections at his expense, in accordance with the
requirements of this chapter. The planning commission may require that, where
practical, residential lots adjacent to arterial streets or parkways be platted
or restricted so as to prevent driveway opening into such streets."
Mr. Colson asked if Deacon or Welsh were planned to be through streets, to which Mr.
Gallaway replied that they both are, with Welsh to intersect with Rock Prairie Road,
and Deacon to intersect with Wellborn Road, which it now does.
Mr. Dresser asked about the location of the new elementary school and Mr. Callaway
replied it will be at the corner of Welsh 8: Rock Prairie Road, and Mr. Dresser then
said he thought that a statement had been made at the time the Commission considered
• the school site to the effect that Welsh would be completed before the school opens.
Mr. Callaway explained that Welsh, in front of the school will be completed, to serve
the facility.
PB:Z Minutes 3-2-89 Page t
•
i•
Mr. Dresser then asked about the maximum length of a cul-de-sac and Mr. Callaway
replied that the ordinance reads that cul-de-sacs shall not exceed 600 feet in
length to a radius point. Mr. Callaway then stated that some of the propo:~ed cul-de-
sacs appear to be a little over that length.
Mr. W. D. Fitch, owner and developer was invited forward to explain the reasons for
his proposal, and asked if he could submit an "alternate" Master Preliminary Plat at
this meeting. Permission was granted for a presentation, and he began with a
detailed summary of all the thoroughfares he had built in the Southwood Va:11ey area
up to this time, for the purpose of exemplifying that he is not, in this instance,
trying to "shirk his duty". He stated that this proposal to discontinue Welsh Street
short of the boundaries of his property can be explained by the fact that the cost to
him of building that short strip of Welsh cannot be offset by his property it will
serve, and he is asking the Commission to approve the cul-de-sac in the southeastern
portion of this plat, and the other proposed changes to the north of Deacon Drive
conditional upon approval of Council, which he knows will make the ultimate decision.
Mr. Fitch also mentioned part of the change being proposed along the north side of
Deacon Drive will help address potential drainage problems and the cul-de-:sacs being
proposed will help carry run-off better than the loop street which would put all the
water into one place.
Commissioner Esmond arrived at this time.
Mr. Fitch then referred to the portion of Welsh Street which he was deleting from
this plat because it would only serve a portion of the adjacent Westchester Park
subdivision, and then spoke of a donation by him to the City, of a "greenbelt area"
along the southeasterly corner of his subdivision. He asked for the Commission to
address the portions of the subdivision with the cul-de-sacs, and to leave the
problem of Welsh Street to Council, at which time he explained that he may propose to
extend the length of the lots around the cul-de-sac to where the R.O.W. for Welsh
would be.
Mr. Dresser asked Mr. Fitch to explain exactly which plat the Commission is supposed
to be addressing at this meeting, and Mr. Fitch replied the Commission should be
addressing the plat he turned in to meet the deadlines for inclusion in the packets,
adding that he would continue to prepare what he has shown as the "alternate
preliminary plat" to be submitted for consideration later.
Mr. Callaway stated that although some of the cul-de-sacs on this plat under
consideration at this meeting exceed the 600 foot maximum length set by ordinance,
staff has identified no problems connected to the proposed length. He pointed out
that the alternate plat presented by Mr. Fitch at this meeting reduces the length of
those streets.
Mr. Esmond asked for clarification as to whether the question is the payment for the
extension of Welsh, or actually whether or not Welsh will be extended. Mr•. Callaway
clarified, and pointed out that the alternate plat presented by Mr. Fitch at this
meeting provides for a "R.O.W. Reserve", and what the Commission must con~.ider at
this meeting is the configuration of the subdivision.
Mr. Colson stated that this Commission cannot consider the "alternate plat." because
• it has not been reviewed at a Presubmission Conference. Mr. Callaway stated that it
has been discussed with staff, and can be more carefully reviewed prior to Gouncil
consideration.
P&Z Minutes 3-2-89 Page ;3
• Mr. Dresser asked if it is permissible for the Commission to approve the ciil-de-sac
areas to the north of Deacon Drive and to simply not address the Welsh pori~ion of the
plat. Mr. Callaway replied that would be acceptable.
Mr. Colson then made a motion to recommend approval of all parts of the revised
master preliminary plat which had been reviewed at the Presubmission Conference with
exception of the area in the southeasterly corner, including Block 56 and the street
called "Cochise Court" and the large tract labeled "Area Progress Corporation" which
extends to the boundary of Southwood Valley Section 25C. Mr. Michel seconded the
motion.
Mr. Dresser briefly explained the reasons behind excluding that area for
consideration, and Mr. Fitch stated that he would agree to that solution, and he will
take the Welsh Street extension question to the Council.
Votes were cast on the motion offered by Mr. Colson, and the motion Carried
unanimously (6-O).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Other business.
Mr. Colson stated that he had received a question from a citizen about tra-Pfic
control on private shopping center parking lots and Assistant Gity Attorney Banks
explained traffic lanes in private shopping centers are not dedicated streets,
therefore are not regulated by the city. Mr. Colson pointed out that the city has
control over sign locations and dumpster locations. Mr. Callaway explained that
specific ordinances address sign location parameters, but dumpster locations are
controlled only so far as accessibility is concerned.
Mr. Colson then asked who controls the stop sign at the edge of a shopping center and
a public street, and Mr. Callaway stated that the city only controls signs located in
the right-of-way. City Engineer Pullen came forward and clarified by explaining that
traffic directional signs on or at the perimeter of private shopping centers are
advisory only, and the only signs which are controlled by the city are those placed
by the authority of the City Gouncil. He then gave other examples of "advisory
signage". Mr. Colson restated for clarification gurposes that unless there is
specific Council action requiring and approving signage, the "advisory signs" are the
responsibility of the private groperty. Mr. Pullen added that a "left turn only"
type of sign out of private property is also advisory and is placed by the property
owner.
Mr. Dresser explained that Chairman Sawtelle has requested that the Commissioners
take under consideration the possibility of changing the date of the next meeting
from Thursday, March 16th to Wednesday, March 15th. All agreed and staff was
directed to reschedule the meeting.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Adjourn.
Mr. Esmond made a motion to adjourn. Mrs. Davis seconded the motion which carried
unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. ~. ! ,\
!, ~ ~ ;
APPROVED: ~ j~~,~~(Lt- ___ ~__~ '__cr.k_.
Ch~irman~ Nancy Sawtelle
• ,,
APPROVED:
-------------------
City Secretary, Dian Jones
P&Z Minutes 3-2-89 Page t~
I~~
i•
MINUTES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Planning and Zoning Commission Workshop
immediately following Regular Meeting
March 2, 1989
MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Dresser, Members Colson, Michel,
Moore, Davis and Esmond; Councilman Gardner also attended.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Sawtelle and Council Liaison
STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Callaway, City Engineer
Pullen, Senior Planner Kee, Assistant City
Attorney Banks and Planning Technician Volk
AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Continued review of Land Use Plan and
Development Policies/Standards for update of Comprehensive Plain.
Mr. Callaway opened the workshop by presenting some comments which were no1~
necessarily his own, but rather had been extracted from planning documents and
sources. Those comments pointed out what the comprehensive plan is, and what it is
not, and included the following statements:
A comprehensive plan does not prescribe the future in such detail as ±to preclude
future decision making.
The plan and its policies do describe how decisions will be made under
prescribed circumstances.
To deviate from the plan should require a basis or rationale as logicfil or as
solid as that in the plan.
The land use plan reflects the pattern proposed for the various land ~zses within
the city, and is a general design which is not exact and does not have precise
boundaries.
A land use plan does reflect community facilities in the areas in whi<~h they
will be needed, but not the specific site of the facility.
A land use plan for undeveloped areas reflects types of land uses which would. be
appropriate in an area, but not a specific location for a specific use or zoning
district.
The entire comprehensive plan, both the planning and the plan itself, is a
process which should continue and be an on-going process to allow a chance not only
to look forward, but to look to the past at changed conditions or changes which were
anticipated but have not happened.
Mr. Callaway then showed a slide which exemplifies haw staff would see the revision
of the land use plan with regard to the Wellborn Road Study made by the Commissioners
several years ago. He pointed out that this exhibit is not nearly as specific as the
study itself, but rather more general in nature. He also reminded the Commissioners
that whatever is decided upon for this area now, there will be changes within
approximately 12 months, depending upon what happens to the railroad.
Discussion followed as to other possible proposed uses to be included on the plan of
the Wellborn Road area with Mr. Gardner saying that it is good to have alternatives,
• and perhaps some proposed mixed uses might be considered in the large area to the
west of the railroad tracks. Mr. Esmond said this plan looks as if some creative
development is reflected, and he wondered if all should be apartment zoning with a
P&Z Plan 2000 Update Workshop 3-2-89 Page 1
little bit of industrial along the west is the best, or if abetter use could be
identified. Mr. Gallaway reminded the Commissioners what what is reflected on this
• slide is only staff's interpretation of the recommendations of the Wellborn Road
Corridor study committee, and the only deviation made from those recommendations was
to reflect the actual existing commercial development at Southwest Parkway and
Holleman. He added that the existing plan reflects churches as public user, but
existing churches have not been shown and should be considered.
Mr. Moore commented along those lines that perhaps churches should be channeled
toward major intersections so traffic can be better handled. He added that: churches,
parks and other high traffic generators could then be interspersed at major-
intersections with commercial development, thus eliminating running commercial
development down thoroughfares as is being done.
Mr. Dresser asked if staff is ready for proposal to be made to reflect difi.'erences
from what is presented on the slides and graphics, or is staff asking for 1;he
Commission to give its o.k., and to move on to another area. Mr. Callaway replied
that staff would accept either direction, but he would also like to begin covering
development policies before going on to land uses along south Highway 6.
Mrs. Kee pointed out that the area along Wellborn which is reflected as commercial
was conditioned upon replatting many small tracts into one large tract, anti she
wondered if that should be noted somewhere. Mr. Dresser replied that condition
should be included somewhere, and if not on the land use plan itself, then certainly
somewhere in the narrative, because the reasons were to address limited driveway
access control, with circulation within the commercial area to be on privai~e
property.
• Mr. Callaway moved to the revised Land Use Plan which reflect the recommendations of
the East Bypass Study committee adopted by Council. Mr. Dresser said to him, it
would make more sense to show a buffer of several hundred feet between the Bypass and
low density residential development. Mr. Callaway explained that the mixed uses
along the Bypass came about because the study committee was not comfortable with
recommending industry or churches all along the Bypass. Mr. Dresser said in his
opinion, residential development ought to take place off Appomattox Drive :rather than
the Bypass. Mr. Moore said he thinks pressures will come from car agencies for
development along the Bypass with the completion of the overpasses. Mr. Colson said
he thinks the areas at the interchanges will be commercial, and the land use plan
might just as well reflect it now.
Mr. Gallaway reminded the Commissioners that the plan reflected on the wall
graphics was adopted by Council after a recommendation by the Commission,
but if the Commission thinks it should be changed, now is the time to do
it. Mr. Dresser said he would like some modifications made by staff in the
area of Appomattox and Harvey Road, and probably the entire length of the
study.
Mr. Gallaway said that now staff would like to discuss Commercial Development
Policies and then read from the draft document which reflects newly adopted goals and
objectives, as well as policies and standards taken directly from the current plan.
"Commercial activities should be located at points of high vehicular access.
~, Points of highest access are at grade separations along controlled access
roadways (freeways). Secondary points of access are located at the intersections of
thoroughfares or major streets.
F'8:Z Plan 2000 Update Workshop 3-2-89 F'age 2
•
Commercial, general commercial or industrial zoning on major and minox• arterials
should have a minimum depth of four hundred (400) feet, and individual tracts should
be encouraged to limit access at a minimum spacing of five hundred (500) feet."
Mr. Callaway then explained that both paragraphs 1 8: 2 quoted above are ant;i-strip
commercial development. He said that has not been applied so far in the ax-ea
along Highway 6 South, and he would like to see if the Commission wants to stay
with those statement, or change them to reflect something else. He then referred
to a wall graphic which showed a 400 foot wide commercial strip running fr<~m Rock
Prairie Road to Green's Prairie Road, and stated that this "land use plan" would
seem to be unacceptable. The Commissioners agreed. Mr. Gallaway then pointed out
that the possible alternatives appear to be (1)something like the current Plan 200
which deals with commercial development at intersections, or (2)a plan which shows
actual, existing zoning in the area.
Mr. Moore said he would. like to see some type of graphic to represent what a plan
would look like if required commercial development was confined to intersections,
with another graphic to superimpose the actual, existing zoning which has been
approved for that corridor.
Mr. Dresser said that he would not want the long, commercial strip, but he thinks it
would be quite acceptable to include some residential zoning along the highway, as it
has been done quite successfully in many areas, including College Station, and cited
the Windwood subdivision as an example, with major commercial development in the form
of a regional mall directly across the Bypass. He went on to ask if there are any
plans for a north/south backup street along the west side of Highway 6 South. Mr.
• Gallaway said that has not been done to date, but it could be done. Mr. Pullen
pointed out that Decatur street on the west side of the highway running through the
Shenandoah subdivision has a 70 foot right-of-way, the same as Appomattox Drive on
the east side of the highway. Mr. Callaway went on to say that Longmire could be
continued, and Marsh Boulevard on the south side of Green's Prairie Road offers some
opportunity for plans on the east side of the highway.
Mr. Gardner stated that staff should quantify "how much" of any type of use should be
needed based on projected needs and neighborhoods, and especially "how much"
commercial development at intersections should be included on the new land use plan.
Mr. Dresser pointed out that if only current guidelines are followed, the minimum
size could be 5 acres in a "spot", and staff has mentioned 25 acres as a development.
He went on to say that he would rather get some idea of the size of "nodes", and
would like to see staff present some development concepts and to include the location
of the intersections, as well as some distance figures.
Mr. Callaway explained that most of the "methods of enforcement" included in the
document presented are methods which are possible methods of enforcement available to
the city right now, but he wants the Commissioners to know that many of them are
actually being enforced primarily on a complaint basis, and this, too, should be
taken into consideration.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Adjourn.
After a brief summary of what the Commission would like to see from staff at the next
workshop on Wednesday, March 15th, Mr. Dresser adjourned this workshop.
P8:Z Plan 2000 Update Workshop 3-2-89 F'age 3
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GUEST REGISTER
• DATE March 2, 1889
NAME ADDRESS
1 . ~'~1(LI S ~~C~... ~ ~~~- ~ ~~-a-~ ~ l2 ~c~ LZ~,c,~c~c.~ l C S
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7•
8.
9.
10.
• 11.
12. ~~
13.
14.
15.
16.
17
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
•
25