HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/21/1989 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission• MINUTES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 1989
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Sawtelle, Members Davis, Michel,
Esmond & Colson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Members Gentry ~ Dresser
STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner Kee, Assistant Gity Engineer
Smith, Assistant City Attorney Banks and
Planning Technician Volk
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of minutes - meeting of September 7,
1989.
Mr. Michel made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Mrs. Davis seconded
the motion which carried unanimously (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Hear visitors.
No one spoke.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: 89-709: A public hearing on the question of
granting a Conditional Uae Permit for a Student Center for the
Association of Baptist Students to be located at 410 ~ 412
College Main {Lots 6&7, Block 4, Boyett subdivision}, Applicant
is the Association of Baptist Students. Owner of land is Howard
G. Nelson.
r~
L_J
Mrs. Kee gave the staff report which included an explanation of the request, location
of the proposed project, description of the physical features of the lot, area zoning
and land uses, and information that the adapted Land Use Plan reflects the subject
property and surrounding properties as medium density residential. She included
slides of the subject lot and surrounding lots while giving the staff report.
Mrs. Kee then identified the appropriate conditions, safeguards and standards to be
used by the Commission in making a decision regarding requests for Conditional Use
Permits.
Mrs. Kee then explained that the P.R.C. reviewed this project on 9-6-89 and
recommended approval with conditions. She pointed out that the P.R.C. also agreed to
have the entire Commission resolve the question of whether or not to require
inclusion of a screen fence between this project and adjacent residential projects.
She added that staff would like to point out that all conditions of the P.R.C. have
been reflected on the revised site plan under consideration at this meeting except
the distance from the existing fire hydrant and the proposed building, and the fact
that the required 8 foot setback from the property line to the parking area in one
location has not been met and will require a variance if the site plan is not revised
to include this requirement.
Mr. Esmond asked if there will be a location for ingress/egrees to the rear of this
project and Mrs. Kee replied there will not, and a "turn-around" has been provided
for backing up so egress can be made into the street without backing.
• Mr. Colson asked if the zoning around this lot is all R-5 and if all houses are
occupied and Mrs. Kee replied that all zoning in this area is R-6, and she does not
know if the structures are occupied.
Mrs. Kee asked for a description of the proposed uses of this facility and Mrs. Kee
replied that according to information provided by the applicant, this facility will
be used for a meeting place for Baptist students.
The public hearing was opened. Jim Holster, 6404 Windwood, architect for the project
came forward and offered to answer any questions. He explained that a location was
chosen by the student group because it is within walking distance of the campus. He
said that all requirements have been met on this revised site plan except the 8 foot
setback, and that can be accomplished by a slight shifting of the parking lot to the
east. He explained that there is still some question regarding the distance to the
nearest fire hydrant, and he would work with the Fire Marshal and the Water R Sewer
division to ascertain the exact location and distance to the project, and whether or
not adequate coverage would be provided.
Mr. Michel asked him what discussion to place at the P.R.C. regarding screening, and
what type screening would the applicant be willing to provide. Mr. Holster stated it
had not be discussed to any great extent, but added that if screening is required he
would be a reasonable request, and he and the applicant could propose something.
Mr. Colson stated he was the P8Z Representative on the P.R.C. that reviewed this
project, and the screening question was not discussed much at that meeting because
• the P.R.C. really could not decide what screening would screen this from. He added
that this issue was referred to the entire Commission because of the nature of this
proposed use and the conditions of the surround area.
r
Mrs. Kee pointed out that the layout of the parking lot and the hours of operation
should also be a consideration, as well as the fact that this use caill be more like a
commercial use than it is a residential use.
Bardin Nelson, 504 Wayside, Bryan, owner of 24 units either across the street or
behind this property came forward and stated that he echoes Mr. Colson's sentiments
about screening, and added that he welcomes this project as he thinks it will
certainly enhance the entire area, which is not very impressive right now. He added
that he thinks the enhancement will be of the quality of tenants renting in the area
as well as of property value.
Mr. Esmond asked him to specifically address the question of screening and Mr. Nelson
said he is more in favor of adequate landscaping than of screening fences, and added
that unless the fence were of a particular type, it could detract from the appearance
of the project. He went on to say that he does not view this as a business, but more
as a church.
Stephen McGann, 3102 Larkspur came forward and identified himself as the Director of
the Association of Baptist Students here in College Station, and his sole purpose for
living here is to minister to students. He explained the association wants to locate
the student center closer to the campus than the previous center, so more students
will be able to walk to it, and then said that he and the association would be
willing to do whatever is asked regarding a screening fence, but added that a fence
in this neighborhood may be hard to maintain because of the tendency of students to
P&Z Minutes 9-21-89 Page 2
"cut through" whenever possible.
• Mr. Esmond asked Mr. McCann to address the hours of operation of the facility, and he
stated that the regular weekly meetings are held on Thursday nights, but the center
would be open every night to be used for study. He clarified by stating the hours
the center will be open are 8-5, 6 days a week, with Monday night being used for a
small group for Bible Study and Thursday nights for regular weekly meetings. He said
the latest hour the facility will be open is 1Q p.m.
Mr. Michel. asked if Mr. McCann had any desire to screen this facility from
surrounding uses and Mr. McCann stated he does not, since the key word in this
ministry is "reach out to students", and actually he would prefer not to include a
screening fence. Mr. Michel asked if a matter of economics is involved and Mr.
McCann replied that would be a consideration, but not the main one; adding that the
plan is to have enough landscaping to look attractive, but he would actually prefer
not to screen this facility away from the neighborhood.
No one else spoke. The public hearing was closed.
Mr. Golson said that based upon what he has heard at this meeting and at the P.R.C.,
this site plan and use meets the spirit of the ordinance, the minimum landscaping
requirements although he would like to see additional trees, and he pointed out that
outside of the Planned Parenthood facility, there is no fence in this entire
neighborhood.
Both Mr. Esmond and Mrs. Sawtelle agreed that requiring a fence would not be in the
best interest of either the neighborhood or the applicant.
• Mr. Colson asked about signage and Mrs. Kee replied that signage plans are included
in a note on the site plan, and those plans fall within the regulations of the R-6
zoning district, so will be allowed without special consideration.
Mr. Colson moved to approve this request and site plan for a Conditional Use Permit
with P.R.C. conditions. Mr. Michel. seconded the motion which carried unanimously (6-
0}.
AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: Other business.
Mr. Esmond asked the staff what the outcome of the survey being done on what cities
require geo-technical surveys and Mr. Smith replied that he has completed the survey,
but has not finalized it into report form, but in essence the information he received
is as follows: Houston requires geo-technical surveys for building permits, but not
for all subdivisions - only some; Georgetown sometimes requires geo-technical
surveys; Bryan does not require them.
Mrs. Sawtelle asked for clarification as to what is the subject of this conversation
and Mr. Smith replied that geo-technical information is used for planning foundation
designs in certain places. He stated it is not a common requirement, but it is not
unheard of. He added that the City of College Station does not require that
information from private developers, but the information is required and used for all
City facilities.
Mr. Esmond said he would like to receive a copy of the report when it is finalized,
adding that it is his opinion that information of this nature is the trend of the
future.
PB:Z Minutes
9--21-89
Page 3
Mr. Colson asked what information was gathered regarding the fire hydrant situation
in newly annexed areas and Mr. Smith replied that when the City annexes undeveloped
• areas and installs water lines, some fire hydrants are installed primarily for
maintenance of water lines. He said that when the Gity annexes developed areas and
puts in water lines, which is the case in the Harvey Hillsides area, fire hydrants
are located to provide coverage for all existing structures which are in the City
Limits. He added that in that specific area, the City Limits is only one block deep,
and perhaps some of the homes in the area are not actually in the City. He pointed
out that as development takes place in these areas, the developer would be required
to run a water line if the new project is nat covered by the existing hydrants.
Mr. Colson said that the memo to the Council that staff has prepared at the direction
of the Commission regarding screening at the Public Services Center is exactly what
the Commission meant to convey and thanked staff for its cooperation.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Adjourn.
Mr. Michel made a motion to adjourn.
unanimously (6-0}.
Mrs. Davis seconded the motion which carried
APPROVED:
Chair an, Nan Y Sawtelle
r1
LJ
•
ATTEST:
City Secretary,-Dian Jones
PB:Z Minutes
9--21-89
Page 4
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GUEST REGISTER
DATE ~;f~~lia-~vv.~iL o~~i ~~~
NAME ADDRESS
1 .
- ~' ~ ~ ~, ,,~,;,
--,~ ~ ~ .1-' ~~
4. ` ~%I.
~ ~
,
6. ~ ~ ~.
.-
+ f
_ __
~
8 . , ~^
~~ i1
9.
10.
11.
12. ~ '
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
. 19
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.