Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/1992 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission• MINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 7:00 P.M. February 6, 1992 • n U MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Sawtelle, Commissioners Esmond, Hall, Colson, Hawthorne and Smith. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Callaway, Senior Planner Kee, Planning Technician Thomas, and Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of the minutes from the meeting of January 16, 1992. Mr. Colson moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 16, 1992 as presented. Mr. Hawthorne seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public hearing to consider a conditional use permit request by George Sopasakis to allow a tutorial center to be located at 301 B Patricia in the Northgate caning district. (92-700) Planning Assistant Kuenzel presented the staff report and informed the Commission that staff discussed the parking situation with the applicant. The property is zoned C-NG Northgate, whose uses do not have specific parking requirements. Instead, the Ordinance gives the Project Review Committee discretion to request additional parking be provided. In order to analyze the impacts of this use, however, staff looked at existing parking requirements for shopping centers in other parts of the City. Using a ratio of 1 space per 150 square feet, the center is short seven spaces of its parking need. If this center was located in a C-1 district, it would need to provide 32 parking spaces. Building Official Coy Perry inspected the parking lot before the committee meeting and determined that the lot provides 25 parking spaces. The applicant contends that there has not been a parking problem at the center because of its proximity to campus draws pedestrian customers and because two of the three other lease spaces are take out in nature. The Building code will restrict the number of occupants for this lease space to 30 people, including instructors. Planning expressed some concern regarding possible congestion due to overlapping hours. Thirty-one property owners within 200' of the subject properly were notified with one inquiry. Chairperson Sawtelle opened the public hearing. Applicant George Sopasakis approached the Commission and explained that the center is targeting freshmen and sophomore students whose courses are entry level math, physics and chemistry. The classes are planned to be a maximum of 1 hour and 45 minutes with a 15 minute interval between classes. The proposed location has been chosen mainly because of its proximity to the Texas A & M University campus and because it offers a parking facility. Over 50% of the tutoring center's students will be either walk ins or bicycling to the location. Mr. Sopasakis concluded that the center will be primarily operating during the fall and spring semesters; however, if there is a need for summer school tutoring, the center would like to provide these study services. C7 Mr. Smith questioned the applicant with regard to providing a bicycle rack or some other method of parking bicycles. Mr. Sopasakis stated that there is a covered entrance where they could be stored. If, in the future, the parking of bicycles becomes a problem, he will provide a parking rack. Chairperson Sawtelle closed the public hearing. Mr. Colson explained that he was in favor of any codes that limit occupancy loads, especially in the Northgate area. He moved to grant a conditional use permit to allow a tutoring institution to be located at 301-B Patricia in the Northgate zoning district. Mr. Smith seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public hearing to consider a rezoning request by Anco Corporation of Lot 14, Block T of the University Park II subdivision, located along the University Drive Corridor, from A-P Administrative Professional to C-B Business Commercial (92-101) Senior Planner Kee presented the staff report suggesting that A-P zoning is preferable on this property to preserve the block of A-P separating two currently zoned blocks of retail commercial, to avoid possible negative impacts on adjacent developed residential lots and to achieve compliance with the Future Land Use Plan. The City's Future Land Use Plan shows a consolidated block of office commercial uses adjacent to a consolidated block of medium density residential uses along the north side of University between the two retail commercial areas at the ends. The university Drive Report stated that, "The existing land uses reflected on the land use plan on the north side of University from Tarrow east to Spring Loop ar still appropriate". Currently the zoning configuration on the norther frontage of University is retail commercial at the ends with alternating A-P and R-4 • districts in between. This pattern of alternating A-P and R-4 districts is not particularly desirable and the previous University Drive study recommended rezonings to eliminate this "sandwiching" ' effect. This "sandwiching" effect will be continued with this rezoning. Although the C-B district is different from C-1 in that some C-1 uses are not permitted, it is a commercial district and was designed as such. It does allow uses that could have negative impacts such as noise, lights, food odors and traffic on the adjacent developed residential lots. The A-P district does not allow the retail and restaurant uses allowed in C-B. Staff does not feel that C-B zoning on this property would adversely affect the recommendations of the University Drive Report because of the protection yielded by the Overlay District, it is just not the preferable zoning taking gall planning aspects into consideration. Chairperson Sawtelle opened the public hearing. J. O. Alexander, representative of the applicant, Anco Corporation, approached the Commission and stated that he was under the impression after the University Drive property owners meeting, that all properties along this corridor would be rezoned to C-B. There is no immediate: particular use for the property; however, eventually the property will be developed, maybe into an office building. He would like to improve the property value and have a wider variety of uses other than an office building. Mr. Colson agreed and stated that the proposed C-B zoning would give the applicant more flexibility in developing the property. Paul Clark, representative of the owner of the adjacent R-4 tract to the west, approached the Commission and stated that he had no objections to the proposed rezoning. Chairperson Sawtelle closed the public hearing. P & Z Minutes February 6, 1992 Page 2 Mr. Esmond stated that in all likelihood, there will be a request to rezone the R-4 tract to C-B. If this was granted, then the proposed rezoning would not create a sandwiching effect. There is proposed C-B zoning surrounding this property. It is in the City's interest to see that this property is developed fully. Senior Planner Kee stated that if there was a rezoning request on the R-4 tract to C-B, she would have to make a negative recommendation because of its conflict with the future land use plan. The remaining proposed rezonings from C-1 to C-B along this corridor, are not in conflict with the land use plan. Mr. Hall stated that if this rezoning request was denied, it would not prohibit the applicant from requesting C-B zoning in the future when there are definite plans for a use that is not allowed in an A-P zoning district. Mr. Esmond stated that the C-B zoning will give the developer more flexibility and would still allow the applicant to develop a use listed under the A-P district. He moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request of Lot 14, Block T of the University Park II subdivision, from A-P Administrative Professional to C-B Business Commercial. Mr. Hawthorne seconded the; motion which passed (5 - 1); Mr. Hall voting in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing to consider a city initiated rewning of 22 tractY located along the University Drive Comdor from Tarrow to the East By-Pass, fi<om Gl General Commercial to GB Business Commercial and from GN Neighborhood Commercial to A P Administrative Professional (92-100) Senior Planner Kee presented the staff report recommending rezoning of tracts 1 - 21 to C-B and • tract 22 to A-P. These rezonings are being initiated at the direction of the City Council upon adoption of the University Drive Report. This report stated that there are many locations within the City where some commercial uses such as retail activities, restaurants, theaters and night clubs are appropriate but not the wide range of uses available in the C-1 zone. Therefore, the C-B district was created. It is intended as an alternative to C-1 for locations where the more intense commercial uses allowed in C-1 would not be compatible with existing zoning, existing land uses or, as in the case of University Drive, with the future intent of developing an attractive entryway into the City. The report concluded that the full range of C-1 uses would not be appropriate along the University Drive corridor considering its function as an entryway and the properties currently zoned C-1 would be more appropriately zoned C-B. The report also addressed what is referred to as tract 22. It concluded that because the C-N zone is designed for convenience stores (and this one of the two uses not recommended for the corridor) this property should be rezoned to a more appropriate district such as R-4. Council modified this recommendation to A-P. The proposed zoning changes will not alter the comments concerning utility availability found in the University Drive F.eport. It stated that ample water service infrastructure and capacity is in place to accommodate e~:isting and future development in the area. There is also sufficient sewer capacity to accommodate future development if similar land use types and density levels continue to develop. Gas and electrical service should pose no constraints. One hundred and ten property owners within 200' of the subject properties were notified with two inquiries. Chairperson Sawtelle opened the public hearing. Paul Clarke, representative of the owners on the north side of University from Tarrow to the Anco tract, stated that he was in favor of the C-B zoning in conjunction with the Overlay district to establish a uniformed effect along the corridor. This uniformity should be extended contiguously along the corridor and include the A-P, R-4 and R-1 tracts. P & Z Minutes February 6, 1992 Page 3 Chairperson Sawtelle informed the applicant that it was the Commission's intent to make zoning recommendations on all of the tracts in the corridor. Some of the uses allowed in the C-1 zones were not compatible to this major entryway. The City would initiate rezoning on the intense C-1 zones and let the property owners of the less intense R-1, A-P and R-4 zones initiate rezoning. Mr. Colson agreed and stated that if he wanted the R-4 tract rezoned to C-B he would have to request the rezoning and pay all applicable fees. Mr. Clarke stated that he objected to the C-B zoning at the existing Chimney Hill Shopping Center because it will prohibit convenience stores and other uses normally allowed in a shopping center. This center is already developed and there is no need to rezone or place more stringent restrictions on the center. He stated that he is concerned with the limited future uses of the center if it were zoned C-B. Any barriers placed on this property would only hinder the redevelopmf;nt of the center. This center is set apart from the rest of the corridor and could easily be excluded from this target area. When soliciting new tenants it makes it difficult to have to go through special channels in order to get a particular use approved by the Commission. This site was allowed to be developed as a shopping center and should be able to continue. Mr. Esmond stated that if the center came upon a use prohibited by the C-B district, thf: applicant could come before the Commission for a use permit. There are provisions in the Overlay district that regulate convenience gas stations. The applicant has not proven that the rezoning would effect the development of the property. Mr. Hall stated that one convenience store is not going to make or break a shopping center with a • vacancy of 65%. This center should do well with the development of Randall's and the 'Texas A & M University Headquarters Building surrounding it. The proliferation of convenience stores is not in the future. There are vacant convenience store buildings all over Bryan/College Station. This center will not be limited by the proposed C-B zoning. Chairperson Sawtelle agreed and stated that she does not want to see another automobile dealership at this location. She did recommend that staff look into standardizing and clarifying the permitted uses lists in the zoning ordinance so that they are consistent with other zoning classifications. She stated that the list of permitted uses in the C-B district is not an exhaustive list. Chairperson Sawtelle closed the public hearing. Mr. Esmond stated that he felt uncomfortable voting on tract 22 because of the recent rezoning request of the adjacent A-P tract. He suggested tabling the item until the next available meeting to wait and see if the A-P tract is rezoned by City Council. Mr. Colson agreed and stated that tract 22 should be rezoned to C-B. He moved to recommend approval of rezoning tracts 1 - 21 from C-1 General Commercial to C-B Business Commercial, and tabling the rezoning from C-N Neighborhood Commercial to A-P Administrative Profession on tract 22 until the next available meeting. Mr. Hall seconded the motion. Mr. Esmond stated that Mr. Clarke has a valid concern. If he feels strongly enough about the limitations of C-B zoning, he should go to the City Council meeting and voice these concerns. These city initiated rezonings are at the direction of the Council through the University Drive Corridor report. He concluded that the C-B zoning should not hinder the redevelopment or occupancy of this center. • The motion to recommend approval of the rezonings passed (5 - 0 - 1); Mr. Hawthorne abstaining. P & Z Minutes February 6, 1992 Page 4 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Other busiiness. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Adjourn. Mr. Colson moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Hawthorne seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0). APPRO O Chairp ,Nancy S~d(~telle TTFS Plannin Technician, Natalie homas P & Z Minutes February 6, 1992 Page 5 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GUEST REGISTER DATE ~~ NAME ADDRESS . r~ i K~- I_ ~ ~, J E''_c~~cz~ ~ ~~, ~~~5« J ,~^~ , ; , r~ ! _ C- ( - ~ :~ a C c~_~ ~_ ., , _ _, ~ _ c 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. . 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.