Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/06/2000 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning CommissionMINUTES Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS January 6, 2000 7:00 P.I. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Rife, Commissioners Floyd, Hrin, Kaiser, and Mooney. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Parlor and Warren. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Members Hazen and Maloney. STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner McCully, Staff' Assistant C haranza, City Planner I , Development Coordinator Ruiz, Assistant City Engineer Mayo, Graduate Engineer Tndr, Transportation Analyst Hester, Staff Planner Jimmrsn, Staff Planner Anderson, Director of Development Services Callaway, Neighborhood Planner Battle, Planning Intern Dean, Community Development Administrator Carroll, and Assistant City Attorney Nmil. Chairman Rif was not present at the beginning of the meeting; therefore, Commissioner Mooney began the meeting in his absence. AGENDA ITEM NOD. 1: Hear visitors Benito Flores Meath, 901 Val Verde, handed the Commission a letter of concern for Agenda Item #12 (Discussion of the appropriate zoning district to allow for recreation vehicle parks.). His concern was for mobile home parks. ThefoLlowing items were approved hy common consent, AGENDA ITEM N. : Consent Agenda. Agenda Item No. 2.1: Approved the minutes from the Regular Meeting held on December 16, 1 999. Agenda Item No. 2.2: Approved the minutes from the Workshop p M ting held on December 16, 1999. P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page I of 1 REGULAR AGENDA AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.3: Consideration of a Final Plat of approximately 50.78 acres, Pebble Hills Phase 1 Subdivision, located on the north side of Greens Prairie Road approximately 1 400 feet east of State Highway -227) Commissioner Floyd removed this item from the consent agenda. He was concerned with the alignment of Pebble Hills Boulevard with the existing street in Pebble Creek, and the access points for the CIC Agency. His concern with the safety of the alignments because of the hill. Graduate Engineer T explained that Staff has looped at the sight distance concerns and felt that since it is downhill', the traffic on greens Prairie Toad can be seen exiting the subdivision. Mr. Frank Thurmond, 3015 Glenn Eagles, explained that the road centers with the road that used to be Greenleaf Hospital. Commissioner Floyd moved to approve the final plat, with staff conditions as stated in the staff report. Commissioner Horlen seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 4 -0. (Chairman Rife was not present at this time.) Chairman Rife entered the meeting. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public hearing and consideration of a rezoning request for 3.378 acres adjacent to the High Ridge Subdivision from R -1 Single Family to - Commercial Industrial. ( 99-131) Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report and stated that the request would incorporate an add itional 3.378 acres of C -2 zoning to two tracts currently zoned C-2 on the east side of Highway between Highwa 60 and 3. The existing two tracts consist of the Varsity Ford car dealership and a largely vacant 8.14 acre tract to the north. The entire 3 .38-acre tract lies in the 100-year fldpl.in; hr, there is a reclamation project associated with this proposal. This current reclamation project consists of filling the flood fringe, without disturbing the creep channel. The request is in compliance with the Land Use Plan, which shoves regional retail for the entire area between High ays 60, 30, and and bound to the east by the Carters Creep flday. Commissioner Floyd asked why there would be one piece of land remaining R-1. Graduate Engineer T explained that this tract is in the floodway and cannot be filled o disturbed. It is located in the center o f the creep channel. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Mr. Greg Taggart, Municipal Development Group, stated that he was the project engineer and was present to answer questions. Chairman Rife closed the public hearing. Commissioner Floyd moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request. Commissioner Hrin seconded the motion, which passed 4 -1; Commissioner Kaiser voted in opposition due to allying development to occur in or near flays . P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 2 of 1 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, use only, for a religious facility, Brazos Community Church, to located at 700 University Drive East Suite 11.. -727) Staff Planner Anderson presented the staff report and stated that churches may be permitted as conditional uses in any district upon approval from the Planning & Zoning Commission. The proposed church is requesting permission to be located in a 4750 square foot lease space in the University Village Shopping Center. The Church has approximately 70 members and lists hours of operation as Sundays from 9 :00 a.m. — 1:00 p.m. and after 7:00 p . m . on various evenings during the week. . She explained that the shopping center houses several different types of tenants, such as restaurants, plasma donation center, bookstore, nail salon, a nightclub, and office tenants. The proposed religious facility is to be located within 300 feet of The Legacy nightclub. Since the nightclub is already existing and the Church is choosing to move within the Soo -foot alcohol sales boundary, the nightclub may continue to serve alcohol and to gain liquor permits. However, new alcohol establishments would be prohibited under our ord inance because of the church location and thus, they could not apply for a liquor permit for this same shopping center. If the existing liquor establishment is abandoned or if the use is still there but alcohol sales are extinguished, then the existing establishment may not be repermltted. According to our legal staff, the Planning & Zoning Commission does not have authority to deny a conditional use permit based solely upon potential future uses of any bind including the possibility of a future liquor establishment within Soo feet of the proposed use. She explained that the church would have approximately 70 members, which requires 23 parting spaces. The applicant contends the church operation hours would differ than the existing tenants and thus, plenty of parking will be available. Ms. Anderson said that she received three phone calls in concern of the request, to of which were concerned with the parting situation if the congregation were to increase, and one call concerned w ith the nightclub in the same shopping center. Staff recommended approval of the request. Chairman Life opened the public hearing. Mr. Roy Brantly, 2503 Antitem, explained that he was a member of the church and was present to represent the church. He explained that the church had no problems locating near a nightclub because they felt the church would be a positive influence to the center and to the community. He explained that the lease was for one year. The intention would be to look into purchasing property to build a more permanent locations in the next few years. He explained that there were 100 chairs in the church. He also pointed out that there was additional parking in the back of the building. Chairman Life closed the public hearing. Commissioner Mooney moved to approve the request. Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion. Commissioner Kaiser asked Staff if time limitations could be placed on this item. Ms. Anderson said that the zoning ordinance does allow established time limits on conditional use permits. Chairman Life felt that a time limitation would not be necessary because Mr. B rantly said that the church intended to purchase and build on a more permanent location. Commissioner Mooney agreed. Commissioner Floyd agreed with Commissioner Kaiser and felt that the time limit would be beneficial in this case. P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 3 of 1 Chairman Rife called for the vote, and the motion to approve failed 2 — ; Chairman Rife and Commissioner Mooney voted in favor of the motion; Commissioners Floyd, H rlen, and Kaiser voted in opposition of the motion. Commissioner Kaiser moved to approve the request with a one -year time limitation, expiring one year from the date of approval. Chairman Rife asked for clarification from the applicant as to when they were scheduled to move into the facility. Mr. Roy Brantly received permission to approach the Commission to clarify the length of the lease, which he said was actually signed for a -year time limit, as confirmed by Mr. John Clarke (property manager). He said that there are chances that the church would be moved from the location within one to two years, or they have an option to move within the center to another location. He asked that the time limitation, if desired, to run concurrently with the existing lease of three years. The Commissioners asked Assistant City Attorney Nemcik to address the issue of the church moving lease spaces within the same center, and if the Church would have to return for another conditional use permit. Ms. Nemclk said that a new conditional use permit would be required if the church changes lease spaces, even within the same shopping center. The motion to approve the request with the one -year time limitation (as stated by Commissioner Kaiser) died due to the lack of a second. Commissioner Hrlen moved to approve the conditional use permit with the condition of a time limit to run concurrently with the existing lease and ending when the lease is terminated, not to exceed 3 years. Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 5 —0. AGENDA ITEM NO. : Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, use and site plan, for College Hills Missionary Baptist Church located at 712 Churchill Street north of Lincoln Avenue and east of Tarr ow Street, to pave and expand an existing gravel parking area. (99-731) Staff Planner Jimmerson presented the staff report and stated that the applicant was requesting permission to pave the existing gravel parking on site and to expand the parking area. The site is zoned R- Single Family Residential and shown as high density single family residential on the Land Use Flan, but churches may be permitted as conditional uses in any zoning district. The original structure and the existing use predate the current Zoning Ordinance; therefore there is not an existing Conditional Use Permit. The current site with the gravel parting area and the use are grandfathered. Because the entire parting structure is being paved this change is considered significant and even if there were an existing use permit, it would be required to come before the Commission for approval of the new site plan. If this use permit is granted it will be legitimizing the church as well as the new site plan. She explained that because the change to the site is considered significant, the driveway ordinance gives us the authority to require that non- residential driveways be brought into full compliance. The o rdinance states that adjacent non- residential driveways on a local street should have a separation distance of 150 feet. The driveways o n this site are approximately 104 feet apart. Variances to the driveway ordinance normally are required to go to the Project Review Committee. However, in this particular instance both the PRC and the Commission have authority over this issue. The Commission has authority because driveway placement may affect "the health, welfare or safety of the surrounding neighborhood or its P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 4 of 1 occupants." Staff determined that going to both bodies to review the variance request would be inefficient, and since the PIC consists of three members of the Commission, and since the conditional use process allows for a public hearing, which the PRC review does not, then the logical place to tale the variance request is to the Commission. Ms. Jimm rson said that staff did support the driveway variance request. If the northern most driveway were moved further north to fully comply with the driveway ordinance then an awkward street offset would occur. Also, the proposed driveways are in almost the exact locations of the existing curb cuts. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Mr. Ed McDowell., 1013 Walden Drive, was present to represent the church. He explained that there were 74 spaces required by the parting regulations, but the site plan shows that 77 spaces would be provided. Mr. Tommie Preston, 6 16 Pierce, representing the church, gave the Commission some historic information about the church and parting lot. Chairman Rife closed the public hearing. Commissioner Horl n moved to approve the request with the variance request. Commissioner Moon seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 5-0. AGENDA ITEM NO. : Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, use and site plan, for the Ord n z Residence located at 1701 Langford. This request is to allow an in- house child care facility within the single family residence. -733) Staff Plann Anderson presented the staff' report and explained that child care facilities may be permitted as conditional uses in any district upon approval from the Commission. The request was for permission to operate a child care facility in her home located at 1 701 Langford Street. The applicant proposed to convert the existing 440 square foot garage into the child care area and provide use of a square foot bathroom for child care use, for a total of 465 square feet to be used for both child care and r purposes. She explained that the Zoning Ordinance defines a child care facility as "any facility or premises where seven or more children under sixteen years of age regularly attend for purposes of custody, care, or instruction; and which children are not members of the immediate nu family of any natural person actually operating the facility or premises." The applicant currently has four children in her immediate family. The applicant proposes three types of child care programs, which would operate different hours and have a variant number of children participating. The main child care program would be after school care from the hours of 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. This program would have a maximum number of 12 children ranging in age from 5 to 13. The second program is a part time "Mother's Day Out" program which would operate from 9 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. This program would have a maximum number of 8 children ranging in age from 18 months to 5 years. The third program is a summer program, which would serve school age children from the hours of :o a.m. to 6 p.m. The maximum number of children in this program would be 1Z, ranging in age from 5 years to 13 years. The applicant plans to hire one employee to help provide care for these programs. She pointed out that currently the property has two off street parting spaces for the residential use; the applicant proposes to use these same spaces to satisfy the needs of the child care use as well as the residential use. She said that a wood fence surrounds the proposed playground area (the backyard). It is unknown., however, how the children will enter the playground area (either through the house, or around the front yard). The applicant has informed staff that drop off and pick up of children in each of the programs would be P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 5 of 1 intermittent and thus, traffic impacts would be minimal. Ms. Anderson said that she had received 4 phone calls in favor of the request and one phone call with concern for the number of children proposed. She clarified that the state allows 14 children to be cared for in a space of 465 square feet, although it is limited to 12 children for in -home child care. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Mr. William Guidry, 1712 Laura Lane, explained that he was opposed to the request. He said that there were unsafe conditions on the property, such as a leaning wooden fence, exposed nails in the fence, and a steep slope in the backyard, which causes problems with drainage. He said that area is known to flood during heavy rains. The leaning fence provides no privacy. Ms. Debby Mason, 1714 Laura Lane, was also opposed to the request. She said that her backyard abuts the subject property and could see a potential problem with noise. She also had the same concerns with the request as Mr. Guidry. She was also concerned with decreased property values. Ms. Deanna Ord on z, 1701 Langford (the applicant), explained that she was aware of repairs that would need to be made prior to the opening of the childcare. She said that the state would inspect the area before allowing her to be ap proved. She pointed out that the fence was being repaired nova. She did not anticipate a traffic problem because she would primarily beep children from South Knoll Elementary. Her plans were to hire one additional employee, but it would be unlikely that both would be present at the same time, with the exception of rare occasions. She told the Commission that her oven children's ages range from 4 to 13. If the request was not approved she would be allowed to beep a total of 10 children unrelated in addition to her oven four), but she wanted the additional children to male an income and to be able to support her family and hire additional help. She stated that she was more than willing to work with the neighborhood regarding any concerns. Mr. T H Kwa., a friend of the applicant, told the Commission that Ms. ordon z was a very caring mother. He said that there was no evidence that property values would not be fftd by in -home dayars. He stressed that there are times when human needs should be considered. Chairman Rife closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kaiser moved to approve the request to open the floor to discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner Moony seconded the motion. Commissioner Kaiser felt this was a very difficult issue. Commissioner Moony said that if the request was denied, the number of children would be decreased by only two children. The permit would allow the applicant to hire additional help, which h v ould help with the care of the children, and would bring the teacher /child ration down. Commissioner Horlen expressed his concerns with safety of the children crossing the street from the school to the home. Chairman Rife stated that he was against the motion from a planning perspective. Commissioner Floyd suggested that this request receive a time limit, which would alloy Staff to monitor the screening and other issues, and it could be re-evaluated for compliance. P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 6 of 1 Commissioner Kaiser amended his original motion to approve the request for a period of one year with appropriate screening and upkeep (including drainage). Chairman Fife called for the vote, and the motion to approve with the one year time limit passed 3 — ; Chairman Fife and Commissioner Horin voted in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Public hearing and consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, use and site plan, for Northgate Center located at the corner of College Mai and Church Avenue, to allow for a night club. -730) Staff Planner Jimmrson presented the staff report and stated that the applicant wished to renovate an existing building located at 301 College Main. The building was previously a retail use and the intent is to convert it into a restaurant during the day and a nightclub during the evening. The nightclub use requires a conditional use permit from the Commission this includes the site plan as well. The current building contains 5600 square feet and there is no designated off - street parking. The applicant indicated he would like to use the roof for additional seating as well as build an interior mezzanine. There are no spifYi parting requirements in this district I -1 for this type of use, hover, as a guide, the honing Ordinance would typically require 100 parting spaces for the existing building, 20 for the mezzanine and 100 for the roof. The Northgate Review Board met on December 10, 1999. Because of concerns about the parking, the N B's motion was to exclude the use of the roof until such time as the Northgat parting garage is completed to allow additional parting. Completion of this is expected in two years. The site plan was reviewed by Staff and the NRB. All landscape and sidewalk details had not been submitted. The N B recommended approval of the use, the aesthetics and the site plan with the condition that the roof not be used until the parking garage is available. Staff supports the N B's recommendation. The Commission may wish to delegate either to the staff or the IB the final review of the sidewalk and the landscape details or the Commission may table the site plan pending submission of these for review by the fill Commission. Chairman Fife asked the distance from this building to the parking garage. Ms. Jimm rson said that she believed it to be a lot or two north of this project. Commissioner Kaiser asked for the procedures that staff uses to assure compliance with landscaping, sid wall , and part ing. Ms. Jimm rson said that a Certificate of Occupancy would not b 1ssu d until all requirements are met. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Mr. Chad Grauke, The Arkitex Studio, was present to represent the applicant. He stressed that the proposed use is consistent with existing establishments in the area. All of the required parking would be acquired by the parking garage once completed, in the interim parking will be along Patricia Street. H explained that the Northgate guidelines have "0" lot line development, which does not require on -site parting. The anticipated completion date of the proposed facility would be less than one year prior to the completion of the parting garage. He explained that there would be restaurant activities during the day, and nightclub activities during the evening hours. Ms. Marianne Oprisko, 14125 Renee Dane, she was opposed to the request because of adding additional traffic to an already ong std area in aspect to parking. P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 7 of 1 Mr. Harry Jones, 1900 Comal, was present to represent A &M Methodist Church. He told the Commission that this church currently has approximately 1400 members. He thought there would be possible interference with the nightclub and some of the church activities that are held in the evening hours. He explained that the church parting lot is currently used for overflow parting to the existing nightclubs and felt that adding another club to the area would cause even more problems. He said that with their parting lot being used for the nightclub patrons contributes to litter on the church grounds and parting lot. Mr. Benito Flores-Meath, 901 Val Verde, said that he was in favor of something being done to the building, and hoped the owner would establish a nice restaurant, excluding the nightclub. He was concerned with the parking even after the parking garage completion, because of the reserved parking for the dorm that is planned. He felt this nightclub was closer than the required distance between nightclubs and daars and churches. He was also concerned with security for the church's playgrounds. Mr. Paul Mayfield, boo Aster Drive, was present to represent the Baptist Student Center. He was concerned with the nightclub proposal and the general atmosphere of Northgat . He felt there should be a balance in the area. He explained that the area is already very congested in the evenings. He is concerned with litter on the church grounds and in the entire area. He felt that the proposed nightclub would contribute to an existing noise problem (received from the current night clubs), if not be worse because the church would be closer to this proposed club. Chad Grauke addressed the Commission to address some of the concerns expressed by the p in opposition. He explained that the development complies with the legal restrictions, including the distance between church facilities. He told the Commission that there is not commitment between the parting garage and the new dorm, therefore there are no dedicated parting spaces. He also told the Commission that the security of the playgrounds on the church's property is the church's responsibility. Chairman Fife closed the public hearing. Commissioner Moony moved to approve the request with condition of compliance with all ordinance requirements, distance requirements, and with Staff and NRB conditions. Commissioner Horl n seconded the motion. Commissioner Kaiser was concerned with safety and parking issues. Chairman Fife stated that impact on the churches and surrounding properties should be considered. H also thought parting was a serious concern. Chairman Fife called for the vote, and the motion to approve the request passed 3 — ; Chairman Fife and Commissioner Kaiser voted in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. : Public hearing and consideration of a Rezoning for 101.32 acres located in the north quadrant of the intersection of Greens Prairie Road and Woodlake Drive from -o Agricultural open to AOOR Rural Residential. -132) (The presentation was combined with Agenda Item No. 9.) P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 8 of 1 Graduate Engineer Tondre presented the staff report and stated that the subject 101.32 acres being rezoned was annexed into the City in 1995. The property owner's intention is to continue the same type of housing development that exists across Greens Prairie Road in the current Sweetwater development. The current A -O zoning is a holding zone that was placed on the property when it was annexed. The owner now wishes to receive a permanent zoning that will allow development. The A -OR zone is generally intended for minimum 100 -acre tracts on the periphery of the city limits, although there are areas within the city limits where rural residential development exists. Lot sizes are required to be a minimum of one acre and different infrastructure standards are allowed. It is required that a development plan be presented with the rezoning request. This plan covers approximately 300 acres with a preliminary plat of the 141 acres being considered for rezoning. The Commission must ascertain that the plans meet the following criteria: 1. The proposed subdivision will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding land uses, 2. The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies and goals of the comprehensive plan for development of the city and shall not be contrary to the thoroughfare or infrastructure master plans. 3. The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the intent and purpose of this district. 4. Adjacent property will not be adversely affected. Southwest of the development is wellborn Oaks Subdivision, and southeast are the Woodlake and Sweetwater Subdivision. All three adjacent existing subdivisions are located within the city's ETJ and are rural in nature. Parkland will be dedicated with the final plat. The Parrs staff' has indicated that they will recommend to the Parrs Board that dedication be in cash, because of the small number of lots shown for the initial phase 22 are shown on the preliminary plat) . Staff recommend approval of the rezoning request, Mr. Tondre explained that the Master Development Plan (Agenda Item Igo. 9 ) is for 303.966 acres northeast of the intersection of Greens Prairie Toad and Woodlake Drive. The minor cast -west collector is being shown to connect from the Crowley Development to Greens Prairie Toad. The extension of a 16-inch water and a sewer line is being shown along this collector street. Due to the topography, approximately only half of the 303 acres will be able to be served with a gravity sewer system. The remaining portion is currently proposed to be served by on -site septic systems. The Preliminary Plat for the 36.271 acres for Phase one of Sweetwater Forest is intended to continue the same type of housing development that exists across Greens Prairie Toad in the current Sweetwater development. Staff recommended approval of the Master Development Plan and Preliminary Plat of Phase one with the conditions: • The Ike- zoning of the 101 acres is approved by City Council. • City water service is extended to the subdivision, or an alternative approved by the City of College Station is approved (including fire service). • A master sewer plan is approved "to assure that all lots, at some future date, can be connected to the future sewer collection system." The stormwatr detention facilities are contained within Phase 1. Parkland dedication methods are acceptable to the Parrs Board. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Mr. Mike McClure,, 9262 Brookwater Circle, was present representing the owner as the project engineer. He explained that he concurred with the connection of the sewer line. They are in the process of working with wellborn water for an agreement. He pointed out that this area 1s beyond the City's Master Plan for sewer service. He said that the plan is to get this are on line for the lift station. He said that on the plat there is an established place for the sewer line to be installed, but there it is not going to happen initially. P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 9 of 1 Mr. Glenn Pierson, 16805 Calumet Trail, expressed his concern with the impart n the existing lake., in the aspect to drainage. He would like the plan to nfirm that there would be no impact on the lak Mr. Robert zawal l i, 3596 Greens Prairie Road, pointed out that drainage is a problem and felt this development would only increase the pr Chairman Rife closed the public hearing. Commissioner Mooney made a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning request. Commissioner Hrlen seconded the motion. Commissioner Kaiser was concerned with the impact on long term septic problems. Assistant City Attorney Nemcik said that the A -OR zoning district allows septic systems, therefore the minimum requirements were met. Chairman Fife called for the vote, and the motion, to recommend approval of the rezoning passed 4 -1; Commissioner Kaiser voted in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. : Consideration of a Master Development Plan for 303.966 acres, Sweetwater Forest, located in the north quadrant of the intersection of Greens Prairie R and woodlal Drive; and Consideration of the Preliminary Plat of 36.271 acres, Sweetwater Forest Phase 1, for 22 rural residential lots. (99-31 The presentation and discussion for this item was combined with the previous item. Commissioner Horl n moved to approve the Master Development Plan with staff recommendations. Commissioner Floyd seconded the motion. Commissioner Floyd was concerned that the Master Plan did not show any access points. Mr. T ndr said that there was a note n the plan that prohibits ass nt erns Prairl ad from and lit. Th would be one main road from Greens Prairie Road for the 22 lots. Commissioner Mooney asked for a requirement to tie onto the City's sewer service when available. Mr. Tondre said that the City requires "tie -ins" if the line is within 150 feet of the property line, o within 250 feet of the structure (home). He added that the Health department renews septic permits every five years. Commissioner Floyd was concerned with the protection of the lak Commissioner Hrin amended his motion to add the condition that the creep is maintained at the natural existing state. Commissioner Floyd seconded the amendment. The motion and the amendment passed 4 -1; Commissioner Kaiser voted in opposition to the motion. Commissioner Floyd moved to approve the Preliminary Plat. Commissioner Hrl n seconded the mtin, which passed 4 -1; �mmissinr Kais vo td in ppsitin. P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 10 of 1 AGENDA ITEM N. 1: Public hearing and consideration and possible action on an amendment to Ordinance #1638, the zoning Ordinance of the City of College Station, amending Section 8.4 relating to the number of Principal Structures on a Lot or wilding Plot and establishing Section 8.21, NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION OVERLAY. -813) Director of Development Services Callaway presented this item in conjunction with Agenda Item No. 11. Mr. Callaway reminded the Commission that there were concerns raised regarding the provisions of Section 8.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. This section allows the construction of multiple principal structures on a lot or building plot. Linder this provision, two houses can be constructed on a residential lot if is has an area equal to two minimum lots. On November 9, 1999, Staff presented proposed modifications to this section to a Joint Workshop p meeting of the City Council, Z A, and P &Z. The proposed amendment pr changes to this section of the o rdinance to require platting of separate lots prior to construction of additional principal structures in single family residential districts. Staff also presented another concept to address problems of infill development in established residential areas, establishing minimum lot sizes as follows: (a) The minimum lot size is the platted lot or building plot as it existed on the effective date of the adoption of the amending ordinance; or (b) A specified area that would limit inappropriate infill. Included in the amendment is a provision that establishes a new overlay district, Section 8.21, Neighborhood Preservation Overlay. This concept, if adopted, would work in unison with the change to Section 8.4 to address infill problems in established neighborhoods. The ordinance would provide for the provisions as described with an 8,500 square foot minimum lot size for new lots. Staff recommended approval, if the Commission wishes to remove Single Family Residential districts from the current provision that allows multiple structures on a lot or building plot. Mr. Call told the Commission that on December 9, 1999, staff presented a status report to Council regarding amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to address lot sizes and multiple principal structures in these areas. At that time, Council directed staff to prepare a moratorium ordinance to limit infill in these areas. This is to prevent further inappropriate infill while new regulations are established and overlay zones created. The ordinance amendment establishes two areas for a six month moratorium on applications for zone changes, conditional use permits, variances, and special exceptions o prop currently zoned single family residential. Commercial and multifamily properties are not effected. The two areas are: A. Area 1 — An area bounded by Texas Avenue, Holl Drive, wellborn Road and George Bush Drive. B. Area 2 — An area bounded by Texas Avenue, University Drive, the Earl Rudder Freeway, and Harvey Road. Staff recommended approval. He advised that the Commission can recommend alternate areas or changes in the types of applications to be subject to the moratorium. Chairman Rife opened the public hearing. Mr. Bill Bingham, 404 Fairview, said that he supports these amendments and felt this would help with neighborhood preservation. P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page II of 1 Ms. Norma Miller, 504 Guernsey, said that she wanted to see the "states" streets included in the moratorium. since they are included in the historic area. These streets include Georgia, I etr it. Phenix, Arizona, Alabama, Carolina, and Nevada. She was happy t see the City working t save these areas. Mr. Mile Luther, 614 Welsh , supported both o rdinance , and was appreciative of the efforts by the City. He encouraged mating something of the history of the older areas of College Station. Steve Whitten, 501 Guernsey, asked when the moratorium would go into effect. Mr. Callaway said that is would be effective 10 days after publication in the newspaper, following approval from Council. Marianne Oprisko, 14125 Renee Lane, stated that she supported the amendments, but suggested moving the boundary lines for the moratorium to Southwest Parkwa Ms. Helen Pugh, 601 Fairview, supported the amendments. She is very concerned with preserving the older neighborhoods. Chairman Rife closed the public hearing. Commissioner Mooney moved to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment, with a change of language to assure clarity of reference to single family lots only (in the first paragraph of 8.4, and 8.21). Commissioner Kaiser seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 5 -4. AGENDA IT E M NO. 11: Public hearing, consideration and possible action on an amendment to ordinance #1638, the zoning Ordinance of the City of College Station, adding Section MORATORIUM N CERTAIN APPLICATIONS,, -814) This item was presented and discussed with Agenda Item No. 10. Commissioner Kaiser moved to recommend approval of the moratorium, with recommendati that "Area A" include the "states" streets, and extend the area to include properties bounded by George Bush, Wellborn Road, Southwest Partway, Glade, up Holleman from Glade, to Texas Avenue. Commissioner Mooney seconded the motion. Commissioner Floyd amended "Area B" to exclude the portion bounded by University Drive, Tarrw, Lincoln a triangular area) — with the southern boundary to be Iominil. Commissioner Kaiser amended his motion to include Commissioner Flyd's suggestion. Chairman Rife called for the vote, and the motion to recommend approval passed unopposed -. AGENDA ITEM NO. 12: Discussion f the appropriate zoning district to allow for recreation vehicle parrs. Staff Planner Anderson addressed Mr. Flores - Meath's letter of concern that was handed out during the Hear Visitor's item. She pointed out that his concerns were directed toward mobile home parrs not ITV parks. Ms. Anderson explained to the Commission that Staff has received at least two inquiries regarding the appropriate zoning district to allow recreational vehicle parrs. The Zoning Ordinance does not address P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 12 of 13 this particular use. Staff felt that A-o and C -1 might be the better. She stressed that this item was only up for discussion at this time, any ordinance revisions would be at a later date. She explained that the advantage of the -o district is that it is generally found in the outer areas of the city. The City of Bryan allows RV parrs in their A-0 district as a conditional use. She said that the advantage of the C -1 zoning district is that a RV parr is a commercial enterprise for our visitors. The City of Bryan allows V parrs in the most intense commercial district as a right. Staff would require that any proposed RV parr must comply with a full site plan review and landscaping regulations, regardless of the district. The Commission directed staff to research the topic and return with more information. They seemed to agree that a Conditional Use Permit would be the best way to go, and they also felt that the parrs should be restricted to certain districts. AGENDA ITEM No. 13: Update to the Commission of any new Minor or Amending Plats approved by Staff. There was no report from Staff: AGENDA ITEM No. 1: Discussion of future agenda items. There was no discussion. AGENDA ITEM No. 15: Adjourn. Commissioner Moony moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Kaiser seconded the motion, which passed unopposed -0. LIN W W IOLOILTA DI DIP LIN 00 &1F. Chairman, Wayne Fife Staff Assistant, Debra Charanza P&ZMinutes January 6, 2000 Page 13 of 1