HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes
P&l Minutes
12-1 ~83
pagie 3
signs shown,
a"l.lowed unt'fe',r
(
P&l Minutes
12 -')-8J
page 4
(
P&ZMiAutes
12-1-83
page'S
located on
(
done in a sho'rt period of' time
c
there
It.;
-i~A M in utes
1-17-84
page 2
for 'the B razosBanc sJ gn. She further explained that the Legal Department felt tha tthe
actioilof this Board concerning that agenda i,tem was above and beyond the legal authority
of this Board. Mr,.MacGilvraysaidhewould enjoy hearing that explanation. Mr. Upham
suggested that perhaps this Board should be disbanded and then Mr. Denton can sit here
alone and make decisions. Mr. Wendt said that if there is a problem, the Legal Department
shbuld be represented at the meetings and also, the attorneys should interview the Board
members before overruling a decision given. Mr. MacGilvrayagreedthat if this Board is
going astray, it should be made aware of it. 'Mr. Upham said that part of the 'City Attorneyf~
job descriptionfs to aid and assist various Boards and Commissions. Mrs. Kee said that
prior to the meeting, staff did not perceive a legal question and from that point forward,
staff has been keeping in better contact before meetings. Motion carried 5-0 (unanimously).
AGENDA ITEM NO.2: HearVisrtors
Noone spoke, but Mr. MacGilvray thanked staff for including this item on the agenda.
AGENDA ITEM NO.3: Consideration of a request for variance to the parking requirements
as set forth, in OrdJnanceNo."8S0, Section7-C. for the construction of an officebui lding
on Lot 5 Block'VUnlversity Park Section 2. Application is in the name of Wood Associates.
Mrs.Kee explained the request is for a parking variance as required by Section 7 in the
Zoning Ordinance, but that italso applies to Section 3-A~2.of the Zoning Ordinance, and
then read Section 3-A.2. aloud as follows: IINo part of a yard, or other open space, or
off-street parking or loading space required about or in connection with any building or
use for the purpose of complying with this ordinance, shall ,be included as part of a yard,
open space, or off-street parking or loading space similarly required for any other build-
ingor use." She further explained that.this office building project provides 384 parking
( spaces, 360 of which are needed to meet the parking requirements based on square footage
figured at 1 space per 300 sq.ft.', and would allow parking for only 24 employees. She
stated that the parking lot at the hotel site provides 47 spaces over and above that re-
quired for a hotel and the owners of both projects are proposing a cross-over parking
agreement between the two projects. She informed the Board that staff believes that due
to the different hours of pea~ operation of the two projects, it can recommend approval
of a variance to the parkihg requirements of the office project with the provision that a
cross-over parking agreement Is provided. She ~aid that the Legal Department is research-
Ing this proposal now, but that there is a strong possibility that this might be acceptable
since the two projects are under the same ownership and are ~eing developed together.
Mr. Upham pointed out that the proposed hotel is being advertised asa hotel for conven-
tions, and would have an extremely large dining room. He stated that conventions are held
during the day and during the week, and contends that many of the attendees of the con-
ventions will be staying at other locations and not necessari ly housed at this hotel,
therefore they will be driving Jnand will require a parking space. He said that he can-
not see how this cross-parking agreement will work because this hotel may be full (with
conventions) 5 days per week, which would be the peak hours of operation of the adjacent
office building. Mrs. Kee said that according to her information, there will be some meet-
ing rooms available in this hotel, plus restaurants for seating approximately 500 people,
and she is unable to project just how many people at meetings will be driving to the hotel
and how many will be staying there. Mr. Upham stated that he is only pointing out that
this project isadvertisingltself asa cenvention center rather than just a hotel, and
this must be taken into consideration.
spaces shor.t the officebui lding wi 11 be and
/
\.
.,.
~3AM i nutes
1-17-84
page 3
Mr . McGuirk asked if,
Kee sa1d that in all probabi-
1 i ty, Jtwas. Mr. McGu i rk asked I f she was awa re of any problemsi n cities with s im i 1 ar
ordinances, and Mrs. Kee said that in reading published material recentlypertalning to
this type of project, the trend seems to be leaning toward shared parklng,as that better
utilrzesbothland and facilities. She further pointed outtha~ourZoning Ordinance
should take into account the possIbilIty of mixtures of uses with different ,peak hours
of operation in the future.
Mr. McGuIrk saId that he simply had no feel for an adequate number of parking spaces for
a project of this nature, and 'the zoning ordinance lneffectdoes not address the issue.
Mr. Mac Gilvray agreed that there are many grey areas lnthe ordinance, and these areas
primarily are the ones this Board Is required to address, and the Board's chargeisto
either uphold the ordinance or to graniavariance; and the point here is that this project
is95 spaces short, half of which can be provided next door, leaving a total shortage of
approximately 48 spaces. Mr. Upham said that in his opinion this is another example of
too muchbu i 1 di ng on too l'i t t 1 e land. Mr. MacG i 1 v ray said the Boa rdmus t consider any
unique or special conditions of the land, to which Mr. Wendt speculat~d that there is a
creek which runs between the two projects and would exemplify a unique condition of thIs
land as neither project can get any more land because of it.
J. W.Wood was sworn in and explained that the ordinance requires 1 parking space per
300 sq. ft. plus 1 for every 2 employees, and herein 1 iesthe problem. In an office build-
ing approximately 80% of the people in the building are employees, so he questioned just
what the 1 space for each 300 sq. ft. is for. He stated that he bel ievesthis ordinance
requIres double parking for, office buildings. He then asked if he could provide informa-
tion concerning parking requIrements in other cities, stating that Dallas requires 1 space
per 333 sq. ft. with a crossover p'arking agreement for 50% of the required spaces, if
one of the projects is closed. Mr. Upham pointed out that he said "closed" and not "during
a slow periodll. Mr. Wood continued saying ehatFt. Worth requires 1 space per 400 sq. ft. ,
Houston has no parking requirements and leaves the number up to the people who o~n the
building. He also pointed out that this is the extreme end of the sp~ctrum, and that he
would not advocate this' policy. Corpus requires 1 space per 250 sq. ft. up to 20,000
sq. ft., then 1 per 400 sq. ft. with shared parking allowed for up to 50% 0f the required
parking if it is located within 300 feet of the property. He said the Hilton proje'cthas
431 spaces and this project has 360 spaces, givi'nga total of 791 spaCes on this block.
He also said that Mr. Upham'spoint about attendees is well taken, and that the Hilton
plans some type of shuttle to and from other polnts. Mr. MacGilvrayasked if capacity ,of
2000 people for the convention center is anaccuratefigute and Mr. Wood said he really
did not know now, but that'hehad done some of the initial work on the hotel and seemed
to remember tha tthere waul d be approx i matel y 500 restaurant seats . M'rs .Kee offered the
informat.ion that there would be 500 seats available in restaurants and clubs, with 5000
sq. ft. inmeetihg rooms. Mr. MacGllvray asked if there would be an additional banquet
room and Mrs. Kee said she did not know, but perhaps it would be lumped with the meeting
rooms. Mr. Upham speculated that there could be upwards to 1000 salesmen in abig room
for a meeting atone time. Mr. Wendt likened that possibility to the ':100 Year Flood Plain,
stating that this type of convention would be one in 100, and would not be happening 5
days a week.
Mr. Wood stated that the shopping center heisinvolved with across the street has lots
of extra parking which might be used for overflow. Mr. Upham agreed that in that area,
there's probably more parking available than would be needed for a long time in the
future, but that he is ~ot sure this is a solution. Mr. Wendt said he thinks that staff
..
"SA M lnu tes
1-17-84
page 4
has a good point concerning the different peak tJme uses but the Zoning Ordinance does
not address this. Mr. MacG 11 vrays ai d> that the cu r ren tordi nance was wr 1 tten fo r ' small e r
projects and does not address this type of project, and this Board would have to make a
mot'ontoapproveonuntque~~nd special conditions of the land, and is forging new ground
and once again the City Attorney is not here to help. Mr. Upham said the Attorney had
given the Board general guldellnes,but now it has to forge ahead without any legal help.
Mr. Wendt asked the exact location of the creek and Mr. Wood polnted it out. Mr. Mac-
Gllvrayaskedlf the creek prevents more parking spaces and Mr. Wood said yes, but for
the hotel lot more than this project, and then speculated that the unique characteristic
of this property is the proposed plan, crossover parking (also unique) and it can work.
Mr. Wend t said tha tin hi s op in ion,w it h thei nc rea se in land va lue, theei ty will be
faced with more of this. Mr. MacGilvrayagreed, but added that the ordinance should be
revised to allow this. Mr. Wood sa'Jd lenders will govern requirements, and said that
Aurora, Colorado requires 1 space per 500 sq. ft., but lenders are trying to get 1 per
300 sq. ft. nationwide. Mrs. Kee said that in her opinion, 1 per 300 sq. ft. would be
ample. She then referred to Section 11.8.1 of the ordinance, and. read, lI...To hear and
decide appeals where it Is alleged there is error in any order, requirement, decision,
interpretatfon,or determination made bytheZoningOfflcial in the enforcement of this
ordinance" as being part of thlsBoard'spowers,further saying that Mr. Wood may be
approaching this project under this section, adding that an ordinance cannot be all en-
compassing and must allow room for interpretation.
Mr. Wendt stated that the Board is making an interpretation of 1 per 300 sq. ft., plus
employee parking, and that Mr. Wood ls contending that thIs isa double parking requirement
because 80% of the people in the office building will be employees. Mr. Wood answered
various general questions about the uses of the buIlding" offering the informatLonthat
the buildlng will be 10 stories in height.
Mr. Wagner stated that this is the third time this Board has been faced with brand new
problems, therefore the case is a unique and speclalcondltion,butif the Board votes
on this, it must carry forward the importance of gettfngthe ordinance changed. He went
on to say that he attends a lot of conventions in his work and that most people fly in
and, further that he rarely has seen 2000 cars ata 2000 person convention. Mr. MacGil-
vray said he would love to do a study; that he thinks there are more parking spaces in
this town than there are cars, and he thinks the current ordInance has led the City to
this posItion.
Mr. Wagner said he would like to make amotion to authorize a variance to the parking
requirement (Section 7) from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to
thepubl icinterest, due to ~thefollowing unique and special conditions of the land not
normally foundinl1ke districts: That the development in itself represents a unique
and special conditlon,therebeingnoneotherlike it In the. City and therefore (2) no
ordinance covering parking requirements for this type of development exists, and because
a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hard-
ship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and
substantial Justice done, subject to the following limItations: There be an enforceable,
shared parking agreement acceptable to the City. Motion was seconded by Mr. MacGilvray.
Votes were cast and the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM No.4: Other Business
Mr., Upham made a ,motion that s'taff must address this issue and make the necessary prOVISions
to cover thelssue in the ordInance, and until that time no other similar variances wTl'1
that he is very upset
in person by t"heCity
of a decision made by
Mr. MacGilvray and Mr. Wagner each agreed that
are not provided, this Board feels it is being
Mr. Wendt indicated that eve~ with
make a decision without even a telephone call
concerning the action the Board has taken.
Mr. Upham said he would 1 ike to pass a Resolution to condemn the CIty Attorney for incon-
sideration. Mr. MacGilvray stated that he believed this should be handled under other
business, and then called for votes on the motion to approve the minutes. Motion carried
4-0-1 (McGuirk abstained}.
Mr. Upham then.made amotion to pass a resolution to condemn the City Attorney for, lack
of consideration of "Board"lsaction regarding 'Agenda Item #4 on the October 18, 1983
~genda . Mr. Wagner suggested that perhapsth i~t"y~e.<?f"~c:,ti<?~"w~Lll,9P~~t~~~?a ~di()n the
same level as the CltyAttorney. ,Mr. Upham agreed this might:be so, 'and then:w<ithdrew
his motion.
Mr. MacGllvray asked if the Board would accept an amended resolution, and the Board
agreed. He offered the motion to requestthattheCi tyAttorney provide this Board
a full explanation of his unilateral action concerning Agenda Item #4 of the October 18,
1983 meeting, andthathemeetwlth this Board at theearllest possible time, so that
reoccurranceof this lIundo ing" can beprevented,anqhefurther requests that' th i smeet i ng
be held prior to the next regular meeting of this Board. Mr. Wendt seconded this motion.
..McGuirk'asked Mrs. Kee if staff can make
including this item on the agenda.
Mr. Upham pointed out that "the proposed hotel is being advertised as a hotel for conven-
tions,and would have an extremely large dining room. He stated thatconv'entionsareheld
during the day and during the week, and contends that many of the attendee's oftt)eco'n-
ventlons will be staying at other locat,ions and not necessarily housed" at this hotel,
therefore they will bedrlvlng in and will require a parking space. He said that: he can-
not s:eh()w,th issross-pi3rk inQ agreelllent will .work because this hotel maybefull (with
conventlons)5dayspe"rweek,which would be the peak hours of operation of'theadj'ace:nt"
office building. Mrs. Kee said that according to her information, there w:ill be some meet-
ing rooms available in this hotel, plus restaurants for seating approximately 500 people,
and she is unable to project just how many people at meetings will be driv:ing to ,the hotel
and how many wi'll be staying there. Mr. Upham stated that he is only pointing out that
this project is advertising itself as a cenvention center rather than just: a hotel, and
this must be taken into consideration.
Mr. MacGilvray asked Just how many parking spaces short the office building will be and
Mrs. Kee said it would ,be approximately 95 spaces short, as near as she can figure the
J.W. Wood was sworn in and explained that the ordinance requires 1 parking space p,er
300 sq. ft. plus 1 for every 2 employees, and herein lies the problem. In an offic:e build-
ing approximately 80% of the people in the building are employees, so hequestionedijust
what the 1 space for each 300 sq. ft. is for. He stated that he bel ieves this ordinance
requIres double park.ing for office buildings. He Ehen asked if he could provide informa-
tion concerning parking requirements in other cities, stating that Dallas requires '1 space
per 333 sq. ft., wi tha crossover park ingagreement for 50% of the required spaces, ii f
one of the proJects is closed. Mr. Upham pointed out that he said "closed" and not: Ilduring
a slowper'iod". Mr. Wood conti'nued saying that Ft. Worth requires] space per 400 ,sq. ft.,
Houston has no parking requirements and leaves the number up to the people who oWn ~he
buildlng. He also pointed out that tMis is the extreme ehd of the spectrum, and th~t he
would not advocate this policy. Corpus requires 1 space per 250 sq. ft. up to 20,OpO
sq. ft., then 1 per 400 sq. ft. with shared parking allowed for up to 50% of the re~uired
parking If it is located within 300 feet of the property. He said the Hilton proJeFt has
431 spaces and this project has 360 spaces, givi'ng a total of 791 spaces on this~lbck.
He also said that Mr.Uphamls point about attendees is well taken, and that the Hiliton
plans some type of shuttle to and from otherpolnts. Mr. MacGilvray asked if capac!ity of
2000 people for the convention center isan accuratefiguteand Mr. Wood said he re~lly
dfdnot kno~ now, but that"he had done some of the initial work on the hotel. and se~med
to remember that there would be approximately 500 testaurantseats. 'Mrs. Kee offer~d the
information that there would be 500 seats available in restaurants and clubs, with 5000
sq.ft..lnJn~ytin9>.roo~s..Mr.MacGllvrayasked if there would. be an additional J)c31'l811et
room and 'Mrs.K.ee>said she did not' know, but perhaps it would be lumped with the' meeting
rooms. Mr. Upham~speculated that there could be upwards to 1000 salesmen in a big ~oom
for am~eting at one time. Mr. Wendt likened that possibility to the 100 Year Flood Plain,
stating that this type of conventlonwould be one in 100, and would not be happeningS
days a week.
Mr. Wood stated that the snopplng center he is involved with across the street has lots
of extra parklng which might be used for overflow. Mr. Upham agreed that in that area,
there Is probably more parking available than would be needed for a long time in the
future, but that heis not sure this is a solution. Mr. Wendt said he thinks that staff
has a good po int concefnlngt~eidifferentpEjaktime uses but the ZoningOrdi nance does
notelddressthis..Mr..MafGJlvray said that the current<ordinance \"leiS wrltten.for smaller
proJects and does not address this type of project, and .thlsBoard would have to make a
motlontoapp...oveon.unlqu~and.speclal conditions of theland,..andisforging new ground
and."onceagalntheClty.Att()rney .",....1 s ..not here ".tohel p. "Mr.. "Upham '"sa Idthe Attorney, had
gJven.the- Board generalguldellnes ,but now it h-asto forge ahead wI thout any 1 egal he Ip.
Mr. Wendt asked theexactloc.ationofthecreekandMr, Wood ,poInted Ttout. Mr, Mac-
Gilvrayaskedlfthecreekpreventsmor7parkingspaces and Mr.W?od sa id yes ,but for
the hotel1otrnore.thanthi..sproject, and then speculated that the unique characteristic
of thls.proP7rtyls.thepr9p9se9pl an ,crossover parking. (a] sounique)an.d it can work.
Mr. Wendtsal dtha't-lnhlsoplnlon, wi ththe increase inl and value , the Ci ty wi llbe
faced wI thmoreofth is. Mr. MacGJ-lvrayagreed, but added that the ordi nance shou 1 d be
revised to allow thls. Mr. Wood sa" d lenders will governrequ irements,and sa id that
Aurora, Colorado <requJ-reslspaceper500sq. ft _, but lenders are trying to get 1 per
300 sq. ft.nationy.Jid7. .. Mrs. Kee said that in her opinion, 1 per 300 sq. ft. would be
ample. .Shetbenr,eferredtoSectlon> 11. B. I of', the ordl nance,~and read, II.. .To hear and
decide appeellswhere.lt<isallegedthereis error in any order, requirement, decision,
interpretatlon,or'determlnation<madebytheZoningOffJcia1, in the enforcement< of this
ordinance-II asbelngpartof>thls Board's powers, further-saying that Mr. ,Wood may be
approaching,thls ptoJect under this section, adding that an ordinance cannot be all en-
compasslngandmustallow room for interpretation.
Mr. Wendt stated that the Board is rnaklngan interpretation of 1 per 300 sq. ft., plus
emp loyee park i ng,andthat <Mr ,Wood is contend ing that this isa doubl epark i ngfequi rement
beca,use 80%. of theipeople intneoffice build lngwi 11be employees. Mr . Wood answered
various general qu~st'onsabout the uses of the' buIlding, offering the information that
the building will be IOstorlesin height.
Mr. Wagner stated thatthls lsthe third tIme this Board has been faced with brand new
problems, therefore the case is. a unlqueand,special condition, but if the Board votes
on this, it must carryforward theimportanceofgettlng the ordInance changed. He went
on to say that he attends a lot of conventions in his work and that most people fly in
and further that he rarely has .seen2000cars at a 2000 person convention. Mr. MacGil-
vfay said he would< love todoa-study;thathe'thinks there are more parking spaces in
this town than there are cars, and he thinks the current ordinance has led the City to
this posItIon.
Mr. Wagner said he would like to make a motion to authorize a variance to the parking
requ lrement(Secti onZJ.fromthe_ termsofth j sord i nance as J twill not be con t ra ry to
the public Jnterest, due to the following unlqueand special conditions of the land not
normally found In like districts: That the development lnitself represents a unique
and special condit' on,therebelngnoneother 1 'r kei tin theCi tyand therefore (2) no
ordi~.anc..7 ~o\f~ri ~gparkingr7quirements for this type ofdeve lopment exists, and bec;aus~
a,strlct'enforcement'of-the provlsions,,"of the Ord.inance woul,d resul t in unnecessary.hard'"
ship to thisappllcant,and such'that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and
substantial Justlcedone,subJecttothefollowinglimltations: There be an enforceable,
shared parkIng agreement acceptable to the City. Motion was seconded by Mr. MacGilvray.
Votes were cast and the motion carried unanimously (S-O).
AGENDA ITEM NO. '4: Other Bus lness
Mr. Upham made a motion that staff mustaddr~ss thlsissueand make the necessary prov sions
to cover the Issue lntheordlnance, and until that time no other similar variances w-i 1