HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportCITY OF COLLEGE STATION
VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR
501 & 503 Corregidor Drive
and 2021 & 2023 Legacy Lane
REQUEST: Reduction of lot depth
LOCATION: 501 & 503 Corregidor Drive and 2021 & 2023 Legacy Lane
APPLICANT: Jim & Kathy Loveless, Property Owners
PROPERTY OWNER: Jim & Kathy Loveless
PROJECT MANAGER: Matt Robinson, Staff Planner
mrobinson(cDcstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION: Denial
BACKGROUND: The subject properties are part of the Legacy Addition Subdivision, which
was platted in 2000. The subdivision is currently zoned and developed as duplex residences,
with the subject properties having one lot fronting Corregidor Drive and one lot fronting Legacy
Lane. The duplexes are accessed via a shared driveway off of Holleman Drive. The applicant
is proposing to subdivide the properties from two lots into three lots with access for the three
lots being a shared driveway off of Holleman Drive. As such, the new lot would front on
Holleman Drive which is where the minimum lot depth requirement would be measured from.
For duplex lots, the Unified Development Ordinance requires a minimum lot depth requirement
of 100 feet. The applicant is proposing a minimum lot depth for the proposed lot of 83 feet 9
inches. A variance is needed in order to proceed with a replat of the property, which as
proposed would also require a discretionary item be approved by the Planning & Zoning
Commission. As such the applicant would like to reduce the required lot depth for the
proposed lot from 100 feet to 83 feet 9 inches; thus, they are requesting a lot depth
variance of 17 feet 3 inches.
APPLICABLE ORDINANCE SECTION: UDO Section 5.2, Residential Dimensional Design
Standards.
Zoning Board of Adjustment
July 6, 2010
Page 1 of 6
8
ORDINANCE INTENT: Residential dimensional design standard requirements usually allow
for some degree of control over population density, access to light and air, and fire protection.
These standards are typically justified on the basis of the protection of property values.
Zoning Board of Adjustment
July 6, 2010
Page 2 of 6
9
L4
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 of 6
July 6, 2010
10
G
~
S
G
I
N
J I I
y L
S
~
,
~
L~
O ~ I
p
~
~
ti ❑ z
u~o~r~
W
N
ar
~ I C-J
.C 7 V~ r 1 H
;n
I
~ f i fY r~ M1
~
~ I
1' ' c'y ❑
-t'1 CI t7?O~1
L p 1
i
'I J
I
I•. ~r I t T
01
r-F
II,
AX EA ti
i
.m~
I Fns .
I o ~ c " s
L7~ 'J
C~ _ - - -.ry' 4 w r. LL
-lYaE:a UU
U FD
LLJ
+SGy+= = i a k de's u
Y~~~'. , ~ : gal + r N M ~ in c;~ r- ~ ~_j _ y r
.JM
`Firm .t r
n, •Y``~tv f zCc
I" I I W
z
IL
=s 1 e
v W
W
v
~zaI: O
0-o6 r.
LL. J
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 of 6
July 6, 2010
11
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Board Hearing Date: July 6, 2010
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station's
Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
None
Property owner notices mailed
Contacts in support:
Contacts in opposition:
Inquiry contacts:
ZONING AND LAND USES
11
None at the time of writing the staff report.
None at the time of writing the staff report.
Direction
Zoning
Land Use
Subject Property
R-2, Duplex
Duplexes
North
R-3, Townhouse
Duplexes
South
PDD, Planned Development District
Commercial/Retail center
East
R-4, Multi-Family
Apartments
West
R-2, Duplex
Duplexes
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
1. Frontage: The properties have approximately 384 feet of frontage on Holleman Drive, 87
feet of frontage on Corregidor Drive and 102 feet of frontage on Legacy Lane.
2. Access: Access is via a shared driveway off of Holleman Drive.
3. Topography and vegetation: The properties are relatively flat with sparse vegetation.
4. Floodplain: The property is not located within the floodplain.
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Extraordinary conditions: The applicant states that the "density is unequal to opposite
side of street on Legacy Lane" and that "these are oversize yards compared to other lots".
It is staff's opinion that a special condition does not exist as lot density on one street does
not necessitate that other streets maintain that same lot density. In addition, while the
yards for the subject properties are larger than existing duplex lots in the subdivision, the
LIDO only specifies minimum lot dimension and size, which allows for a range of lot sizes
and yards.
2. Enjoyment of a substantial property right: The requested variance is not necessary for
the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicants. If the
Zoning Board of Adjustment
July 6, 2010
Page 5 of 6
12
variance is not granted, the applicants are still able to utilize the properties as duplexes,
which currently exist on the subject properties.
3. Substantial detriment: Granting of the variance would increase the number of vehicles
taking direct access to a major collector which could be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare or injurious to other property in the area or to the City in administering
the UDO.
4. Subdivision: The granting of the variance would necessitate a waiver when the applicants
replat the property. The Planning & Zoning Commission would need to approve a
discretionary item to the creation of a right angle lot at the time a replat is sought.
5. Flood hazard protection: Granting the variance will not have the effect of preventing flood
hazard protection because this property is not located in a FEMA recognized floodplain
area.
6. Other property: Other properties in the neighborhood are meeting minimum lot dimension
requirements as specified in the UDO.
7. Hardships: It is staff's opinion that a hardship does not exist in this case. The subject
properties are currently utilized as duplexes as allowed for in the UDO.
8. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject properties as
Urban on the Future Land Use and Character Map. Urban areas are intended for intense
residential development, which includes townhomes, duplexes, and high-density
apartments. The addition of another lot within the area would not conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan.
9. Utilization: The application of the UDO residential dimensional standards as they apply to
duplex lots does not unreasonably restrict the utilization of the subject properties. The
properties are currently developed as duplexes and are currently meeting all residential
dimensional standards.
ALTERNATIVES
The applicant has stated that they can shift the location of the proposed duplex towards the
other lot. However, this alternative would still necessitate the need for a variance to the
proposed lot depth.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the variance request. It is staff's opinion that the applicants have
not identified a hardship or special condition for the subject properties. The inability to
subdivide existing duplex lots to add an additional duplex lot is not a special condition. In
addition, staff feels that the current duplexes on the existing lots are making reasonable use of
the property as allowed and that an additional duplex is not a necessary improvement to the
properties. As such, denial of the requested variance does not prohibit the property owner's
utilization and enjoyment of the subject properties.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1. Application
Zoning Board of Adjustment
July 6, 2010
Page 6 of 6
13