HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportCITY OF COLLEGE STATION
VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR
1520 Harvey Road
(11- 00500020)
REQUEST: Variances to the 10 -foot sidewalk and 5 -foot pedestrian walkway
requirements of Section 7.9.E.4 of the Unified Development
Ordinance
LOCATION: 1520 Harvey Road
Post Oak Mall Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 4A
APPLICANT: Jared Taylor, Golden Property Development, LLC
PROPERTY OWNER: CBL Properties
PROJECT MANAGER: Matthew Hilgemeier, Staff Planner
mhilgemeier @cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION: Denial
BACKGROUND: BJ's Restaurant and Brewhouse (BJ's) is proposing to construct a new 9,804
square foot freestanding structure near the southwest corner of Harvey Road and the Earl
Rudder Freeway Frontage Road in the Post Oak Mall parking lot. As of February 7, 2011 BJ's
Restaurant and Brewhouse has received site plan approval and was issued a building permit to
begin construction of the proposed structure. When constructed, the new structure will be part of
a building plot that has more than 150,000 gross square feet of floor area. Section 7.9.E.4.c of
the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requires a five -foot (5') pedestrian walkway
connecting to other buildings and existing sidewalks in the building plot when a building is part
of a building plot with a gross floor area of 150,000 square feet or more. Additionally, Section
7.9.E.4.d requires a ten -foot (10') sidewalk along the full frontage of any fagade facing a public
right -of -way.
The applicant states that a three -foot (3') change in grade on the northeast side of the proposed
building prohibits the construction of a ten -foot (10') sidewalk along the fagade facing the public
right -of -way. The applicant also states that the required five -foot (5') pedestrian walkway will be
constantly unusable due to cars parking over the walkway and that the walkway would cause
traffic congestion. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to the required five-
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 1 of 7
March 1, 2011
foot (5') pedestrian walkway and the ten -foot (10') sidewalk requirements of Section
7.9.E.4 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
APPLICABLE ORDINANCE SECTION: Section 7.9.E.4 "Pedestrian / Bike Circulation and
Facilities" of the Unified Development Ordinance states that pedestrian walkways shall be a
minimum of five feet (5) wide and shall connect public street sidewalks, transit stops, and other
buildings in a design that ensures safe pedestrian use. When the walkway is within a parking lot
area, it shall be clearly designated using brick pavers or a stamped dyed concrete pattern.
Section 7.9. EA also states that there shall be a ten -foot (10) sidewalk along the full frontage of
any fagade facing a public right -of -way to accommodate pedestrian activity and connectivity. In
this case the ten -foot (10') sidewalk is required along the northeastern fagade facing Earl
Rudder Freeway Frontage Road.
ORDINANCE INTENT: To provide safe connections for pedestrian and bicycle traffic among
primary buildings and secondary buildings in building plots that have more than 150,000 gross
square feet of floor area.
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 2 of 7
March 1, 2011
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 3 of 7
March 1, 2011
V O r O O
�" N rv m C PG� 6 FFO� 0
A y,
FP' p.A d'p
oE (Q t4
m S
^ c m >
o :
w E
^ v m 'E 0.6 O
a 0i r E�v;U�p U)
N O 1 O a c U)l
— U c m W v d
°° U O
/ _�Q° €2 _
rr D W O W r0 -
J 2 U (L' Q Q
LU
U m
7E w
ca
T - ,...... -- V O N vJ
DO d
a � E -
1 W T. W > 9
u W
�E UT+ m
U W W
E
,l -/� Y �o�WE��
A =2EaQ(9U
b f, O r
K��tY4UU
W a r
J 5'
> ° m
e o
j
W
pt � 1 � .2 m of al
LS LERS a Q�O�
00�
I I I I
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 4 of 7
March 1, 2011
C
O
6
L7D
L
- .
p.
j W m
Q . - n
m
r
n o n, rp
I '.S
S Z
,w
N
n mo a�
m
�
m z o t
p
1
O.
CA
.cm W ?> E
C O C 0
YO
V I I
VJ Z . W 0 0-
�2
U H (Y () w Y
^ I I ^ to
I
U I I 1
p
U
>o0
3ZzzowQ
(n
V O r O O
�" N rv m C PG� 6 FFO� 0
A y,
FP' p.A d'p
oE (Q t4
m S
^ c m >
o :
w E
^ v m 'E 0.6 O
a 0i r E�v;U�p U)
N O 1 O a c U)l
— U c m W v d
°° U O
/ _�Q° €2 _
rr D W O W r0 -
J 2 U (L' Q Q
LU
U m
7E w
ca
T - ,...... -- V O N vJ
DO d
a � E -
1 W T. W > 9
u W
�E UT+ m
U W W
E
,l -/� Y �o�WE��
A =2EaQ(9U
b f, O r
K��tY4UU
W a r
J 5'
> ° m
e o
j
W
pt � 1 � .2 m of al
LS LERS a Q�O�
00�
I I I I
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 4 of 7
March 1, 2011
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Board Hearing Date: March 1, 2011
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
3
None at the time of writing this staff report.
None at the time of writing this staff report.
None at the time of writing this staff report.
Direction
Zoning
Land Use
Subject Property
C -1 General Commercial
Retail Parking
North
N/A
Freeway /Expressway
South
C -1 General Commercial
Retail
East
C -1 General Commercial
Retail Parking
West
C -1 General Commercial
Restaurant
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
1. Frontage: The subject site is located in the Post Oak Mall parking lot and does not have
direct frontage along a public right -of -way. The northern fagade of the proposed structure
will face the Earl Rudder Freeway Frontage Road.
2. Access: The site is accessed through the Post Oak Mall parking lot. The Post Oak Mall
parking lot has two entrances on Harvey Road, one entrance on the Earl Rudder Freeway
Frontage Road and one entrance on Holleman Drive.
3. Topography and vegetation: The site slopes three feet to the south. Existing parking
islands have little vegetation. The site will be landscaped upon construction.
4. Floodplain: This site is not located in the floodplain.
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. Extraordinary conditions: The applicant has failed to show the existence of a special
condition affecting the property such that the strict application of the provisions of the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO) would deprive them of the reasonable use of their land. The
applicant states the construction of a 10' sidewalk along the northeastern fagade of the
building is prohibited due to the existence of two easements and existing grade at the east
end of the building. The applicant also states that the five -foot walkway will be unusable due
to cars parking over the walkway and that the walkway will cause traffic congestion.
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 5 of 7
March 1, 2011
Based on the site plan approved for this project, there are no existing easements located
within the area in question which would prohibit the construction of a ten -foot sidewalk. As
shown on the approved site plan, the 10' sidewalk runs along the northeastern side of the
proposed building. The two easements the applicant is referring to are located on the
southwestern and southeastern sides of the building and do not affect the placement of this
sidewalk.
The five -foot pedestrian walkway is located at the southwest end of the proposed building,
continues across the parking lot, and connects to a sidewalk located near the Sear's Auto
Center building. The applicant states that the walkway will be unusable due to cars parking
over it and that it will cause traffic congestion. While a portion of the five -foot walkway is
located between sections of angled parking stalls, these stalls meet the standard size
required by the UDO. Each parking stall is large enough to accommodate a vehicle without
encroaching into the five -foot pedestrian walkway. Typically in a situation such as this, the
stall would be curbed or provided a wheelstop to prevent a car from encroaching upon the
walkway.
The placement of the pedestrian walkway is not dictated in the UDO; therefore the walkway
could be designed to provide a crossing at a controlled intersection located approximately
80 feet east of its current proposed location. Providing the pedestrian walkway crossing at a
controlled intersection would reduce the possibility of traffic congestion.
2. Enjoyment of a substantial property right: These variances are not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant because denying
the requested variances would not prohibit the applicant from constructing the proposed
building or meeting the sidewalk and pedestrian walkway requirements of the UDO.
3. Substantial detriment: The granting of these variances will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in
administering this UDO.
4. Subdivision: Since the type of variances requested does not relate to the subdivision of
property, the granting of these variances will not have the effect of preventing the orderly
subdivision of other land in the area in accordance with the provision of this UDO.
5. Flood hazard protection: No portion of the subject property is located in a floodplain;
therefore, the granting of these variances will not have the effect of preventing flood hazard
protection in accordance with the provision of the UDO.
6. Hardships: The applicant did not provide a hardship that would justify the granting of these
variances. Staff was not able to identify a special condition with the property that would
justify granting the requested variance.
7. Other property: The hardship provided by the applicant is a result of the applicant's own
designs therefore; these conditions do not generally apply to other properties in the vicinity.
-,
8. Comprehensive Plan: The granting of these variances would not substantially conflict with
the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of this UDO.
9. Utilization: The application of the UDO to this particular piece of property does not prohibit
or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property.
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 6 of 7
March 1, 2011
ALTERNATIVES
The applicant provided the following alternative to granting the requested variances:
Relocate the 10' sidewalk to the front or north side of the building. No alternative was offered
regarding the five -foot pedestrian walkway.
Staff proposes the following alternative to granting the requested variance to the 10 -foot
sidewalk:
• As shown on the approved site plan, a two -foot retaining wall can be constructed where
grading is an issue.
Staff proposes the following alternatives to granting the requested variance to the five -foot
pedestrian walkway:
• The five -foot walkway can be constructed as a raised sidewalk where located between
parking stalls.
• The five -foot walkway could be located to provide a crossing at an intersection of the
Post Oak Mall perimeter drive aisles to allow for more controlled pedestrian connectivity.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the applicant's request for variances to the 10' sidewalk and five -
foot pedestrian connectivity requirements of Section 7.9.E.4 of the UDO. It is staff's judgment
that the applicant has not shown that a special condition exists with the property that creates a
hardship that deprives them of a substantial property right and that the hardship provided by the
applicant is a result of their own actions. By virtue of the approved site plan, the applicant has
demonstrated an ability to design the site in a way that complies with the requirements of the
UDO.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1. Application
2. Copies of the site plan (provided in packet)
Zoning Board of Adjustments Page 7 of 7
March 1. 2011