HomeMy WebLinkAbout203 Zoning Board of Adjustments August 17,1982AGENDA
City of College Station, Texas
Zoning Board of Adjustments
August 17, 1982
7:00 p.m.
1. Approval of Minutes from July 20, 1982.
2. Consideration of a Request for a Variance to Table A -Ordinance 850 -
Mininum Rear Setback Requirements at 106 Southland in College Station
in the name of A. G. Searcy.
3. Consideration of a Request for Variances to 6-G.l (front setback),
6-G.3 (side setback), 8-D.6 & 8-D.9 (sign requirements), and 4-C.3
(amount of expansion) -Ordinance 850, to the existing Shell station
located at the northwest corner of Nagle Street and University Drive,
in the name of Broach Oil Company.
4. Other Business.
5. Adjourn.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1:
MINUTES
City of Coll ege Station, Texas
Zoning Boa rd of Adjustme nts
Jul y 20, 1982
7:00 P.M.
Board Chair man Cook, Members MacGilvray, Upham,
Donahue and Council Liaison Boughton
G. Wagner and Alternate Member Lindsey
Zoning Official Kee, Zoning Inspector Keigley, Planning
Technician Volk and City Attorney Denton for a portion of the
meeting.
Approv a l of Minutes from Jun e 15, 1982
Mr. Upha m made a mo tion to approve the minutes; Mrs. Donahu e seconded; motion carried
unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Reconsid erat i on of a Variance Request to Section 8 -Ordinanc e
850 -Par k ing Requir ements for a san dw ich shop at 411 University Drive in th e nam e of
Centex Subway, Inc.
Mrs. Don ahue made a motion to remov e this ag enda item from the table; Mr. Uph am s e -
cond ed. Motion carried, and Ch a irman Cook exp l a ined th at sh e had me t with Mr. Mayo,
the Dir ector of Planning who is now in the process of getting tog e ther information
conc e rning North ga te and will mak e a presentation of this mat e rial to th e Board as a
group at a lat e r dat e .
Phil Call ahan was th e n sworn in an d id ent ified himself as th e applicant of the Variance
requ est wh ich had been tabled for 2 mo nth s in a row, and requ ested that som e kind of
d e cision be mad e tonight so he could go ah ea d with hi s plan s . He r e iterated that his
pro pose d business would not, in his es tim a tion, add to the parking problem in North-
gat e , as mos t of his bu s in ess would be carryout an d fast service, and no one would be
par k ing very long for th e serv ice he wo uld be providing. He also said that his employees
would be pa r k i ng i n th e park in g l ot d ir ect l y be h i nd hi s propo se d s i te which be l ongs
to the Ca mp s, who own hi s build i ng and th e books t o re adjacent , and a l so that in t he
evening there is very littl e parking prob l em in this area. Mr. Upham agreed with him;
then Mr. MacGilvray asked if the building is prese ntly empty to which he was answered
in th e aff irm at iv e . Mr. Uph am th en r e fe rr e d to the memo dated Jul y 12th from Jan e Kee
conc e rning action th e Bo a rd ha s ta ken on va ri o us parking va r·i a nc e r e qu es ts in th e past
for the Nor th gate area, and th e n su mm a ri ze d by saying that th e Bo a rd has denied mos t
of the r eq uest s, to which Mr. MacGil vray di sag r eed say in g that it was hi s opinion th at
th e Bo a rd has mo st ly approved th e r eques ts. Mr. Boughton po int e d out th at in one in-
st an c e of approva l, th e bu s in ess n ever d i d mat er i a li ze . Mrs . Donah ue th en made a
moti on t o author i zed a var i ance t o th e park in g r e quir eme nt s (S e ct i on 7) fro m th e terms
of thi s ord in ance a s it wi ll not be contrary to the public in t e rest, du e to th e fo l-
lov1in g uniqu e and s pec i a l conditions of the l and not norm a ll y fou nd in 1 i ke di str ict s :
(l)T his will not be a r eg ular r estau ra nt , and beca u se a str i ct e n for c ement o f th e
pr ov i s i ons of th e Ordin ance wou l d result in unn e cessar y hards hi p , an d such th a t th e
spirit of thi s Ordinan ce s ha ll be obs e rv ed and substant i a l ju st ic e done and with th e
fol l ow in g s pec i a l condi t i ons: (l)T his va ri ance i s to be r e viewed in one year . Mr.
MacG ilvr ay secon ded th e mot i on , th e n asked about th e r e vi ew i n on e yea r, and it was
explain e d t hat thi s var i a nce wi ll l apse i f i t i s not pre se n ted to th e Board for r e view
wit h i n one y ear .
ZBA -Jul y 20, 19 82
page 2
Mrs. Martha Camp was sworn in, and was asked how many park in g spac e s we r e requir ed
for th e op e rat ion of th e ir bo okstore , and she did not know, so her hu sba nd, Ernest
Ca mp was also swor n in, but he too did not know , so was asked ho w many square fe et
were in their store and they said 4650 square feet, and 18-20 emp loy ees, som e of whom
we r e part ti me . Mr. MacGilvray c a lculat ed a qu ic k figure of 20 spaces required.
Mr. Camp was asked if he was in a position to al l ow 10 spaces for Mr. Callahan's busi-
ness, but Mr. Camp r ep ] i ed th at he really did no t kno w if he could spare 10 spaces or
not . Mr. MacG ilvray exp l ained that this City a nd Bo ard are op erat ing und er an Or d in ance
wh i ch has been drawn u p for larg er malls with parking spaces a nd lots, and that there
is no way to e ver enforce parking in the Northgate area, and th at no on e c an really
operate un der that Ordinan ce in that area. He furth er stated that this Board is a
revi ew ing autho rity for the Ord inanc e , and it is his opinion that the City must either
change th e law or take the re spons ibility for the situation.
Mr. Callaha n then said that he was not int e r ested in a variance with a required re-
view in one year . Chairman Co ok call ed for a vot e , and th e motion carried 4-l wi th
Chairma n Coo k voting against the vari ance.
AGE NDA ITEM NO. 3: Consid e ration of a Request for a Vari ance to Tabl e A -
Ordin a nc e 850 -Minimum Rear Se tbac k Req uireme nts at 2800 Manassas in Coll ege St at ion
in th e name of Sherman Clic k dba Clic k and Brown Ho mes , In c .
Sh e r man Clic k , 1020 Holt, was swor n in and explained that he had made a mistake i n the
d esig n of the hous e due to the odd c onf iguration of the lot, and there seemed to be
no way to put th e structure on the l ot and save th e trees, so they changed the plan
and salvaged the trees. Th e plan wh ich had been approved was chan ged after approval,
but he was trying to stay out of the u tility easement, and forg ot ab out the 25 ft . set-
bac k _requireme nt, and found out now th at a portion of the garage s l ab is in the set-
back area. (He th e n pass ed around photos of the slab and building plot.) He said if
he had -t o move th e structur e , he would l eave th e slab which had been poured and add on
to it, a nd it was his opinion that thi s wou ld l eave an unsightly slab area which was
not u sab l e for a patio du e to the loc at i o n, and would probab ly just be used for an
open storage area . J ane Kee stat e d that an adjacent propert y owner had fil ed a com-
plain t about the locat ion of th e slab. Sh e exp lain ed that th e staff was opposed to
granting thi s variance because bui l ders must get approval befor e ch a nges to an approv e !
plan are made and Mr. Cl ickcertified that he comp ! i es with laws and is familiar wit h
r egu l at i o n s when he s i gns an app li cat i on for a building permit; furth e r, he is a ve t-
eran builder in this area . Mr. Upham i ndicated th at he was both ered about a build e r
that has s v1orn under oath that he was una wa r e of setback r equ i rem e nts and s i gned his
na me o n an app lica t i on f or a buildi ng perm i t in d i c a tin g he was awa r e of a ll requir e-
ments .. He said th a t the City has had problems with bui l ders i n the pas t who had mad e
o mi ss ion s and erro r s a nd i t puts the Board in the pos i t ion of being a judiciary body
and it i s not in the Board's po wer to l ega li z e e rrors. Mrs. Coo k stated that i t i s
the responsibility of the City to e nf orce ordinanc es and l aws , and it i s the r espons i-
bility of those d es iring to do bus i ness he re to be aware of those l aws and a bid e by
them, and certa inly i f som e on e signs someth ing, th ey shou ld be a wa r e of what th ey s ign.
Mr. Cli ck said they had bui l t 23 homes in this area an d thi s i s th e f i rst time an
insp e ct i on i nvo l v e d a r ear setback; al l oth e r s inv o l v e d s id e or front setbacks whi~h
they ha v e comp li e d with. He sa id th e y had made a mis take and it wou l d not happ e n
a ga in. He furth e r stat e d t hat he be li e ve d th e r e we r e too many d epar tm e nts involved
when f ili ng for a bu il ding permit. Mr. Mac Gilvray asked Mr s . Kee how bu il d e r s hav e
bee n informed of th e requir eme nts, and sh e exp l a in e d th a t l e tt ers had bee n sent ou t to
e v e r y membe r of the Home Build e rs ' Assoc iation a nd a ll bo nd e d co ntra ctors in this area
in wh i ch th e zon in g insp ect i on process was exp l a in e d. She furth er stated that in he r
opinion, other enforceme nt e ff ortsw ill be hampe red if th i s vari ance i s gran te d. Mr.
MacGi lvr ay sa id th a t pe rha ps a s tat eme nt s hould be ad ded to th e app li cat i on for th e
buil d in g pe r mit sta ting that any changes to th e approved s i t e pl an mu st be a ppro ved
by th e Pl anning De partme nt.
ZBA -J uly 20, 19 82
page 3
Ji m Brown was sworn in and i dent ifi ed h i mse l f as one of th e dev e lo pers and informe d
th e Board t hat th ey will be unable to jackhamme r th e e ncr oac hin g s l ab from the s l ab
th ey l ea ve a nd po int ed out that th e bui l ding lin e was ne ve r shown on the app rov e d sit e
plan. Mrs . Kee informed the Board that th e Ci ty r eq uir es sca l e drawings, wh i ch th i s
one i s, and th e n when buildi ng 1 in es are om itt e d, whoever ch e ck s the p lan can use a
scale t o d e t e r min e if th e r e is the r eq uired amo unt of space allowed .
Mr. MacGilvray made a motion at thi s po int to d e ny a vari a nc e to the minimum setback
(Table A) from th e terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public inter-
est, du e to th e lack of uniqu e and sp ec ial conditions of the land and becaus e a strict
enforceme nt of the provisions of the Ordinance would not result in unn e c essary hardshi p ,
and such that th e spirit of this Ordin ance shall be ob se rv ed . and substantial justic e
done. Mr. Upham seconded th e motion. Motion to d e ny varianc e carri ed unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a Request for a Varia nce to Table -A -Ordin a nce
850 -Minimum Front Se tbac k at 415 Eis en ho wer in the nam e of W. T. Aycock.
Bill Aycock was s wor n in and identifi e d him se lf as th e applicant for the variance and
stated th a t his office address is 305 E. Univ e r s ity Drive. He gave backg roun d for his
propos ed project, and said that he was pl a nnin g to us e the ex isti ng structur e wh ich
had been on th e la nd for 30+ y ears , to r emo v e the me tal s iding, e nl a rg e it, and d e ve lop
a building which would be asthetically pleasing and co mpat ibl e with an existing nei gh-
boring office building. Mrs. Kee expla in e d that the encroachment has ex ist ed since
the Ordin a nc e has been in a ff e ct, and that the expansion of thi s ex isting building is
not th e cause of the encroachment. Mr . Ma cGilvray ~sked why this building is consid er-
ed to front on Eisenhower St reet , and Mrs. Kee inform ed the ent ir e Board th at this was
du e to th e config ura tion of the lot and met the minimum standard s of lot depth and ·
width when th e front was con s id ered to f ace Eis e nhow e r.
Mr. Upha m made a mot ion to app r o ve th e varianc e to th e minimu m setback (T ab l e A) fr om
the ter ms of thi s ordinance as it will not be contrary to the pub lic in te r est , du e to
th e f ol lowing unique and spec ial conditio ns of the land not norma lly found in li ke dis-
trict s~ (!)that th e u sef ul lif e of th e ex i st i ng building has not bee n fully utiliz ed,
and because a strict enforceme nt of the p rovi s i ons of th e Or d in ance wou ld r e sult in
unn e c ess ary hardsh ip : Mr. MacGilvray seco nd ed the mo t i o n. Mot i on carried unanimously.
AGEND A IT EM NO. 5: Cons id erat i on of an Ap pe al of a Dec isi on by t he Zonin g Offici a l
regardin g Bea uty Salons as Home Oc c u pa tions.
Ga il Tay l or, 2 711 J e nni fer, came f o r war d and was sworn i n and i dent i fi e d he r se lf as
spokesman for the ap plic ant , Bonn i e Couch . She exp l a i ned that the appl icant was not
asking for a Beauty Salon in her ho me , but r athe r was r e qu es ting a lic ensed area in
the hom e , and explained th e n ed f or this was due to the current State l aws governing
cosm eto logists. Sh e assur e d the Board that th e applica nt wo u ld no t be running a 11 s a l on 11
but rath e r o nly wanted thi s eq uipm e nt in sta ll ed in her home and a li ce n sed area esta-
bli s hed so th at sh e could cut he r hu sba nd's, sons ' an d fr i ends ' and r e l ati ves ' hair.
Sh e said several t i mes that on ly thi s wou l d be don e and no ch arges wo uld be made . Sh e
furth e r exp l ain ed t hat th e re wo uld be no a l tera tion s to t he exter i or of he r home , th ere
wou l d be no r egu l ar hours es t a b li sh ed and that no extra traff i c wou ld be generated .
Sh e furth e r stated that i n her op i n i on, i t was no on e e l se 's bu s i ness what a p e r so n
d i d i nside he r own hom e . Mr . Upham asked why s he needed to have a I i c ense , i f she was
not actua ll y go in g to pr act i ce he r profess i on . Sh e said that at some l ater t i me Mr s .
Co uc h mi g ht want to go back to pract i c i ng her trade , and i f she l et th e lic e n se l apse,
it wou l d be necessa ry for her to go back to schoo l and a l so t ake a t est to ha v e he r
I ic e n se r e i ss ued . Mr. MacG il vray a sked why th i s r equest was brought before th e Board ,
a nd Ms . Tay l or sa i d i t was because Mr s . Couch wa nt e d to do thin gs r i g ht. Mr s . Kee r ead
th e Ord i nance d ef i n iti on of Home Occupat i ons, and in for me d th e Board that thi s on e wou ld
ZBA -Jul y 20, 19 82
pag e 4
not fall into that category, primarily be caus e of th e specia l equipm e nt requir e d whic h"
wou l d not no rm a lly be found in a household. (She then read a li st of th e equ i pme nt
required by the State Cosmeto l ogy Comm i s s i on .) Sh e further po i nted out that i f th i s
wo ul d become a business in th e ho me, it wou l d be c ome a potential ge nerator of addit ion a l
traffic i n th e area, and the possibility of financial need could a ri se to the point of
Mrs. Couch having to in crease the numb er of cl ient e l e a nd the City wou l d have no way
of knowing, o r of control] ing s uch a situation after a vari ance had been granted.
Sh e sa id th e zon ing Ordin a nc e cat egor i ze s bea uty s hops as Per s on a l Se rvic e Sh ops , and
as such are a llowe d as permitted uses in Ad ministra tive -Prof es sional District A-P zones.
Elain e Gibson of 2727 Ce linda Circl e was sworn in and identified hers e lf as a nei ghbor
who oppo sed a beauty shop in the area and hoped th e Board would uphold th e int erpre-
tation of the Zoning Official.
John Hill er of 2716 Jennif e r Circl e was sworn in and id e ntified himself as a neighbor
who also opposed a bea uty shop in th e area because he feared for the safety of ch i ldr en
and pedest rian s due to possible increas e d traffic, and because he be liev e s there are
pl e nty of comme rcial areas in which to allow busin esses , and hop e d the Board wou ld up-
hold th e int erp r e tation of the Zo ning Offi c i a l.
Mr. MacGilvray expressed a desire for Mrs. Co uch, t he app lic ant, to swear un der o a th
that what she planned in her home would not be a bu siness, since Ms. Tay lo r was only
a spokesman, and not a l ega l r eprese nt at iv e for he r.
Bonni e Couc h of 2704 J enn ifer Circl e was sworn in and stated that she did not want to
start a bu s in ess , and a l so did not want to off e nd her ne i g hb ors .
Dr. Be dna rz of 1723 Ce lin da Circl e was sworn in and id en tifi ed himself as a neighbor
who oppos e d the beauty s ho p, was wo rri ed if it was allowed th e Board and the Ci ty wou l d
hav e no power to control it ~ and a lso saw no nec ess ity to mak e an except ion to th e
Ordinanc e as he saw no need fo r the shop in the ho me .
Annab e ll Davis of 2731 Celinda Circl e was swor n in and identified herself as a neighbor
who also opposed the beauty shop and said th e re were plenty of areas zon e d for com-
merc ial uses and thinks that by a llowin g this to take p lac e th e Board wou ld open a
"P andora 's Box", and added that many more ne i g h bors ar e o pposed to this potent i al bus i-
ness be i ng e stab li s hed in t he home than we r e a bl e to attend this mee tin g tonight.
Frank Kelly of 2723 J enn i fer Circl e was s worn in and id e ntified hims e lf as a ne i ghbor
who ho ped the Boa rd wou ld u p hold the int erp r e t a t i o n th e Zon in g Offic i a l ha d ma d e be -
c a u se he be li e v e d that i n a ll ow ing th e beauty sho p , Mrs . Cou c h wo u ld be ope r at i ng a
professional bus in ess in her residence, and the r equireme nts for he r profession were
not a qu estion except that allowing this would ope n the d o or for other bu sinesses in th e
hom e in College Station. He indi cated that he believe s that hi s ne ighbor wou l d do what
sh e say s she will do, but others wou l d be allriwed the same variance a nd th e n al l control
wou ld be Jost.
Mrs. Ke e th e n point e d out that this i s not a r e qu est for a var i ance, but r ath e r a
qu e st i on of i nt e rpr e tat i on of staff, and wh ate ver i nt e rpr e t a t i on th e Board ma kes ton i gh t
wou l d g o ve rn futur e ruling s , at which t i me Mr. Uph am exp r essed g r a t i tud e for Mr s . Ke e
br in g in g thi s up.
Dr. Ga rc i a of 2720 J e nnif e r Circl e wa s sworn in an d id e nt i fi e d hi mse lf a s on e of th e
n ewes t ne ig hbo rs in th e ar e a who had bee n a t t r a ct e d t o th e qui e t ne i g hb o rh o od and l a ck
of traff i c p r ior to buy i ng his ho me , and nm·1 he wa s co nc e rn e d about th e saf e ty of th e
childr e n if thi s in t e rpr e t a t i on was r e ve r sed .
(
ZBA -July 20, 1982
page 5
Mrs. Donahue th e n asked Mrs. Kee i f she had much r eact i on to th e notificat i ons se nt to
res i dents within 200 ft. of th e property i n q uest i o n to wh i ch Mrs. Kee rep li ed th a t
she had 9 t e l ephone calls oppos in g to chang i ng the int erpre t at i on and none in favor
of ch ang in g it .
Gail Tay lor then spoke aga in and sa id th a t a ll of Mrs. Couch's former cl i ente l e had
bee n referred to Vars ity Salon, so v1o uld not even be interested in having her do th e ir
hair. Mr. MacGilvray a sked i f Mrs. Co uch had applied for a building perm it yet to
which Ms. Taylor replied that she ha d not .
Mr. MacGilvray th en made a motion to u pho ld th e decision or int er pr etat ion made by the
Zoning Official in the enforcement of Sect i on 1 .D.38 of this ordinanc e , as th e d ec ision
or interpretation meets the spirit of this or din a nc e and substantial justice was don e .
Mr. Upha m second ed ; motion carri ed unani mo usly.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Con s id erat ion of a Reques t f or Al lowing Signs during Rush
Week for Sororiti es and Fr atern iti es .
J ea n McDermott of 1002 Madera and Jo y Ho wze of 1015 Gu ada lup e were s wor n in and to-
gether ex plain ed that th e week of August 23 -29 was Ru sh Week fo r Soro r ities only in
Colleg e Station, and th e y wou ld li ke to get an id ea of how th e Boa rd f ee ls conc er ning
ex tra decorations during Ru s h Week, and li kened these decorations to Christmas d ec or a -
tions. They gave examples of what they might be talking about as ban ners and English
tr a nsl at ions to the Gre ek l etters wh ich appear on all the hous es . Mr s . Kee info rmed
th e Board that she had not r e c ei ved this r eques t in time to advertise it, so th e Boar d
must only discuss th e issu e tonigh t , and no ruling coul d be made. Mrs. Co ok informed
th e Board that she co uld not take part in the discussion s or vote on the i ssue when
the time cam e be cause of pe r sonal conn ect i ons to soror i t i es . Mr. Uph am 1 i kened ·Rush
Week to a on e week s al e . Mrs. Kee sa i d th e staff's main concern wo ul d be violations
and th e notification of viol at i ons as th e Ord in ance no w r eads , and asked if possibly
some kind of perm i t could be i ssued so that a staff member, perhaps th e Building Offici a l
coul d f il e a comp laint. Mr. Upham suggested th at th ese l ad i es wo r k out a di mens ion
and l et ter size of the Engli sh tran s lation and present th e m as suggest io ns . Mrs. Coo k
asked staf f to wo r k out something and find out what vi o lations wou ld be if th e r e were
any violations. Mr . Uph am and Mrs. Kee both indicat ed that th e staff does not have th e
a uth ority to say what c a n or what cannot be don e , but that perhaps this needs some
study and e ven a joint meet in g to arr i ve at su it ab l e suggest i ons . Mrs. Bou g hton asked
if th ese peop l e sho uld come before the City Coun c il and Mrs. Kee informed that the
ZBA i s g iv e n the aut hority by Ord in ance to make int erpretat i on and gr an t va r i ances.
Mr s . Boughton th en suggested th at s t a ff confer with th e City Attorney on th i s . Mr s .
Kee said she wou l d ch e ck .
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Other Business
Mr. Upham made a mot ion t o remov e fr om the tab l e and drop fo r l ack of n ee d to process ,
th e r eq ues t for var i ance concern i ng r ear setback r equireme nts for a garage from Rob e rt
H. He nsar l ing. Mr. MacGilvray s e co nded ; mot i on carri ed unan i mous l y .
Mr s . Boug hton requ es t e d perm i ss i on to a d d r ess the vari ance which was granted to th e
par k in g requ i reme nt for Cent ex Su bway , I nc. Pe rmis sion was grant ed , and sh e asked
Mr . & Mrs . Camp, o wne rs of th e property in q ues t i on, i f th ey had any prob l em with th e
spec i a l cond i tion s pc i fy i ng rev i ew wi thin l year whi ch was attached to th e v ar ian ce ..
Th e Camps r epl ied th a t i t d oes pos e some problem, and that th ey want ed this part i cul ar
t e nan t, a nd that furth e r th e y d o not be li ev e th e par k i ng s itu a tion will be aggra va t ed
by a sandw i ch shop. Mr. Mac Gilvra y said tha t th i s specia l condit i on was r ather li ke
a promi ss ory note .
(
~ ..... ,I ~ ..... , . ..,.,<o,;-pa ge 6
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8 : Adj ourn
Mr. MacGilvray made a mot i o n to adjourn; Mrs. Don ah ue se c on d e d ; motion carr i ed
un an i mous ly.
APPRO VED:
Vi Cook , Chairman
ATTEST:
Di an Jo nes, City Secr etary
C i ty o f Colle g e S tation
POST OFFI CE BOX 9960 11 01 TEXAS AVENUE
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840
August 11, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment
FROM: Jane R. Kee, Zoning Official
SUBJECT: Agenda Items, August 17, 1982
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration of a Request for a Variance to
Table A -Ordinance 850 -Minimum Rear Setback Requirements at 106 Southland
in College Station in the name of A. G. Searcy.
The applicant is requesting a variance to the rear setback for new construction.
The approved building permit indicated the correct setback. A zoning inspec-
tion was indicated on the permit card and the application. Mr. Searcy lost
the permit card and came in for a new one. It was issued without the notes
indicating a zo~ing inspection. The regular slab inspector was out at the
time the slab inspection was requested. The individual who did the slab
inspection apparently did not know to look for a note indicating the need
for a zoning inspection. Therefore, Mr. Searcy received a slab inspection
and a framing inspection before the electrical inspector noticed the setback
problem. At that point the zoning inspector and I went to the site and found
the slab to be encroaching by 11 feet.
Mr. Searcy should be present at the meeting to discuss possible alternatives,
if any. The site plan attached to the application shows the s i tuation clearly.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a Re uest for Variances to
6-G.I front setback , 6-G.3 side setback 8-D.6 & 8-D .9 si n re uirements),
and 4-C.3 amount of expansion -Ordinance 50, to the existing Shell station
located at the northwest corner of Nagle Street and University Drive, in the
name of Broach Oil Company.
The applicant has very clearly stated his intent and reasons for the requested
variances in the information attached to the application.
I would point out only one thing. The applicant does not need to reques
both setback variances and a use permit for the expansion of a non-conforming
structure. He needs one or the other. If the variances are granted then future
building permits need not come before the Board. The use permit for the ex-
pansion will allow only this building permit to be issued.
The sign variance is a separate issue and should be considered as such.
sjv
ZON lNG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Name of Applicant --~.__\~·-t;J~,r-----=:-S~r~/~<~~~C_(_\~C.~( _____________________ _
I
Mailing Address __ _,_i c-'-·_(.D __ ~.=--=0'--LA...__.t ..... /. ...... , .... I ~.t...._1\.-'-' • .._d ...... ' ·-----------------
Phone __ .....,( .... o""'"q-'---3_. _~_o __ .J_.?.=./"""e .... ·,_3 __ _
Location: Lot Block Subdivision -------
Description, If applicable __ /,=vt_._,>_L ~·-~a-_·4~--~~~.~~t ~v-~--------------------
Action requested: _\)rl r t0 11 ce-"1L~~-~.:::,_+1.~~-·c._.lC~J~·-~------·-------
NAME ADDRESS
(From current tax rolls, Colle ge Station Tax Assessor)
I
.
~
ZON I NG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Present zoning of land in question R-\ ~-'----~-------------------
Section of ordinance from which variance is sought -~~/I.:;..· ~L .i_:\o:_· .Lf_• ------------
The follo~vi.ng specific variation from the ordinance is requested:
,:.:._J r c e,, ( n c,'Y\
This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of
the land not found in like districts:
/DQ1(-,n,,\r.\\_l t I 1..tAJ pl.1:a.i..." "Tc !p\S f '""TU ES b ..,,LJ.',~q '"=>(A,,,) 4-t..::i o -\r-l f;.lS.
r c.~nltl "\ Ll 1H~:.i~ Tt.J§J?E;: ~~~L:\ bn r.J c-. C("l'-'f:l 1s:T tC fT f.l.. Tt.1ab l\c ~ $?k:fC::'\[i
LuJG.. .. µ<"~~,;s iL. I cod..d ,.Jl'T b i;;,.cA 0St:. 1 !ll.., ... ..:.._A ·-n~e:::. C..\ >1,,.1 l e:: Q...1,,,1~ 'S C·~~ -. . .~~ . \ ..
:r£~t-~~ fi-41 ({H L1>.J~ .LCC.lCS :) t-"-~ 1 'lc~ t?S CC'-1 r~ IC: L!. J cccLcl ,Jc-r q ~-r l~t::>M.. l t.O Q E. .
The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible~ ---------
___ r e. 11"\ c v i ', _-'> ·±oc e.,.., c o o :f'Y'\
This variance will not be c0ntrary to the publfc interest by virtue of the following
i~c~~: y /<f;:. \~~-co ,:s t...>~!"'t~q \::eµt ,.;:ic\ l."u\r~ov~11"TL1 E:'(cc::V'T o~;;;.r..o pAs-TUe.t=..
(}f:' l:E:L~ \\) s,tl ,Abt:.~~ 1'5 f'.\. \>-..) e:b.. ::::fu.E.:. clt:=.A!Z. O F "-"-~ b Au.c.. ~JJcpt:::\2.-
T~\ L .~,~~·~~-~-~-~~~-~-~~~---~~~~-~~-
The fact s stated by me in this application are true an<l corr e ct.
Da te
SOUTHLAND
BK l, LT 1,2,3,4,5
Joseph J. McGraw
211 Suffolk
College Station, TX 77840
BK l, LT 6,7
James R. Watson
105 Southland
College Station, TX 77840
BK 1, LT 8, 12
Will E. Ma 1 one
% Robbie Clark
313 Holleman
College Station, TX 77840
BK l, LT 9,10
Andy Wilborn
109 Southland
College Station, TX 77840
BK 1, LT ll
Albert Clark
ll5 Southland
College Station, TX 77840
BK 2, LT 1,2,3,4,5
Carrie Barnes
1201 Old College Rd.
College Station, TX 77840
BK 2, LT 6 . _
Doris Wilson
P.O. Box 755
Shiro, TX 77876
BK 2, LT 8
J.C. Culpepper
P.O. Drawer JC
College Station, TX 77840
BK 2, LT 10,11,12
Charlie C. Smith
ll 4 South 1 and
College Station, TX 77840
BK l, LT 7
Ball
Eunice Wi 11 i ams
lOll El ea nor
College Station, TX 77840
TR 90
C. Burnett
Mrs. Waldo Walker
P.O. Box 3125
Bryan, TX 77801
TR 161
C. Burnett
Kenneth R. Schick Tr.
2323 Voss #260
Houston, TX 77057
L_ (jJ
0 --1 lJ>
{l fll y r-
m u
I
J> z
I
I i
I I
I
~·
~Qo -i"" c.____ ---··-
.
_: -~.
'\ ·-.
\
I : _...,.__ - --...
7
rn
[
fil
./...
I __ ___j
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Name of Applicant BROACH OIL COMPA NY, INC.
Mailing Address 1700 Puryear Drive E., Colle ge Station, Texas
Location: Lot SIX (6) Block SIX (6) Subdivision TAUBER
Description, If applicable ~-B_u~il~d_i_n~g~a~n~dc-=:l~a~n~d:;_:1~·s::;.._;e~x=1=·s=t=-=in==-g-><S=h=e~l-l.......,.s~e~r~vui~c~e~~~~~~-
station at Northwest corner of Nagle Street and University
Drive.
Action requested:
NAME ADDRESS
(From current tax rolls, College Station Tax As s essor)
Exhibit A
..
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Present zoning of land in question C-1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
Section of ordinance from which variance is sought
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested: 6-G. l.
(25' front yard w/ 6' overhang into front y ard). 6-G.3. (7.5' side yard).
8-D.6 and 8-D.9 (sign existing on corner of Na gel and University). 4-C.3
(expansion approval requested to be 25 % of existing building).
This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of
the land not found in like districts:
The variance request are nec~J>J>_~t~t~_ci_~?~it is not_ecQilQm;i...cally feasible or
physically possible to bring the existing service station into compliance .
. -
The following alternatives to the requested variance are p0ssibl e : ~o logical
owner alternatives are available other than make no physical improvements to
,I
the business at this location.
This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following
£;ac~~: This building and site has been in existance for the last 15 years without
any publicly documented adverse effect to the public hea]th, safety and
general welfare. The allowing of the variancas and the addition
to the building will not increase the public's e xposure .to unsafe conditions.
corr e ct.
~&J=· L ~, ~e I
TAUBE R
BK 6 , LT 1
Bobby Holliday
2701 Pinehurst
Bryan, TX 77801
Bk 6, LT 2,3,4,5
St. Marys Catholic Church
103 Nagle
College Station, TX 77840
BK 5, LT 2
Bi 11 J . Coo 1 ey
503 Glade
College Station, TX 77840
BK 7, LT 1
A. P. Boyett Sr.
315 Boyett
Colle ge Station, TX 77840
Bk 7, LT 2
General Telephone Co.
P.O. Bo x 1001
San Angelo, TX 76901
J.E. SCOTT LEAGUE
Pt. LT 1, LT 2
University Investment Serv . Corp.
University National Bank
P.O. Box 2680
College Station, TX 77840
JACK W. CUMPTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ARCHITECTS
Broach Oil Company, Inc.
Shell Oil Service Station
at Corner of Nagle 'Street
and University Drive
I I,
_'College Station
Zoning Board of
_,
Subject: Variance Request
I •
' From: Jack W. Cumpton for
Broach Oil Company, Inc.
Date: August 6, 1982
I
On behalf of Broach Oil Company r ' respectfully request your variance
authorization on the following spec i fic items:
~. Section 6-G.l. .(25' front yard with 6' overhang of canopy
, i int~ front yard) .
• Requested justification: T~e existing first pump island is approxi-
Section 6-G, 3
• mately 14 '-0" from front property line to .,
. edge of pump curb and 16' from property
,-· l 'ine to centerline of canopy columns.
' 'To move the canopy foundation, pumps ·and
' 1 , . :islands would be of considerable cost.
· ' · We request authorization to leave the
· pump islands and canopy columns in their
·l\ ~~esent location with authorization to :
Jimprove the canopy provided it meets the
building code and does not infringe on
\he front yard setback any further than ' . . existing . •
' ., .
~(7.5 foot side yard)
t
Requested justification:. 'The e~isting building on the west elevation
1is approximately 3'-3" from the common
property line. The existing wall is con-
' crete block without windows. The roof is
,• Class 'A' on heavy timber construction which
apparently was permitted when the structure
'was built.
Modifications ·to bring the construction back
an additiona l 3'-3" would be prohibitive.
4103 S. TEXAS AVENUE, SUITE 202
MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN
BRYAN, TEXAS 77801
INSTITUTE OF
713/846-3771
ARCHITECTS
Page 2
3. Section 8-D.6 and 8-D.9
Requested justification:
'
.
Section .4,C.3
Requested
(sign ordinance)
The Shell sign has been in existence on
the corner since the station was built.
sign does not block view at the inter-
'~ sect~on.
!The removal of the sign will cause an
'l economical hardship and absence of easy
I identity .
; (25% eJCpansion of non-conforming use)
I..
'The existing site and building is obvi-
ously . well suited for its intended use
however, trends in the customer's conve."T ··,!, .. ,:1·,;
niences and economic consideration require
.,additional space.
The ex isting building has 1662.28 square
feet and under Section 4,C.3 we request
the non-conforming building be authorized
with an additional 406 square feet of new
construction. r