HomeMy WebLinkAbout209 October 19, 1982 Zoning Board of Adjustments\
•
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
AGENDA ITEM NO. l:
MINUTES
City of College Station
Zoning Board of Adjustment
October 19, 1982
7:00 P.M.
Chairman Cook, Members MacGilvray, Wagner, Upham, Alternate
Member Lindsay, Council Liaison Lynn Nemec
Mary Kay Donahue
Zoning Official Kee, Zoning Inspector Keigley, Director of
Planning Mayo, Asst. Director of Planning Callaway, Planning
Assistant Longley & Planning Technician Volk
Approval of Minutes from September 21, 1982 meeting.
Mr. Upham referred to the last paragraph of page 3 concerning Mrs. Cook's statement
concerning 11 a pizza restaurant had been opened in a building where the ZBA had at a
previous meeting established hours during which a business could be in operation ... 11
and wanted to amend this statement to reflect that the ZBA had not established the
hours, but rather that the applicant had informed the Board this restaurant would be
in operation from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., and the Board had included this in the approval
of the variance requested. In other words, the applicant established his own hours
and approval of the variance was given based on the specifics of his request, plus
• the one granted of parking.
•
Mr. Wagn e r made a motion to accept the amendment to the minutes. Mr. Upham seconded.
Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Upham then made a motion to approve the minutes with
the addition of the above amendment; Mr. Wagner seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration of a request for a variance to Table A, Rear Set-
back 11 E11 requirement of Ordinance 850, at a proposed Village Square Office Park located
in a neighborhood commercial zoning district in Southwood Valley Sec. 5-A. Application
is in the name of G. Philip Morley & William E. Loveless.
Mr. Wagner asked to be excused from participation in this request; Mrs. Cook excused
him from the Board at which time he took a seat in the audience. Mrs. Kee explained
the request, and further explained that the Ordinance requirement of 10 ft. of required
15 ft. setback being clear had been researched, and it was discovered the purpose of this
10 ft. clear area had been established to guarantee that there would be clear space
for emergency vehicles, and because there was more than enough clear area to meet that
requirement in this setback, and because access was provided in the adjacent access
right-of-way, staff had no problem with this request.
Philip Morley, a registered architect and developer of this proposed project was sworn
in and informed the Board his group had met with all City departments, and all had indi-
cated they have no problem with this project or the encroachment for which this variance
has been filed. Mr. Lindsay asked about access right-of-way being given by the owner,
and Mr. Morley indicated that this had been granted. Mr. MacGilvray asked who would
maintain this city-owned access area and Mr. Morley answered that the project owner
would, and that he would be happy to put this in writing. Mr. MacGilvray further asked
about the amount of setback and Mr. Morley said that in most cases there is 25-30 ft.
between the rear of a building and the property line. Mr. Lindsay asked if there is a
power line across the rear of this property line, and Mr. Morley answered that there
•
•
•
•zBA Minutes
10-19-82
page 2
will be, and that the power poles will be in the islands. Mr. Lindsay asked if the
Fire Department had seen this plan and Mrs. Kee answered that the Fire Department has
given their approval of the plan.
John Lofgren, a neighbor of this project was sworn in and told the Board that this
paving of this easement was creating a street. He quoted the Ordinance concerning
location of parking and the setbacks required, then spoke at length concerning this
11 street 11 which he believes will be created. He also referred to the Ordinance which
allows parking to be located within 200 feet of this property, and then offered the
opinion that the whole project could be moved back which would allow parking in front
of the buildings.
Mr. MacGilvray asked how this right-of-way came about and who had approved it, and
Mrs. Kee explained that this had been done in the platting process and had come before
the P&Z. Mrs. Cook asked what the vote was when this plan was approved by P&Z and
was told that it was 4-3 in favor.
Jack Weitsman, a neighbor was sworn in, then showed a sketch concerning the drainage
problem which could be created by the establishment of this drive and expressed his
concern. Mr. MacGilvray asked if this was his sketch, and he said that it was, but
that it was not drawn with exacting equipment. Mr. MacGilvray referred to a wall in
the sketch and Mr. Weitsman replied that this was his interpretation of what would be
done. Mr. MacGilvray asked Mr. Morley if he had done a crossection of the road, and
Mr. Morley replied that he had not, but further said that the water would be carried on
to Longmire Drive and handed out a topographical study which had been done by a profes-
sional engineering firm. Small group discussion followed and Mrs. Cook then asked
who would be responsible for maintenance of that drainage area during construction and
after occupancy, and voiced concern about the debris which often accumulates from
construction which could block drainage here. She wondered if perhaps the owners of
the adjacent properties should be required to help with the maintenance of this area.
Mr. Upham said that the City no longer accepts drainage easements, and that this one
had been platted before the newer pol icy became effective. Mr. Weitsman reiterated
that the road was being built for access to parking rather than maintenance, and
asked what wil 1 happen in later years when this 11 road 11 crumbles and is repaired and
debris accumulates.
A head count for those in attendance who were in opposition to this variance request
was taken, and results tallied 8 in opposition in the audience.
Al Mayo, Director of Planning was sworn in and stated that he would like to answer
some of the questions which had been raised. He addressed the drainage easement
and said work currently was being done to prepare a master drainage plan and mainte-
nance pol icy both for future areas and areas which have already been developed, and
that this drive would be a public right-of-way which would give both access to this
project and for maintenance vehicles working on the drainage area. The construction
of this driveway and the maintenance agreement, as well as the impact on drainage
will have to be cleared through the City Engineer's office. The Fire Department has
been consulted and has stated that it does not need the 10 ft. clear easement because
this driveway will be there, and the Public Works Department will be provided with
a paved surface to get to an area they must maintain and has stated they will be happy
to see it .
Paul Beckingham, a neighbor was sworn in and asked about the location of 3 of the
buildings in regard to setback and said there was not a 25 ft. setback for them. Small
..
•
•
•
ZBA Minutes
10-19-82
page 3
group discussion followed. Mrs. Cook called the meeting back to order and asked if
the City is cre ating another 11 front 11 entrance with the use of this driveway. Mr. Mayo
answered that the street address would be on the actual street in front of the project.
Mr. Upham asked if any buildings would be facing the drive in the rear, as well as some
facing the street. Mr. Morley answered that some buildings would be facing the drainage
ditch. Mr. MacGilvray said that in his opinion, Mr. Morley was trying to do the right
thing and develop a nice project, and gave examples of warehouse projects, the type of
which this developer is trying to avoid, but that he also believes the City has missed
an opportunity in the past to utilize this type of drainage area as a "people place.11
Mr. Lofgren spoke again and said that as Mr. Mayo had pointed out, the City is being
foresighted in not running this driveway through to Deacon Street, but he fears that
this situation will be changed in the future, and that this drive would become a high
traffic generator. He said that he thinks this is a good project which has been rea-
sonable well thought out, but he still hopes a compromise can be reached, and further
asked if speed bumps could be included in the drive. Mrs. Cook reminded him that this
Board is not in a position to funct i on as a Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. Upham
referred to this particular request for a particular variance, and reminded the Board
that the request is for granting parking variance and the placement of a dumpster
adjacent to the rear property line only, and then pointed out that because this project
is for office space, it would generate less traffic than one for retail use.
Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to deny a variance to the minimum setback (Table A) from
the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest, due to the
lack of special conditions of the land not normally found in 1 ike districts and because
a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would not result in unnecessary
hardship, and such that the spirit of this Ordinace shall be observed and substantial
justice done. This motion died for lack of second .
Mr. Upham made a motion to authorize a variance to the m1n1mum setback (Table A, note E)
from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due
to the following unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in 1 ike
districts and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would
result in unnecessary hardship, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be
observed and substantial justice done and with the following special conditions: That
all debris from the original construction and future debris following opening must
be pol iced by the owners and the road maintained to City Standards in perpetuity.
Lindsay seconded the motion, then amended the motion to include restricting the access
to the rear buildings to employees only. Mr. Lindsay then withdrew this amendment.
Mr. MacGilvray stated that he believed this right-of-way should not be paved at all.
Chairman called for voting. Motion to approve was defeated unanimously. Mr. Upham
reiterated that only the variance which had been requested had been denied.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a request for expansion of a non-conforming structure
and also a re uest for variance to the rear setback re uirements of Table A -Ordinance
50 at a residence at 203 Fairview Street. Application is in the name of Johnny A.Martinez .
Mrs. Kee presented the request, referred to attachments in packets concerning this request
and gave the history of this non-conforming structure. She also reported that all
but one of the adjacent property owners who had contacted here were against this project.
Johnny Martinez, owner of the non-conforming residence was sworn in and explained the
project. He said that he had made numerous calls to City Hall for a final inspection
at the time the last remodelling had taken place, but that this inspection was never done.
•
•
ZBA Minutes
10-19-82
page 4
He said that he had gone through all the steps necessary for each inspection, and that
his wife had called three times for this final inspection of the area to be inspected
which was a porch which he had enclosed. He further stated that he specializes in
three areas, namely electrical, plumbing (also air conditioning) and solar energy, so
he had done this wir ing himself, but had left out some accoustical ceiling so the electri-
cal inspection could be done, and that tile is still missing. He said that he thinks
that he should be able to enlarge his structure more than the 25 % allowable in the
Zoning Ordinance because his house is so small compared to others which would be
al lowed more square footage expansion at the 25 % rate.
Mr. MacGilvray interrupted and asked what the nature of the non-conformity is, and
was told that this is a duplex in a Single Family Residential zoning district. Mrs.
Kee said that the original house had been a single family home, to which a bedroom and
bathroom were added with rear access. In 1981 a covered porch was enclosed . Mrs.
Cook asked if Mr. Callaway had been the Zoning Official at the time the porch was
covered and he replied that he had be en, also had visited the residence, and the enclosure
of the porch would not have exceeded the 25 % maximum. Mr. Martinez answered Mr. Upham's
question concerning the size of lot by saying his lot is 50xl25; then Upham asked for
the size of neighbor's lot, to which Frank Coulter, after being sworn in answered that
his lot is 94xl25. Mrs. Cook pointed out that sing le family residences can be expanded
as much as anyone wanted, as long as setbacks are met, but pointed out that this is
no long er a single family residence, but rather a non-conforming duplex in an R-1
zoning district. Mr. Martinez said that he was planning to give the residence to his
daughter (who 1 ives there now) and then it would be a single family residence. Mr.
Upham referred to the original building permit dated in 1981 which requested repair,
including enclosing an existing porch, but which also included a note stating that
11 no change in the floor plan as it existed prior to construction will be allowed by
order of the Zoning Board of Adjustment -March 24, 1981 11 • He stated further that
he did not kno w anything about a final inspection, but that he does know that the
ruling indicated that there could be no change to the floor plan, but the actual
cosntruction which took place did not comply with this directive. Mr. Martinez
said that only screen doors were changed, and that City Hal 1 has always had a negative
attitude toward this piece of property. Mr. Wagner interrupted and said that what
Mr. Martinez had begun to talk about had no bearing on this request, and that the
Board wants to discuss the request. Mr.' Martinez handed out revised drawings, and
explained them, then Mr. Wagner asked the Chairman to excuse this witness, and the
Chairman agreed and did so. Mrs. Kee then reviewed these revised pans w1 t -e Board.
The Chairman repeated the request before the Board, reiterated that the zoning in
this district is R-1 and the present structure is a non-conforming duplex, which would
not now be allowed in this zoning district. She spoke of how the interior of this
building had been designed prior to the 1981 request for variance, how it is now
designed and states that this current request creates a new structure, not only
creating a duplex (which is now there) but a tri-plex . Mr. Wagner agreed to her
observations and then asked the applicant why the proposed addition is so far away
from the existing structure. Mr. Martinez denied that plans would create a tri-plex
and said the reason for the distance between the str uctur es is that after this addi-
tion is completed, he plans to tear down the exist ing original structure and build
a 2 story residence.
Elizabeth Martinez, daughter of the applica nt was sworn in and stated that she had
been at the last meeting during wh ich the Board had discussed this building, and said
that when her family purchased the residence, it was listed as a duplex, and that they
now wanted to pull the kitchen out of the existing structure and make it larger.
The Chairman again explained R-1 zoning and how this duplex is no w a non-conforming
p
ZBA Minutes
10-19-82
page 5
structure because of the adoption of the current Zoning Ordinance, and further
explained the restrictions this building now falls under. Mr. Upham explained
11 grandfather i ng 11 and how, when the current use is over it wi 11 revert back to,
or be replaced with a single family dwelling or a structure which conforms with the
Ordinance. Mr. Martinez asked if 1 imiting the building to 2 bedrooms and a kitchen
rather than 3 bedrooms and a kitchen would be of help. Mr. Upham said that he
could only approve a structure which contained no kitchen or bath, and could not
accommodate a separate family.
Wayne Allen of Wharton, Texas was sworn in and said he opposed these variances
because of par k ing and sewer capacities, and wondered if there were some way to go
back in history and pinpoint when the nonconformity occurred in this R-1 district. He
then voiced appreciation to the Board for their public service in serving on the
Board and stated that he was a former resident of 302 Fairview, and that his daughter
had resided there last summer.
Frank Coulter (previously sworn in) spoke about the City having refused a permit to
a former owner, and also to another resident on Montclair for an additional non-con-
formity in this district.
Mrs. Cook asked staff if long range plans for this area were for this area to be single
family residential, and this was confirmed.
Billie Hefti was sworn in and expressed concern for fires because of the age of the
homes in the area.
Mr. Martinez then asked to be given permission to build this new structure and to
tear down the old structure later. Mr. Lindsay pointed out t~at the Board cannot
legislate future use except through zoning restrictions.
Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to deny the enlargement of a building devoted to a
non-conforming use where such extension is not necessary and incidental to the
existing use and does increase the area of the building devoted to a non-conforming
use more than 25 % and does prolong the life of the non-conforming use and prevent
a return of such property to a conforming use. Mr. Upham seconded the motion to deny.
Motion carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a re uest for a variance to the location of the
required parking spaces at 321 University Drive (Northgate . Application is in the name
of J. E. Robbins, Sr. dba Chari ie 1 s Grocery.
Mrs. Cook informed the Board and the public that the City Council had ruled sometime
in September that no parking variances would be granted for a period of 12 months in
the Northgate area. She also said that she had spoken with the Mayor and the attend-
ing Council Liaison (Nemec) prior to this meeting, to clarify the intent of the ruling.
Then she advised that this matter should be given no consideration until this 12 month
moratorium has expired. Mr. MacGilvray read from the minutes which were included in
the packet, quoting Councilman Pat Boughton on this matter. Mr. Upham said this item
had been placed on the agenda at the request of the applicant and city staff. Mrs. Kee
explained that the staff knew that the moratorium affected the number of parking spaces,
but was unsure whether it also included the location of spaces.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration of a request for a variance to the rear s e tback
requirements of Table A -Ordinance 850, at th e residence at 1026 Rose Circle. Appl i-
cation is in _the name of Sun Screens of Houston.
ZBA Minutes
10-19-82
page 6
Mrs. Kee explained the request for variance to setback requirements, and advised
the Board that the 10 ft. utility easement had been abandoned by action of City
• Council at their October 14th meeting just the previous week.
•
Richard Nored of Sun Screens of Houston, applicant for variance was sworn in and
answered questions of the Board and a photo of what was planned was passed around.
Mr. MacGilvray spoke of personal knowldege of this particular backyard and wondered
if he should vote on this matter, and further stated that in his opinion this proposed
screening fence would not be detrimental. Mr. Lindsay asked if this man has the
authority to represent the owners of this property, and was informed that he in fact,
had applied for the variance.
Mr. Lindsay made a motion to authorize a variance to the m1n1mum setback (Table A) from
the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to
the following unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in 1 ike
districts: The use proposed will not significantly detract from the area, and because
a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would, result in unnecessary
hardship, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial
justice done, and with the fol lowing special exception: That this Board is approving
only the erection of a screen enclosure within this setback 1 ine.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a request for a variance of Section 8-D.3
Ordinance 850 pertaining to signs; the request is for additional sign(s) at each
of 9 sorority houses in the Greek Village Subdivision. Application is in the name of
the College Panhellenic Association of College Station.
Jean McDermott and Joy Howze were sworn in and further explained their request for
additional signs to be 11 information 11 type signs rather than identification signs .
They said the signs would be 11 tasteful 11 and would be monitored by advisors. Mr.
MacGilvray asked if the subdivision was really named 11 Greek Village" to which he
was answered in the affirmative. Mrs. Cook pointed out that future expansion should
probably be included in this request. Mrs. McDermott stated that only this land in
"Greek Village" subdivision, which totalled 10 lots, was included in this request.
Mr. Upham asked questions and referred to the discussion held earlier this summer con-
cerning signs, then asked what type of sign, what size, how many days would be specified
for the sign, etc. He received no concrete answer, so he then askecll t e sororities
were purposing that the Board give blanket approval for any size, type,duration,etc.
to which Mrs. McDermott gave a general answer that they were requesting perhaps
one extra sign per lot of an uncertain size, with perhaps a time 1 imit of one week for
each time the sign was put out. Mr. Upham then expressed his wish that they come back
before the Board with a proposal the Board could deal with. Mrs. McDermott said that
this was a unique dormitory area and they really did not know exactly what to request,
and would generally like to see a ''lessening of restrictions" to show support for
one of the largest industries in the City (that of the University). Mr. MacGilvray
read from the Zoning Ordinance the size of some signs al lowed in certain zoning districts,
and Mrs. Cook stated that she thought perhaps generalities could be in the proposal.
Mrs. Kee said that if a variance was not somewhat specific, enforcement by the staff
would be a problem. Mr. Lindsay said the sign regulations are 1 isted in the Zoning
Ordinance and advised the witnesses they should sit down with the staff and work out
some specifics the Board could deal with.
Santos Ramirez of 1000 Dominik was sworn in and stated that he thinks the Board should
give specific rules to be followed by sororities.
Tim Coppinger, 1003 Dominik was sworn in and stated that in his opinion, a blanket
type variance would be a mistake.
j •
•
I
ZBA Minutes
10-19-82
page 7
Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to table this agenda item until such time the applicant
of the request can present a proposal the Board can deal with. Mr. Wagner seconded
the motion. Motion to table carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Other business.
Mr. Upham referred to the Committee studying the Northgate area and stated that to his
knowledge this committee has not yet met, and reminded Mr. MacGilvray & Mrs. Cook, who
are both serving on this committee that time is passing quickly, and something needs to
be done. He referred to an article which he passed around to be referred to when making
plans. Mrs. Cook asked if anyone had been appointed Chairman of this committee, and
Mr. MacGilvray stated that he had not been apprised of one. Lynn Nemec said she would
check on this with the Mayor's secretary.
Mrs. Kee indicated the definitions of home occupations, and excerpts from Zoning Ordinances
from other cities had been handed out to the Board for study, and suggested that due to the
lateness of the hour, this be put off until the next Board meeting.
She then referred to the City Attorney's memo which had been handed out concerning the
variance the Board had granted to the D.R.Cain setback encroachment. Mrs. Cook wondered
if there were no automatic penalties for this type of encroachment and Mr. MacGilVray
read the last part of the letter aloud. Mrs. Kee explained the procedure to be followed
if a violation is found. Mr. Upham said that he believed that a fine of perhaps 30 % of
the value of the structure should be imposed. Mr. Callaway explained that the $200 per
day fine for a violation was established by state law.
Mrs. Kee explained why Mr. Guidry and Mr. Searcy had not been .invited to attend this meet-
ing to discuss the utility 1 ine running across Mr. Searcy's property. She was directed
to invite them and the City Attorney to the next meeting of the Board.
Mrs. Kee also informed the Board that the next meeting date will have to be changed because
the City Council has rescheduled their meeting for that night. (November 30th was chosen
by the Board for the next meeting).
Mr. Wagner made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Upham seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVED:
Vi Cook, Chairman
ATTEST:
Dian Jones, City Secretary
I ,...
C ity of College Station
POST OFFIC E BOX 9960 I I OI TEXAS AVENUE
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840
October 14, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Jane R. Kee, Zoning Official/}·[,.,_,
Excerpts from Memo from City Attorney regarding questions
arising after granting setback variance to D. R. Cain
on Sept. 21, 1982
With reference to your comments on the requested two year old setback variance,
my first impression is that the Zoning Board of Adjustments was not intended
to resolve these types of problems. However, intelligent lawyers or lenders
not satisfied with the typical lenders letter from my office or the City
Manager may insist upon such a dtion or advise that a sale not be consummated.
My suggestion is that the Board adopt a practical approach to these requests,
and that if the setback variance involves a minor mistake within certain
tolerances (such as the oft reported two inch brick case) that they should
approve these requests pre-emptorily.
My legal opinion in this respect .is that the Board can do wha t ever it chooses
to do with reference to these setback variances, but at the same time I do not
believe that they should be expected to pull everybody out of the difficult
situations that they might find themselves in by virtue of their own errors.
Where city inspection is partially at fault, the situation even more clearly
indicates the approval of these items by the Board.
Whether or not the parties ultimately choose to litigate their disputes is not
the Board's concern, since it has to act on these requests and make so me
determination. If it determines not to issue the ~ariance, civil litigation
may well result, but that is not the appropriate consideration as far as the
Board's responsibility is involved. The question concerning initiation of a
lawsuit against the original builder is also misdirected, and i ndicates some
misunderstanding of the principles involved.
r
•
The City's alternatives as far as litigation are:
A. To allege a code violation complaint, subject to a
maximum fine of $ 200; or
B. To seek an injunction preventing the maintenance of the
violation, or ordering the property owner to correct
the violation.
Page 2
The first procedure is probably futile, and the injunctive remedy does not
lie against the builder.
.· AGENDA
City of College Station, Texas
Zoning Board of Adjustments
October 19, 1982
7:00 P.M.
l. ·Approval of Minutes from September 21, 1982.
2. Consideration of a request for a variance to Table A, Rear Setback 11 E11 require-
ments of Ordinance 850, at a proposed Village Square Office Park located in a
neighborhood commercial zoning district in Southwest Valley Sec. 5-A. Application
is in the name of G. Philip Morley & William E. Loveless.
3. Consideration of a request for expansion of a non-conforming structure and also
a request for variance to the rear setback requirements of Table A, Ordinance 850
at a residence at 203 Fairview Street . Application is in the name of Mr. Johnny A.
Martinez.
4. Consideration of a request for a variance to the location of the required parking
spaces at 321 University Drive (Northgate). Application is in the name of
J. E. Robbins, Sr. dba Charlie 1 s Groc er y.
5. Consideration of a request for a variance to the rear setback requirements of
Table A -Ordinance 850, at the residence at 1026 Rose Circle. Application is
in the name 0f Sun Screens of Houston .
6. Consideration of a request for a variance of Section 8-D.3 Ordinance 850 pertaining
to signs; the request is for additional sign(s) at each of 9 sorority houses in
the Greek Village s~bdivision . Application is in the name of the College Panhellenic
Association of College Station.
7. Other business.
9. Adjourn.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1:
MINUTES
City of College Station, Texas
Zoning Board of Adjustments
September 21, 1982
7:00 P.M.
Board Chairman Cook, Members MacGilvray, Wagner, Upham,
Donahue; also Council Liaison Boughton
Alternate Member Lindsay
Zoning Official Kee, Asst. Director of Planning Callaway
and Planning Technician Volk
Approval of Minutes from August 17, 1982.
Mr. Upham made a motion to approve the minutes; Mr. Wagner seconded the motion; motion
carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration _of a request for a Variance to Table A -Ordi-
nance 850 -Minimum Side Setback requirements at 502 Bo y ett. Application is in the
name of A. P. Boyett, Jr.
Mrs. Kee explained the request, g1v1ng background of th e residence which was built in
comp] iance with ordinances in effect at that time, but has since be come a non-conform-
ing structure upon adoption of the current ordinance; and any change to that structure
must now come before the Board for Approval.
A. P. Boyett, Jr.., owner of the residence was sworn in and further explained that the
proposed addition would meet all setbacks in the current ordinance, and reiterated
that it is the existing structure which is non-conforming, not the proposed addition.
Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to authorize the variance to the enlargement of a non-
.conforming structure as the enlargemen~ pf a building devoted to a nonconforming use
where such extension i~ nec~ssary ~nd incidental to the existing use of such building
and does not increase the area of the building devoted to a nonconforming use more
thaq 25 ~ and does not prolong the 1 ife of the nonconforming use or prevent a return
of such property to a conforming use. Mrs. Donahue seconded the motion; motion carried
unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a request for a Variance to Table A -Ordi-
nance 850 -Minimum Front Setback requirements at 1107 Hawk Tree Drive. Application
is in the name of Doni, Inc. d/b/a D.R.Cain Company.
Mrs. Kee explained the request, stating that the 2 ft. encroachment of the garage
portion of this home was not detected at the time the home was built, (about 2 years
ago) and that during a recent survey which was made for purposes of resale of the
home, this encroachment was detected.
Harry Bostic, representative for D. R. Cain Company was sworn in and said the company
which built the home was aware of the encroachment at the time of construction, but that
the City apparently did not catch the encroachment during inspections.
Mr. Wagner said that he had driven by the home and that th e encroachment was hardly
noticable, and that it was his opinion that the present owner or any future owners
should not be censured because of a builder error and one of the City not catching
the error in time to correct it.
ZBA Minutes
, 9-21-82
pag e 2
Mr. Upham became upset that a builder wou ld knowingly build a house with a violation
of any City codes and cited several cases which had been turned down in the past. Mrs.
Bought on a nd Mr. Wagn er cited cases which had been approved. Mr. Wagner then made a
motion to authorize a variance to the front minimum setback (Tabl e A) from the terms
of thi s ordinance as it will not be contrary to the pub! ic interest, due to the follow-
ing unique and special condition of the land not norm a ll y found in li ke districts:
(1) Residence already exists, and because a stri ct enforcement of the provisions of the
Ordinance would result in unn ecessary hardship, and such that the spirit o f this Ordi-
nance shal l be observed and substantial j ustic e done. Mr. MacGilvra y seconded the
motion; motion carried unanimously.
Mr~ Upham stat ed emphatically that he wants it known that concerning any construction
initiated from this dat e forward, this Board w ill not function as a Civil Court. Re-
course in a case such as this is for the present owner to sue the former owner, who
i~ turn can sue the builder who knew about this particular violation at the ti me of
construction.
Mr. MacGilvray agreed that builders must be convinced some ho w that homes and proper ty
are a matter of legal record, and if they are not right, then they are wro n g. However,
he thinks that in this particular case the City cannot be held blameless.
Mr. Upha m wanted the City Council, the City Attorney and staff to be notified that any
error in placement of i mp rov ements on property wh ich encroach for any reasons wil 1 not
be handl ed by this Board. He feels 1 ik e this Board should nev er have to look at some -
thing whic h is already completed.
Mrs. Cook made a motion to carry to the City Council the fol l owing statement : 11 We (the
Zoning Board of Adjustments) do not want to be presented with situat ions whe re we are
actually acting as a Court of Law, and in instanc es where there is a question of Law,
the first person' contacted ought to be the Cit y Attorney to see whether this is indeed
under the jurisdiction of the Zoning Board of Adjustments or whether it i s a situation
which should be brought before a Court.11 Mr. Upham seconded this motion; motion car-
ried unanimously.
Kelly Carter, resident of 1110 Hawk Tree was sworn in a nd asked how this ruling affects
other homeown e rs in that area, and if they foun d (upon attempt in g to sell their property)
that an encroachment exists, where should they go first, to the City, the ZBA or an
Attorney. Mr. Upham suggested should the need arise, that they first go to the City,
then perhaps to the City Attorney, and if needed, th e n to a private attorney.
George Sharman, resident of Airline was sworn in and asked if a punitive law suit
(City vs. Builder) would be in order in a case 1 ike thi s, and the Board replied they
really did not know, but that in a case 1 ike this one, they felt the City could not
be blameless be cause the encroachment was not caught during ins pect ions.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Other Busin e ss .
Mrs. Kee explained her request concerning the Board extendi ng the pol icy of staff
approving expansion of conforming structures on a lot where there existed a non-con-
forming structure, to include staff approving expa nsion s of or additions to a non-
conforming structure in a case where the addition itself does not in any wa y affect or
increase the area of non-conformity or in any way creates any non-conformance of its
own (th e non-conformance being of setback, l ot dime n s ion , etc., but not parking).
Mr. Uph am made a mot i on that the ZBA a uthori ze staff to g rant perm it s in the instance
whe r e the propos e d construction does not affect any ex i s ting non-conformanity of se tbac k
or lot dimension. If the staff sees a potential p r ob l em they may bring the permit
before the Board. Mr. Wagner seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
ZBA Minutes
. 9-21-82
page 3
Mrs. Kee then informed th e Bo ard t hat she was havi ng more questions concerning Home
Occupations than ever befo r e, s h e was hav in g a difficult time answering the c alls, and
asked the Boar d to pl ease ass i st her in coming to a more clear interpretation of the
Ordinance. Sh e informed the Board that s he has always advised that ho me occupations
should not adv ert ise an address, a nd sho ul d not bring peop le to the ho me for a se rvic e
to be rendered, however piano l essons have a l ways been an excep tion to this i nterp r e -
tation. Also, Mrs. Kee requested interpretation from the Board concerning what co nst i -
tutes installati o n of mac hin ery or equ i pme nt i n the ho me. Mr. MacGilvray stated that
he thin ks that go vernm e n t should stay out of homes un til c it y street s , s i dewalks, e tc.
are affected. Mrs. Coo k said that u s ua ll y the ques ti on comes up when a complaint i s
filed concerning someone doing bus in ess in the home. Th e Board told Mrs. Kee that if
the definition of Home Occupa t i ons i s to be ch ange d, it should come fro m the Ci ty
Council, but Mrs. Kee said that i f it were a quest ion of interpr etation, (and she
t .hinks this is) it should com e from the Board. Mr. Wa g ner said that he felt that
individual trea t me nt should be given to each quest ion that comes up, but in his min d,
he thinks that if sp ec i a li zed equ ipm e nt i s necessary, or that other than nor mal traffic
is gen erated , the business no lon ger falls in the 11 ho me occ upati o n" category. He
would also inclu de that a home occupation should not const itut e a primary source of inco me.
Mr. Sat ya, a r es id e nt ofCo ll ege Station was sw orn in and sta t ed that hi s w i fe offe rs
electrolysis in the hom e fo r only l perso n at a t i me, and c urr ent l y has only 4 custo -
mers. Mr. Uph am aske d i f this we r e permitted, wha t would hap pen if th e business com -
pound ed and the result was a steady stream of customers? He wondered aloud at what
point does a ho me occ up at i o n become a busin ess, and where sho ul d the line be drawn .
The Boa rd th e n asked s t aff to study ordina nc es from other cities, to meet with the
City Attorney, to bring a li s t of home occupatio n s permitted in other p lac es to
the next meeting of the ZBA,and to inclu de thi s under Other Bu siness o n the agenda.
Mr. Upham as ked 'fo r an update o n the combin ed meet ing of Cit y Council, P&Z a nd ZBA
conc e rning North gate . Mrs. Boughton informed the Boar d that at the regul ar meeting
of the City Council on 9-2 3-82 a committee would be appointed to study the area and
recommend a perma nent solution, and that no variances to parking r equirements wou ld
be grant e d in the next 12 months. Mrs. Coo k then than ked the Board and the Council
'for their support at this joint meeting.-Mrs. Boughton asked if any members were
inter e st ed in serving on the committ ee, and Mrs. Cook and Mr. MacGilvray exp r essed
i nteres.t.
Mr. Wagner then reminded the Board th at Ed Wal sh was to co mpl ete his parking lot pro-
ject and have it inspected prior to September 15 t h. Mr. Walsh has compl e t e d it, and he
(Mr. Wagner) has inspected it, and it is fini shed to his satisfaction, therefore,
Mr. Walsh has met his obligations and can r ema in in business until August 31, 1983.
Mrs. Kee reported that the po we r 1 in e wh ich runs across A.G.Searcy 1 s property is a n
old REA line, is a main feeder lin e , a nd t here are no plans no w to relocate it. Th e
Board stat e d that it had been given the impression th at this 1 in e was insta ll ed t o
carry electricity to a street li g ht by Mr. Searcy 1 s home, and that because the answe r
provided is not altogether satisfactory to them, t he y instructed Mrs . Kee to inform
Joe Gui d ry, Mr. Searcy and th e City Attorney that their prese nc e is required at the
next ZBA meet in g .
Mrs . Co ok informed the Board that a p i zza restaurant had been opened in a building
whe r e th e ZBA had at a previous mee tin g esta blished hours d urin g which a business
could be in operat i on, and it i s he r desire that these ho urs be strictly enforc ed .
Mrs. Kee inform e d t he Board that the operators of thi s restaurant have been made awa r e
ZBA Minutes
9-21-82
page 4
of the approved hours of operation, as we ll as all other stipulations the Board made.
Mr. Wagner made a motion to adjourn with Mr. Upham seconding; motio n to adjourn car-
ried unanimously.
APPROVED:
Vi Cook, Chairman
ATTEST:
Dian Jones, Cit y Secretary
City of College Statio n
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 I I 0 I TEXAS AVENUE
COLLEGE STATION. TEXAS 77840
October 12, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment
FROM: Jane R. Kee, Zoning Official
SUBJECT: Agenda Items -ZBA Meeting October 19, 1982
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 -VARIANCE TO REAR SETBACK 11 E'' REQUIREMENTS OF TABLE A -ORD. 850
P. Morley
The applicant is requesting a variance to note E of Tabl e A which states that a
commercial project must have a 15 ft. rear setback, 10 ft.of which must remain
unobstructed by above ground utility installations, structures, fences, storage or
parking. The proposed site plan, which has been approved by P&Z pending action by
the ZBA, indicates parking along the rear property line (see enclosed site plan).
The rear property 1 ine adjoins a 70 ft. drainage access, and utility right-of-way
which then adjoins single family houses on Sandy Circle. Twenty-four feet of the
access right-of-way will be paved to provide access to the rear of the project and
to allow City maintenance vehicles access to the drainage right-of-way.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 -EXPANSION TO NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE & VARIANCE TO REAR SETBACK
REQUIREMENTS -TABLE A -ORDINANCE 850 -J. Martinez
The applicant is requesting to expand an existing non-conforming duplex in an R-1
Single Family zone. As some Board members will recall, this applicant came before
the Board in March of 1981. Enclosed in your packets are copies of the memorandum
from Mr. Callaway to the _ZBA and minutes of the March 24 meeting. Also enclosed in
your packets is a copy of the building permit issued April 6, 1981. The permit
contained the conditions of issuance as directed by the Board. There is no record
of any final inspections having been made. There was a request for a final inspection
dated 11-17-81 attached to the permit. No record of that inspection exists. The
Planning staff was not aware of it. If a final building inspection was made it
should have discovered that the interior construction was not in compliance with
the Board's directive.
On October 4, 1982 Mr. Callaway and I had an opportunity to make an inspection.
This was the result of a request for a building permit which is now pending. Upon
our inspection we found an interior partition in place which completely divides the
structure into t wo separate, but almost e qual in size, units. My understanding from
the Building Official and my recollection of the 1981 Board meeting is that, at that
time, the structure consisted of one large unit with one very small unit at the back.
This small unit had a kitchen and one bedroom with a small bath. There are presently
two kitchens, two bedrooms, two bathrooms and t \'JO study rooms (one in each unit -see
attached floor plan). From what can be determined, Mr. Martinez ignored the Board's
directive and did alter the interior layout of the structure. There is no longer
what would be considered a non-conforming duplex, but rather an illegal one. There-
fore unl e ss the Board would 1 ike to approve the work done thus far, the staff will
direct Mr. Martinez to return the structure to its original interior layout.
ZBA Memo
Oct. 1 2, 1 982
page 2
The applicant is now requesting to expand the second unit by adding three bedrooms
and three bathrooms and a larger kitchen. In looking at the plans, it appears to
be a third unit rather than an expansion of the second unit, but of this the staff
cannot be sure. (The plans refer to this expansion as a bedroom wing extension for
unit number 2). In either event this expansion far exceeds 25 % of the area of the
building devoted to a non-conforming use and certainly would appear to prolong the
life of the nonconforming use and prevent the return of this property to a single
family residenc e.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 -VARIANCE TO LOCATION OF REQUIRED PARKING -J.E.Robbins, Sr.
dba Charlie's Grocery
Sometime in late August or early September I was made aware of the addition at
Charlie's Grocery of tables and chairs. After investigating, a letter was sent to
the owner, Mr. J. E. Robbins (see enclosed letter). After receiving the letter,
Mr. Robbins contacted me and said that he had always had places for 6 people to sit
and did not realize he could not add additional seating without supplying parking.
He asked what his alternatives were. I explained the Council 1 s request that the
ZBA grant no parking variances for twelve months. Therefore his only alternatives
were to remove all but six seats or supply parking spaces for the total number of
seats.
Last week Mr. Robbins came in and said that Mr. Loupot had just leased a parking lot
across Patricia Street that has approximately 20 spaces. Mr. Loupot is willing to
lease 6 spaces to Mr. Robbins, which would allow him to have 18 seats. The staff
was uncertain as to whether the Council's request was ai me d at variances dealing with
number only or any and all kinds of parking variances. Mr. Robbins is seeking a
variance to Section 7-B.2 which requires off-premise parking locations to be on
property under the same ownership. Mr. Robbins' landlord and the owner of the lot
Mr. Loupot is leasing are two different individuals.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 -VARIANCE TO REAR SETBACK -TABLE A ORDINANCE 850 -Sun Screens of
Houston
The applicant is requesting a variance to the rear setback in order to install a
screen structure over an existing swimming pool. The proposal is to connect the
screen structure to an existing masonry fence running along the rear property 1 ine.
There is a 10 ft . utility easement along the rear and the applicant is requesting
that the Council abandon this easement. The Council will consider this on October 14,
1982.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 -VARIANCE TO NUMBER OF ALLOWED SIGNS -SECTION 8-D.3 of ORD.850 -
College Panhellenic Assn. of College Station.
As you will recall, representatives of the Panhellenic Association discussed the
possibility of additional signs at the Sorority Houses in Greek Village at the July 20,
1982 meeting of the Board. At that time there was insufficient time for notification
and no decision could be made. A formal request is being made at this time.
sjv
ZONni c BO ARD OF ADJ UST MEN T FILE NO. ----
Nam e of Applicant ___ G_._P_H_I_L_I_P_fYl_O_R_L_E_Y_&_W_I_L_L_I_A_fYl_E_._L_O_V_E_L_E_S_S ______ _
Mailing Address ____ 1_7_0_1_s_o_u_T_H_W_E_S_T_P_A_R _K _W_A_Y_, _S_U_I_T_E_1_0_9~,_C_O_L_L_E_G_E_S.;_T_A_T--=-I -=-0-'-N
Phone ___ s_~_s_x_s_~_z_s __ 6 _9_3_-_9_9_2_5
Location: Lots 113-120Block 9 Subdivision SWV SEC. 5-A ---
Description, If applicable
-------------------------~
Action requested: GRA NT VARIANCE TO ORDINANCE REQ U I REfYl E NT FOR 10 •
CLEA R AREA WITH NO PARKI NG AT REAR OF SITE.
NA}ffi ADDRESS
(From current tax rolls, College Station Tax Assessor)
SEE ATTACHED LIST
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FLLE NO. ----
Present zoning of land in question _C_-_N __ ~----------------
Section of ordinance from which variance is sought DISTRICT USE SCHEDULE, TABLE
A, REAR SETBAC K 'E'
The following ·specific v2.riation from the ordinance is requested: -------
TO GRANT PARKING AND PLACEME NT OF DUMPSTER ADJACE NT TO REAR
PROPERTY LI NE
This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of
the land not found in like districts:
THE SITE IS PLATTED IN 50' LOTS, NECESSITATING A STRIP CENTER APPROAC H
OR A PARK SITUATION AS WE ARE PROPOSING, UTILITIZING THE ENTIRE SITE.
CITY OFFICIALS INDICATE THE 10' CLEARANCE REQUmREMENT WAS TO PROVIDE
ACCESS TO THE REAR OF A STRIP CENTER OR OT HER COMMERCIAL USE OF A-
C-N ZONE. DIRECTLY BEHIND THID SITE IS A 70' ACCESS & UTILITY ROW
The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: -------
A VARIETY OF SI~E PLANS WERE STUDIED PRIOR TO THE SELECTION OF THIS
ONE, AND THIS WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT ALLOWED THE SQUARE FOOTAGE
REQUIRED TO MAKE .THIS PROJECT WORK, SINCE THE LAND ALONE IS MORE
r THAN 100,000 DOLLARS AN ACRE. OUR ALTERNATIVES ARE TO REDUCE THE
SQUARE FOOTAGE OR GO TO TWO STORIES OR ABANDON THE PROJECT, ALL
This variance wiil not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following
f~ct~: ACCESS IS NOT IMPEDED BUT IN FACT CONSIDERABLY IMPROVED BY
OUR DESIGN. IN ADDITION, DUE TO THE EXTREMELY CLEAN USE OF THE
SITE FOR OFFICE SPACE, A LOSS OF 10' OF BUFFER IS INSIGNIFICANT
WHE N THERE IS ALREADY 70' BETWEEN PROPERTY LINES.
' The facts stated by me in this application are true and correct.
//'/l . . 1 /) / '(/ ' . . /J/!/;· ) \ /;/ /.;:;; I / {; ,L ,.[, //' /:,/ K,;cA.,-J /-··
' App,1 icant / I ' D :·~te
' r'
' 24' OF WHICH WE PROPOSE TO PAVE TO ImPROVE ACCESS ON AND AROUND THE SITE.
THE PAVING IS ON GENERALLY FLAT GROUND, WILL BE DESIGNED TO CITY SPECS,
AND musT BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
, f. I
' OF WHICH ARE EITHER UNFEASIBLE ECONOmICALLY, OR JUST UNACCEPTABLE.
Blk 9 Lo t 94 southwood Va lley 5-A
Robert Stalcu p
2735 Sandy Circle
Colle ge Station, Texas 77 840
Bl k 9 Lot 95 Southwood Valley 5-A
Jose ph A. Patt erson
273 1 Sandy Circl e
Colle ge Stati on , Texas 77 840
Bl k 9 Lot 96 So uthw ood Valley 5-A
Da vid A. Brooks
272 7 Sandy Circle
Colle ge Station, Te xas 77840
Blk 9 Lot 97 Southwood Valley 5-A
Lonn ie L. Jo nes
2723 Sandy C irc l~
College St a tio n , Texas 77 840
Blk 9 Lot 98 South wood Valley 5-A
Gor do n P. Hop kins et ux
2719 Sand y Ci r cle
Colle ge Sta t ion, Texas 77 840
Blk 9 Lot 99 So uthwoo d Valley 5-A
Kennet h W. Durham
3531 Hawthorne Drive
(2 715 Sand y Cir cle)
Do ver, Del. 19 901
Bl k 9 Lot 100 South woo d Valley 5-A
Wa yn e M Ahr
2711 Sandy Circl e
College Station, Texas 77 840
1
Bl k 9 Lot 10 1 Southwood Valley 5-A
~e sa r eo A. Dominquez
27 07 Sandy Circ le
Co l lege Station, Te xas 77 840
Bl k 9 Lot 102 Southwood Valley 5-A
Daniel Neil Mc Quay
2703 Sandy Ci rc le
Colle ge Sta t ion , Texas 77 840
Blk 9 Lot 103 South wood Valley 5-A
James F. McNamara
2700 Sandy Circl e
Colle ge Stat io n, Texas 77 340
Blk 9 Lot 104 So uthv1oo d IJ.:l 1 r:>y S-f\
Jesus H. Hindjo sa et ux
2704 Sandy Ci r c l e
Colle<Je Stat ion , rr,:-:,1', ,·1::1H)
Bl k 9 Lot 10 5 Southwood Valley 5-A
Yechiel Weitsman
2708 Sandy Ci rc le
College Station, Te xas 77 840
B1k 9 Lot 106 Sou thwood Valley 5-a
Gerald G. Waaner
2712 Sandy e1rcle
Coll e ge Station, Te xas 77 840
Blk 9 Lot 107 Sou thwood Valley 5-A
Donald W. Bugh et ux
2716 Sandy Ci rc le
College Station, Texas 77 840
Blk 9 Lot 108 Southwood Valley 5-A
Paul d . Beckingham
2720 Sandy Circle
Co!1ege Stati on, Texas 77 840
Blk 9 Lot 109 Southwood Va l ley 5-A
Jon [. Porter
2724 Sandy Circle
Co;1c9e S~ation, Texas 77 84 0
Blk 9 Lot 110 Southwood Valley 5-A
Joh n C. Lofo r en
2728 Sandy Cir c l e
College Station, Texas 77 840
Blk 9 Lot 111 Southwo od Valley 5-A
Mar vin C. Miller et ux
2732 Sandy Circle
College Station, Te xa s 77 84 0
Blk 9 Lot 112 Southwood Valley #58
Blk 16, Lots 1 ,2,3,4,5 SWV #3
Rhea D1t1ayne
2751 Long mire
College Sta tion, Texas 77 840
Blk 16 Lot 24 Southwood Val .ey #3
Peo~e rtre e ~pts. Lt d .
Don R. Tu r l :nqton and Asso ciates, I nc .
300 0 Park Hi ll Dr .
For t !·!orth , Tx . 76109
Bldg . D ~ it 28 Woo dsma n Condos
He nry C. Ortec_;a
2800 Lon g~ire #28
Co 1leqe Station , Texas 77 840
G dg . D '..:ni ~ 2S. tr!oods man Condos
~a y11 1 o n d .. S111i th
2800 L.on ~,1 ·1i re ::2 9
Coll ege Station , Texas 77 840
Bl dg. D Unit 30 ~ioods111an Condos
Harold M. Tan ner
2800 Lon gmi re .no
Col l e ge Statio n , Texa s 77840
Bld g . E Un i t 31 t..Jo odsman Condos
Le l and A. Sei dl
2800 Lon gm ire #31
Colle ge Station, Texas 77 840
Bl dg . E Unit 32 Woo dsman Condos
J ames e. Patterson
28 00 Longmire #32
College Station , Tex as 77840
Bl k 23 Lot 55 So ut hwood Valley 7-A
Sou thwood Valley , Inc.
P.O. Drawer AF
Col lege Station , Te xas 77 840
lR Dragon's Ne st
Edwar ds , R. Wayn e
2801 Longmi r e Dr .
Colle ge Station, Texas 77340
2R Dr agon 's Nest
Geor ge E. Echerd
280,~ Lon gmi re
Coll ege Station , Te xas 77 840
Bldg . E Unit 33 Woodsman Condos
Cha r les L. Ada 111s
· 2800 Lon gmi r e
Colle ge Station, Texas 77 840
1
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO. ---
e/;_/9~~/~? µ/J/27/~;,ez..
///ff?s./Yfd-Ry £'". .A/Al?T/~c z..
Name of Applicant A1R· J;};/,JC-IY A . //4ART7/i//.£:Z....
Mailing Address ,;lt:J3 .;::;v;.t/LduJ c-M?uaf;_ c~g~:/z-;;;X ·
Phone G 9~ -7 t?-=o .5
Location: Lot 7 Block ,2. Subdivision ~.'1. PfllZk /'J-ddh;
Description, If applicable C::a "1 c::"?'O ~ X /~£/ uJ bs~/
/ /Jd~ c; /~/ R~/(_:
NANE ADDRESS
(From current tax rolls, Col lege Station Tax Assessor)
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Present zoning of land in question Lt7T 7
Section of ordinance from which variance is sought ---'A;'.7__,,,..__-__./.__ __________ _
The following specific v ariation from the ordinance is requested:
This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of
the land not found in like districts:
--
The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible:
This variance wiil not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following
ilt~t~: 8€cAU>"e:= n1rr= ¥JRF?fl"Z/r .,/?a1ert-L.u..1~ /<: /ii',!Vr/&~'-' ~ P'M-4.L-L-~ 7
A-µD r.v4 '2if1cQUA-rE .Ea'l2 &zm,/l'"rr4 n+P?Lli L. IVtNO.. A.t. ><P om4/r2-~;+'1'2c->ee>
..4 OPtrff?U._ a!.?t/t-It? l'!;tr #HI ?¢c'r?A £>E 7P Tl#c l.11£.4 no.J ~ 'T A tJ&Z</
PKtGPU a11111 ?A-Nt?~~.JG A;.U,.e /3.q.qnE!C4/7Cf7...1,
&cr.-rL /9~
Tri'ate
BI k. 1 Lot N 1, 2,
Alford, Herbert H.
12ltt So. College
Pt 3 College Park _ / v
Bryun, Tx. 778Gl
Blk. 1 NE 20 ft Lot 3 all 4, 5. Colle.ge. ParR
Sheppard, Frank W~ Jr .%
Cecil Parker
lOi'.'.O Rose Ci'rcle
College Stati'on, Tx . 77840 .
Blk. l Lot 6, 26 " 7, 3'·· Strtp Colle.ge Par.k~
A·lant, G. H.
1308 Ange 1 i·na
College Statton, Tx . 7784Q
BI k. I Lot 8, 24 '·' 7, i'.'.Q'·' g_ Co lle.ge. Par I<.
Coulter, Frank C.
#5 Sunset Drive
Jackson, TN 38301
Blk. 1 Lot 30' 9, all 10 College Park
Hierth, Harrison E.
208 Fairview St
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 1 Lot 11 college Park
Tra i I , Bi 11 i e M
402 Timber St
College Station, Tx. 71840
Blk. 1 lot 12 College Park
Jessup, George T.
P. 0. Box 4023
College Station, Ix. /7840
8lk. 1 Lot 13, 20 ft. 14 College Park
Courtney, Joe Inc. ;
P. 0. Box 4305
Bryan, Tx. 77801
Blk. 1 Lot 15 30',
Faulk, W. J.
508 Morgan
Bryan, Tx. 77801
Blk. 2 Lot Pt I
Gent, tarline
500 Jersey St
14 College Park
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2 Lot Pts l, 2, 3 College Park
Miller, Marshal I M.
511 Jersey
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2 Lot Pt 2, 3 College Park
Williams, Channing
I 00~ B I ackhaw
Houston, Tx. 77079
v "
/
I ./'
··'
', ; ,, . -
Blk. 2 Lot Pt 4 College Park
Laverty, Carroll D
503 Angus
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2 Lot 100' 4 (2 Hse's) College Park
Mitchel 1, Jim
1003 Pershing
college Station, Tx. 17840
Blk. L lot Pt 4, 5, 6, College Park
Reierson, John E. Col
P. 0. Box 43
West Point, NY 10996
Blk. 2 Lot 8 College Park
Martinez, Richard
201 Fairview St.
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2A Lot Pt 1, L College Park
Hlk. 2A Lot Pt l, L College Park
Fleming, Deliah C.
P. 0. Box 47 87
College Station, Tx. 77840
Hlk. 3 Lot 1 College Park
Hefti, Edward 0.
300 Fairview
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 3 Lot 2 College Park
Allen, W. Wayne Dr.
Rt. 2 Box 136
Wharton, Tx. 77488
Blk. 3 Lot 3, 4 College 1Park
McAfee, T. E
304 Fairview
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 3 Lot 5, 6 College Park
Creswell, H. S. Mrs
Box 1871 Del Valle, Tx. 7861 7
Blk. 3 Lot Z College Park
Hunt, R. L.
300 Montclair AvenS.
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk 4 Lot l, 2, 3, 4, College Park
Spriggs, Rosa E. Mrs.
501 Kerry
College Station, Tx. 77840
(
Blk. 4 Lot 5, 6, 25 ft 7 College Park
Brown, James R.
1812 Laura Ln.
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 4 lot 7 25' 8, College Park
Torrano, John A.
301 Fairview
College Station, Tx. 77840
. ,..µ
-• ......-.I
City of College Sta.non
POSf OFFICE BOX 9 0 60 I I 0 I TEX;\S 1\ '>'E ~L ;E
COLLEGE Sf1\TIO'.':. TEX.-\S 77840
March 18 , 1981
MEMORANDUM
TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment
FROM: Jim Callaway, Zoning Official
SUBJECT: Expansion of a non-conforming use -203 Fairvi ew St.
The requ est before the Board is to allow the expansion of a n ex isting
duplex in a single-family zone. The construction of the expansion has
been initiated by the applicant. The Building Department has issued a
Stop Work notice and the owner h as applied for all necess a ry permits so
as to be able to co mp l ete th e construction.
I have insp e cted this prop e rty with repr ese nt atives of the Building
Depa rt men t and ha ve found it to be a dupl e x , with two separate living
units v-1ith separate utility meters. I c an not verify th e original
int e rior Jayouts of the two unit s bec ause of the stage of construction.
Th e portion of the permit r equest that requires act ion by th e Board is
the enclosure of the front porch, which increases the floor area of the
non-conforming structure. This expansion is less than the 25 % limit
established by the ordinance. Unl ess additional information is brought
forward at the meeting, there ' should be no problem with granting the request
if the Board is so .inclined.
!
This request was not submitted in ti me for consideration at the regularly
scheduled meeting. We have asked the Board to meet to resolve this issue
in a timely matter because of the status of the stop-work notice and the
need to issue the necessary permits or initiate proceedin~s in Municipal
Court.
Due to the fact that no requ es ts were submitted prior to the deadline for
scheduling, the minutes of the last meeting were net prepared for review
by th e Board. We will att e mpt to ha v e these minut es com p l e t e in time for
inclusion with this packet. If not, the minutes will be includ ed in your
next packet.
• 5'-4 ?'7Q r>1"~/
· 1 ? ~s-w.1..-·O's~ J~
!.. NCJ_::_j /'~/ Ci~.' (Y} -S <;; Vjj/
f> ;? <:? ....::!' ~ 7 ro('1 f1 vt' 0{} • f
~v> Q 'CJ (l'l '7'1/ . (;'
. )µ/-4'(>/ rn-w
rt n2i O"(J ~ 7. ~~·1 .vropY /
. /S c:7 -: 0~ ' ~/. 1f o-z o 76)
""d-N~ a'f '¥~1,NG:S . s.1 1 -11 ;:>/~o/ ~~n~Sfl<:'J
I ~ _!t:J.?7
1 1\ I '-r r.J.. b!vJ
'·~
~."'·~·
I --
---------------------
l Q(l LL rnx o1 •uoA1a
onuo-.v U!'-D:) 'v'Ol.S' l I £90:>' xo g ;iJ'JJO 1rnd
J_J.f .1,.,,, .. , 1 ..-:::> -/,.,,, ,_,. >' .. / .. ,J lj /I L i . .., ,,--"' '-~-••• • . cJ . .
!:Ji'! I ::=:::::::::N: ~ :"J3 =::;~ (Y1~ ::::1,-~1 • ...Ll..Z}tJ':/!.J
.:-• . . ' ~
"' ~ -. : . .--.":f ·
.<--
.... -:: '7""-
. -~ .
.... -·-·-·
MINUTES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
Zoning Board of Adjustment
March 24 , 19 81
i-1EMBER S PRESENT: Act ing Chairman, Mathewson , Bu r ke , Upham, Wag n e r;
Alt e rna te, Boughton
~IBMBERS ABSENT: Ha rper
STAFF PRESENT: Zoning Official, Calloway; Pla nning Assistants, K,e.e and Longley
AGENDA ITEM NO . 1 - Co nsider a ti o n of a request for the expansion of a n on -conformi n g
use in the name of Johnny A . Martinez, 203 Fairview Str ee t.
Zoning Official Ca l loway presented background information concerning the construction
which had beenoc curring without a permit at the above address . A stop work order was
issued and Mr . Martinez was notifi e d of the necessity of a cquiring a building permit
and th a t the Zoning Board of Adjustment wo uld need to a ut horize the permit sinc e
Mr. ~!a rtinez was expa ndin g a n on -conformi n g use. The Building Offic i al informed
Mr . Callaway that the s tru ctur e is actual l y a r esidenc e with a sepa r a t e living uni t
attached in the rear . Th e s tructur e i s in an R-1, s ingle fam ily zo ne .
Mr. Callaway inf ormed the Board that Mr . Ma rtinez 's r e qu est involved changing the
int e ri o r layout of th e structure which would r esult in two living units of approxi -
mately eq u a l s iz e and e ncl os ing th e front porch.
Ma th ewson aske d abou t th e ge n eral c h a ract e r of th e neighborhood . The Boa r d discussed
that the a rea is la r ge l y a single family n e i ghbo rh oo d ea st of Fairview frrth smaller
rental units and non-conforming uses along portions of Fairview and west of Fairview .
Elizabeth Ma rtinez, representing the applicant, explained the r e qu es t . Sh e informed
the Board that the stru ctui e was a duplex when Mr . Martinez purchased it and that it
needed repair .
Upham stated that the situation appears to be an attempt to go from essentially a
single residence with a minimal possibility of being called a duplex to a formal
duplex situation. He stated that the Board 's manda te is to try to avoid perpetuating
a situation which is out of phase with th e Cit y 's Plan .
Burke questioned if the a im of the Pl an is t o bring thi s area ba ck into a single
family area.
Ma th ews on a sked if anyo n e ca lle d to object to the request and Callaway replied that
no one had objected .
Ma th ewson moved that the request fo r a varian ce on th e property l oca t ed a t 203 F.::iirview
Street be g rant ed on the g rounds that the g rantin g of the variance wo uld not represent
a thr ea t to the h e alth , welfare a nd moral s of the ci ti zens of College Station.
Bur ke seconded the mo ti on .
--------------------
~ Board of Adjustment
..:h 24, 1981
Page 2 .
Upham stated that thi s is th e first case of thi s natur e for this a rea to come before
th e Board nnd th e Board should realiz e th a t a precedent will be set if it g rants
this variance. This area will be receiv ing th e Board 's seal of approval to go from
a bas ica lly single famil y area to a duplex area .
Wag n er aske d for an int e rpretation of Section 4 -1.3. of Ordinance 850 ref e rring to
the 25 % limit o n enla rgement of a non-conforming use. Does this include rearrangement
of interior space?
Callaway respond e d that the Staff had di scu ssed this issu e a nd i s loo kin g to th e
Board to resolv e this point.
Mathewson stated that the Board had, in a pr e vious case, set a precedent that if any
part of a structure is non-conforming then the e ntire structure a nd its associated
structures on the lot are non-conforming .
Callaway explaine d that in the same case th e Board es t ablish e d a policy that in
future cases non-conformities of the t yp e wher e there is a detached structure, then
the principal structure, in re sidential cases, would not have to come to the Board.
The Board agreed.
Burke stated that in her opinion, enlargemen t is a n addi tion o r an increase in the
size of a structure. Wa gne r ag r ee d .
Callaway pointed ou t tha t a key point is whether thi s p r oposa l wi ll p r olong the l ife
of th e non-conf ormit y as stated in S e ction 11-B .3 .b. o f the o rdinance .
Uphan stated tha t th e intent of Ordinance 850 is f und amentally in opposition to this
request .
Af ter further discus s io n , th e question was ca lle d .
The motion fail ed by th e following vote :
Against -Burke, Upham, Wagner, Bo u ghton.
Callaway asked the Board if they would like to c onsider th e enclosure of the porch
separately as it falls below the 25 % expansion limit outlined in Sections 4-C.3 and
11-B.3 of the Ordinance.
Mathewson moved that the variance be granted to property located at 203 Fairview
Street for th e purpose of enclosing the sc reen porch with a permanent wall and that
this would not represent a risk to th e health, welfare , o r morals of the Citizens
of College Station. (Math ewson clarified that this motion involves only the porch
and not the int e rior desi g n or us e ).
Up ham seconded th e moti on and it passed unanimously .
There being no furt h e r business, th e mee t i n g was adjo urned.
REQUEST FOR INSPECTION g:3 /C/ v
DATE J/-)1-.P I TIME /(hL
ELECTRICAL PLUMBING BUILDING
Rgh-in Rgh-in Slab
Fina 1 Top-out Frame
Fina 1 @ ;
(). .) "-i " I -__..;.-. \ {:-1V>'V}1..l.!-. : ; ,// ..\ h11 t=z,
!)( ~· j . ~ ..
Company or Person Calling
LOCATION: ;-2._ { ~~ .:}.t'<-G't-LLu._u;
Lot Bl k Addn ------
Approved Date By
Fann 32-3
c::::::: •
.. -
-::>_PLic•~'.-1 '·,1,\.'. ":,n·1'.l -·"· .,.,. (1
.-/} ).:7 _ ... ~-, .,,_. __ .,, ..... : .... o.-£:·
.· ...........
IL.• ~ -,_ ---c....-----~------PHO;l!~-::::;np~e-/ (.•
_:.:rLING ADDRESS ..;:.?ti3 ~'d,,,r 1< <..-',. ,-J C. '$ . //'>< .
'Lu~!BE1 ~-------------------"-· E.LECTRICi i\1'!
---·fi·:EW CONSTRUCTION tJcmIHERCIAL
CY PE: 0 lEHOLITION .USE:
Q :IOVE ON
ORES IDEN CE
tJ·nuPLEX
ON' ARTI1E~~T
BOTHER l< .l > :__ / r>t ,-( ,· 'l ·t
0 REPAIR/ ADDITION
_;~-:ELLING UNITS _______ TOT/l.L AREA 1 O _<) (,,, COST $ Ir f'c \. 't HEATED AREA t<-:(··
-~-'--'---
FEE:
@5.00
@3.00
@2.50
-'"·
c.._,' ~,I !(_t ___ , . : . . . ?OUNDJ.TION_,__ / -'·'---/.:.<--.:="'---------PARTITIONS.:.<~/j C .;--( , &.. c r_~j
I l . ,
J/) i .' ·7 ·? /t ' -/ 0 ., .. ::XTERLiR;__ ___ . -~-· -..:..'·-"'-"-· ____ WIND tfS ( J..,,,C. l l./J -vl.,.'.
@2.00
?.OOF .'-7-n./o NO. OF R00::-1S (excl. kite.he n & bath) . @1.25 ---------v @ .75
::ATHS NO. OF BLDGS. ----[]CARPOR1 []SJNGL£ CJ AJTACHED
'I 0 GARAGE Q DOUBLE" ODETACH E D
I .1
i)
0 ~)
Ci::NTRAL HEAT/ AIR: TO N S . ) GAS AIR _ c_,( ..:. c_.,-. TOTAL $ .::: , !:" <.'' ----
RECEIP T NO. !W (>/ f
:.~~~. --.. .;a.:':_,-,,.
:o~DITIONS OF ISSUANCE: Repair, including en6los ing exis ti n g f ront porch as authori~ed . Wo
c hange fn the fl oor plaR as it ·existed prior to construction will be allowed by order .at the
Zoning fffi~rd of Adjustment -March 24, 1981 .
• i-' -
I certity th~t the const~uction, moving, alteration or use of the l ana as set forth
:-i.e rein complies/does not . comp-1-i;dth . the .-provisions ·o·f ·or din ance 35·0 "and ·.ifs s'~hseqlient
2:-;iendrr.ents.
'·
'.;0:1 -COMPLIA..1'lCE: _______________________ "-------------..
1-lA-t:.t J l. I 9 ? I 1 DATE ISSUED 1
'.?PROVED:
f , the 1..mdersigned, h ereby c er tify tha t th e in fornation stated h erein and in the attached
~l aas is true and co rrec t and th at the con s truction proposed complies wi t h the Zoning
:~<linance, the Building Co<le and condi tion s of approval of the plat of t11e land. I also
c e rtify that 1 am f amil iar with the regulation s above me ntio ne d and witl1 the condit io ns
:•f issu2.-ice of t '.his p erm it and I und ers t a nd t11 at I 2m p e r so:i.al ly liabl e to th e p e nalti es
?r ovid ed by l aw for each and eve ry day's violation of a ny of the above rcg1.1la tion s in
-:J d.iti oil to the cos t s of remov ing or correct ingl'.1all such v iolations wheth e r or not
~he y ar e s hown oa this permit-.... or th e att~5-1}~-p l an~. ..
~I G ~:ATURE OF APPLICANT:~ k c::t/'~~-J--~ATE _ __,..<...!.i-)._/i~/_..::~'--~-'-/ __ _ ~ I I
l_...r ' •
..... •J ·-
-t: ..
--,
_,__,
!.(1 -. . -· l l'.
{ -,.
,, .
l--'vl -... _.'\ .. ......... .. .
HOU .S;~
i
~.--· --I
I
'·
/
..
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Name of Applicant __ J_.~E_.~ .. _R_o'-b'-b'-1=·n~s~~·-3_r~·~D~B~A~_C~h~a=r~l~i_e~'~s~_G=r r~o~c=-e~r~y,__ _________ _
Mailing Address ___ 2"-2'-1_U_n;.;_1~· v'-e_r'"""s_1=-· t__.y,__D_r'-1~· v_e_,,__C_o"--='-1 =-1 e-.r: ..... e'--S=-t""""e."'"t""'"i=-· o=n~, _T=-e=x'"'-'a=s,,___7.._7""'8.._4_,_0,,.__ ____ _
Phone __ 8_4_6_-~9_4_16 ______ _
Location: Lot Block Subdivision --------
NAME ADDRESS
(From current tax rolls, College Station Ta x Assessor)
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Present zoning of land in quest ion __ ..::C_-_1:__ ___ -::G--=e'-'-n'°"e,_,r:...:a:::.l,,,__C=q mme r c i !\l__
Section of o ·rdinance from which variance is sought __ _!._7_---=B:..::•:..::2:...:-•,___0=-=-f-=-f--=-P--=r--=e'-"m::::i:..:.:..s~:..~J_.Q_g_~tion
The following ·specific ·variation from the ordinance is requested: Th At by the leasing of
additional parking places directly behind our busine ss, we have me t t he requirements of
the Zoning Ordinance for the Citv of Colle ge Station; that by meeting these recuirements
in good faith we shall be allowed to utilize the t a bles and c hai rs place d in our store;
t h at we are in reality, replaci'!'l g a r at!-le r antiquated a nd somewhat haohaza rd 11 seating ""
arren~ement of n any years -that a rrangemen t of sitting on the cou nt e rs,va r iou s cra tes
and stools, wbj ch many of o!lr cnstamers have enjor•d :i.:i..~l'll'l-~t..i::;h~@~p;l.lilil!.-l_s;.:tb-.-, ---------
This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of
the land not found in like districts:
As all of us know, the Nor thga te Shppping Area is unique and s pecial in man y way s.
I, fo r one, arn p roud ~_£ some of' the ways which make t-r-soecial. It is ric h in ma.JlL__
tra ditions and has given a special service to many !Ja st c ustomers, and I hope , to
_!Deny future ones. \-le are all aware t hat if we h ad to deoend on the motor vehicles
for which we must · furnish parking spaces, that ~i orth g ate could not ':;e t h e t h r iving
-co mmunity wh ich it is; and certainly co uld not give the measu re of suoport to t h e city
by the_-~·my of tax su pp ort · that we surely.:.iio . Our wal k ing customers and f rien ds bring
us at least ??% of our business. \•le "'oul d li \.::e to off'er t h e !!: ony ad ded co mfort that '·Te
can.
The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible:
This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following
f~ct~: I can see no oossible way that it could be contrary to the public interest
to have a few less people on the walkways a nd curbs by g iving them the alternative of
having a reasonably comfortable olace to eat an ice cre am cone and spend a few relaxed
minutes in a friendly and h ealthy at~osphere. You will have to admit tha t such chances
and op portunities are not tha t a b1mdant in this day And time. The "kids" ,e.s we fo'!'ldly
refer to thet!l even b rin g; their\;. pa rents to see us -an hono r which you may believe
we do not t ake lightly!
The facts stated by me in this application are true and correct.
Oc t ob e r 3 , 19e 2
Date
Blk. I, Lots lA & 2A Boyett
Loupot, J. E.
1201 Walton
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. l, Lot lB & 2B Boyett
George Boyett
l 07 Boyett
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. l, Lot 3,4, & 5 Boyett
Mitchell, A. estate
% H. Mitchell
107 Pershing
College Station, Tx . 77840
Blk. l, Lot 6 Boyett
Martin, Helen S.
P. 0. Box 2
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. l, Lot 7, 8, 11.5' ft of 9 Boyett
Boyett, 0. H. Estate
% L. B. Vance
Horseshoe Bay Box 7807
Marble Falls, Tx. 78654
Blk. l, 21.4' ft. of lt 9A Boyett
Bankston, Norma Sue
ll 03 N. ll th S.t.
Temple, Tx. 76501
61k. l, 3'of 9, lOA, & lOB Boyett
Boyett, A. P. Jr. & W. C.
107 Boyett
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 1, llABoyett
Boyett, Jack
P. 0. Box 1424
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. l, Lot llB Boyett
Li nd 1 ey, L . B.
P. 0. Box 509
114 E. Washington
Navasota, Tx. 77068
Blk. l, Lots 11-C, 12, & 13-A Boyett
Boyett, A. P. Sr. & N. K.
315 Boyett
College Station, TX. 77840
Bl k. 1, Lots 13-B Boyett
Xana Corporation
2500 E. 28th
Odessa, Tx. 77976
~lk. 1, Lots l 3C, l 4B, l 4C, 15, & 16, Boyett
Seeger, Annie Mrs. Est
% Jack Boyett
P. 0. Box 1424
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 1, Lot 14-A Sc 87.44 Ft. Boyett
Boyett Investment
l 07 Boyett
College Station, Tx . 77840
Blk. 2 Lot 12 Boyett
Blk. 1 Lots 19 & 20 Boyett
Baptist Church of College Station
P. 0. Drawer EN
College Station, Tx . 77840
Blk. l, Lot 21 & i~~Boyett
Vance, Marie L. Boyett
Horseshoe Bay Box 7807
Marble Falls, Tx. 78654
Blk. l, Lot 23 Boyett
Bryan, R. A.
1813 Shadowwood
College Station, Tx . 77 84 0
Blk. 6-7, Lot 1-13 Boyett
Presbyterian Church
301 Church
Colle ge Station, Tx . 77840
Blk. 6-7. Lots 14 & 15 l3oyett
Mei Iler Re s2 arch Inc.
P. u. Drawer CB
College Station, Tx . · 77840
Blk. 6-7, Lot 26 Boyett
Johnson, Charles F.
P. 0. Box 10066
College Station, TX. 77840
Blk. 6-7, Lot 27 Boyett
Cowan, Keith
301 College Main
College Station, Tx. 77 84 0
Blk. 6-7, Lots 16, 17 & 25 Boyett
Nelson, Bardin
P. 0. Box 1465
College Station, Tx. 77840
C i ty of C olle g e Station
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 l l 0 l TEX,'\S A VENCE
COLLEGE STATION. TEMS 77840
September 27, 1982
J. E. Robbins
321 University Drive
College Station, Texas 77840
RE: Charlie's Food Market
Dear Mr. Robbins:
It has come to the City's attention that Charlie's Grocery has
recently placed tables and chairs inside t he store. Under
Ordinance 850 -the Zani ng Ordinance for 'the City of Co 11 ege
Station Section 7-B states:
7-B. OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED: In all districts,
for all uses, there shall be provided at t he time any building
or structure is erected or enlarged or increased in capacity,
or at any time any other use is established, off-s treet ,par king
spaces for motor vehicles in accordance with the requirements
specified herein.
The parking requirement for a use utilizing tables and chairs is
1 space for every 3 seats which is greater than the requirement
for a retail operation. Therefore, you must either supply parking
spaces in accordance with Ordinance 850 or remove the ta5les and
chairs. You have twenty (20) days from the date of this letter to
do so. If the conditions of this letter are not met and any
violation of Ordinance 850 is found after twenty (20) days from
the date of this letter a complaint will be filed in Municipal
Court. Convicted violations of Or rlinance 850 are subject to fines
of twenty-five ($25.00) to two hundred ($200.00) dollars for each
day such violation is permitted to exist.
If you have any questions please contact me at 696-886 8 extension 238 .
Sincerel~~
~K ee ct~~ n~. Offi ci a 1
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Mailing Address 1303 Upland Hou s ton, Tex as 77043
~~-~--~--~-~-~---~--'~---~--~-~----~
Phone
Location: Lot \O Block ---
rear
NAME A.DD~{ESS
(From current tax rolls, Colle g e Station Tax Assessor)
.,. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Present zoning of land in question _R-_-_l __ ~_,·_"..,..fJ+-f_e. ___ h..::;o_,.,..._1-'' /'--1'/~-----------
Section of ordinance from which variance is sought _/f:_..L_...c;l.-~b~f_,.e.=:_<A'-'------------
The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested:
_ ___.t_,o'-'--_..e_r._...e_._c_,t_.a.a---:s:uc'-'-r_...e'"""e"'"'nu___...e'-'-n,_,c___.._1 ..... a ..... s:u1u..1 ..1....r..c:e--'w.,._._j ...... t .... h_._1_._· D.u__-1t_chu...c;e__.r_,e"'-':l.a...1.r_l.1...u.0...1.t_~s..s;:e~t--b.a c.k. _ 2 5 f t .
This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of
the land not found in like districts:
Propose to use the exising 12 11 wide masonary wall as part of
the enclosure so that the entire deck s~rrounding the pool would be
·--------
insect free.
·~
The following alt~rnatives to the requested variance are possible:
may be possjb]e to erect seperate screen wall JO' from_.l .o . .:t...line,_h_u_t
would not giye owner the ideal situation that enclousre of the
entire area would.
This va:riance w:i.11 not be contrary to , the public interest by virtue of the follm.Jing
Th e a r e a i s a 1 r e a d y s u r r a u n d e d b y a 6 ' b i g b m a s G.n.r y w a 1 1 a n d
with the mansard type constructjon of the screen enclosure would
hardly be noticable. Also there is a storage type building on the
adjodning lot that backs up to the exising masonry wall and runs the
entire length of the wall. See attached sheet.
The facts stated by me in this applicatfl<)t~ a/Ee true and correct.
Applicant Date
·'
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Page 3
#4 Screen enclosure would not be visible from street or to
property owners adjoining on each side .
13 03 UPLAND • !-J OUSTON , TEXAS 77 043 c 713/984-2488
·.
...
if
i .
'I .l
p~o?_o~t'D .·. s t_((.t-~-
~J\/ c.. I o s uvue
-0
..
..
Blk. 1 Lot 7 Sweet Briar
Martell, Robert D.
1010 Rose Circle
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 1 Lot 8 Sweet Briar
Davis, Donna R.
1030 Rose Circle
College Statton, Tx. 77840
alk. 1 Lot 9 Sweet Briar
Mcllhaney, George R.
1028 Rose Circle
College Sta ti on, Tx. 77840
Blk. 1 Lot 11 Sweet Briar
Hoelscher., Clifford ~E.
1024 Rose Circle
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 1 Lot 12 Sweet Briar
LaField, William C. Jr.
1022 Rose Circle
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2 Lot 7 Sweet Briar
Chiou, Chung Yin
1019 Rose Circle
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2 Lot 8 Sweet Briar
Walla, Walter J.
1017 Rose Circle
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2 Lot 9 Sweet Briar
Prall , Robert L.
1015 Rose Circle
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. 2 Lot 10 Sweet Briar
Workman, Michael E.
1013 Rose Circle
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. A Tr. 1 Carters Grove
Bert Wheeler
1000 Shady Drive
College Station, Tx. 77840
Blk. A Lot C Carters Grove
Charles W. Zipp
1002 Shady Drive
College Station, Tx. 77840
Lot 2 Woodland Estates
Redmond, H.E.
ll 8 Walton Ori ve
College Station, Tx. 77840
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTHEN T FILE NO. ___ _
Name of Applicant Coll e s;e P ::i hh e llen i c Ass n . of C:ol l ege St '3.tio n
Mailing Address ___ r _. __ ._B_o_x_1_2 ___ 2_1~._C_o_l _l~e_s;~e_S_t_a_t_i_o~n_.;..!._,--"'T~e~x~q~s~--'-7~7~8~4~..::._o ___ ~
Phone 6 93 -388 7 (_ennv Ditt on , Panhel . Adv i s e r)
Lo t 1 Tra ct 1 ~ich a r d Ca r t e r Ad di t io n
Location: Lo t3 1 -h Block --Subdivision f-;re e k Vi ll a .g;e 1
Lot s 1-6 Bloc k 1 S u bd i v i s i on 1reek Vi llag e 2
Description, If applicable ---------------------------~
~r ee k V i l la ~e Su b d i v i s io n co ns i s t i n ~ o f e i Qht sor ori t y ho u ses
c o mp l et e d , t he n i n t h to be b t~i 1~·~1 ~t -=b~v--=1~9~8~4~·-·-------------
Action requested: Th :::i.t a dd i t i o n al s i c;n (s ) be =3.l lo ·,"lerl f or o:?a c h res i den c e
wh ic h wo u l d su p p or t fun c tion s i n wh ic h the s tudent r e s i den t s
ar i nvolv e d .
NA}IB ADDRESS
(From current tax rolls, College Station Tax Assessor)
ZONING B0.6J>J) OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.
Present zoning of land in que stion R-6
-------------~
Section of ordinance from which variance is sou3ht __ S'-e~c -=t_,._P...;._>_-""'D'-'''-3"----------
The following specific v2.riation from the ordinance is requested: Th8.t add i tion::i.l
s i qn(s ) p er res i den ce be al l o wed wh ic h woul d sun. p o rt f t " · _ unc ions i n
which the s tu d ent res i den t s are invol v ed (ex .: Rush Wee k , fo o tba ll
~a m es , charity dr i v e s , co mm unity serv i ce pro je ct s , P8.rents ¥ee kend ... ).
This variance is necessary due to the follo\..'in g unique and special conditions of
the land not found in like districts:
-Th i s area o f stude nt b oar d i ng houses e ach wi th close alu mn i
__ s_upervision and re s ident a dv i ser (hou se mo ther), is ve rv w 1 1i ke
i n a pp earance and pu r p o se the a pa rtment co mo l exes th a or d i n anc e
s_
w a~ o r i ~i na ll y wri t t en to co ve r .
The following alternatives to the request ed va:ria n ce are possibl e~ __{n o t ::innl ·~able )
This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following
f~ct~: The n i ne l ot s (8 houses cornnl et:ed h oJJ s;;i n"j just over 350 e oll e:::c
women and one to be com p lete d i n '9 3 or '8 4) are 8.ll t oge ther and
e ither face each o the r (?) or (2 ) f qce condomi i u ms n ri marilv
housin ~ students .
Th2 fact s stated by me in this application ar e true and correct.
Bldg. A, Unit l Sutter's Mill
Bldg. A, Unit 3 Sutter's Mi 11
Bldg. A, Unit 4 Sutter's Mill
Bldg. F, Unit L5 Sutter's Mill
Bldg. F, Unit LB Sutter's Mill
Bldg. G, Unit 33 Sutter's Mill
Bldg. G, Unit 34 Sutter's Mill
Stanford Assn.
P. 0. Box 4106 Bryan, Tx. 77801
Bldg. A, Unit 2 Sutter's Mill
King, Ben R. Etu x
1500 Olympia Way, No. 2
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. A, Unit 5 Sutter's Mill
Buncher, James, Mary, and
7102 Spanky Branch Dr.
Dallas, Tx. 75248
Bldg. B, Unit 6 Sutter's Mill
Lippman, L. F.
1500 Olympia Way, No. 6
College Station, Tx. 77 84 0
Bldg. B, Unit 7 Sutter's Mill
Livingston, Joel E.
1500 Oly mpia , No. 7
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. H, Unit 8 Sutter's Mill
Homeyer, Howard C.
1500 Olympia, No. 8
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. B, Unit 9 Sutter 1 s Mtll
IJwayne, Scott A.
P. 0. Box 4106
Bryan, Tx. 77801
Bldg. C, Unit 10 Sutter's Mill
Columbia Properties
P. 0. Bo x 4106
Bryan, Tx. 77801
Bldg. C, Unit 11 Sutter's Mill
Glassell, Alfred C. Jr.
1500 Oly mp fa Way, Unit 11
College Station, Tx. 778 40
Bldg. E, Unit 18 Sutter's Mill
Bldg. C, Unit 12 Sutter's Mill
303 Anderson Company
3833 Texas Ave. Ste. 400
Bryan, Tx. 77 801
Hldg. C, Unit 13 Sutter's Mil I
Marino, John C.
14703 Bro adgreen
Houston, Tx. 77079
Bldg. D, Unit 14 Sutter's Mi 11
L. F. Lipp man Trust
1500 Olympia Unit 14
College Station, Tx. 77 840
Bldg. U, Unit 15 Sutter's Mill
Harris, Roy H.D.
1500 Oly~pia Unit 15
College Station, Tx. 77 840
8ldg. D, Unit 16 Sutter's Mill
Stein, Hugo H.
1500 Glympia Unit 16
College Station, Tx. 17840
Bldg. IJ, Unit 17 Sutter's Mill
Littman, Charles and Margi
3833 Te xas Ave. Ste B
Bryan, Tx . 77801
Hldg. E, Unit l~ Sutter's Mil I
Ralph, Merry D, Barbara C
1500 Olymp ia Unit 19-E
College Station, Tx . 77840
Bldg. E, Unit LO Sutter's Mil l
Trimble, James W.
1500 Oly mpia Unit 20
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. E, Unit 21 Sutter's Mii l
Chapparel Minerals
1701 SW Parkway
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. E, Unit 22 Sutter's Mill
Green, Uulcie K.
1500 Olympia Unit 22
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. E, Unit 23 Sutter's mi ll
Zingiry, Wilbur L.
1310 Augustine Ct,
College Station, Tx. 77 840
Bldg. F, Unit 24 Sutter's Mill
Nicholls, Bonnie C.
1500 Olympia Unit 24
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg . F, Unit 26 Sutter's Mill
Judge, L. Ke ith Etux
1500 Olympia Way, No. 26
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. F, Unit 27 Sut ter's Mil I
Schwarz Investment Co.
1500 Oly mpia Unit 27
College Station, Tx. 77840
Bldg. G, Unit L9 Sutter's Mill
Rinker. Raymond D. Jr.
1221 Wright Dr.
Nacogdoches, Tx. 75961
Bldg. G, Unit 30 Sutter's Mill
1500 Olympia Unit 30
College Station, Tx. 77840
Abernathy, James M.
Bldg. G, Unit 31 Sutter's Mill
Hope, Henry W.
4U6 Regentwood
Houston, Tx.
Bldg. G, Unit 32 Sutter's Mill
Bishop, George H.
11999 Katy Frwy, Ste-450
Houston, Tx. 7707~
Bldg. G, Unit 35 Sutter's Mil 1
Grinstead, Mildred H.
1500 Olympia Way, Unit 35
College Station, Tx. 77840
Lot 66 C. H. Woodlands
Manning, Kirwin A. Etux
1217 Marstellar St.
College Station, Texas 77840
Lot 67 c. H. Wobdlands
Sutherland, J. P. S.
1220 Munson
College Station, Texas 77840
Lot 86&87 C. H. Woodlands
Trost, Frederick J.
1206 Ashburn Ave. E.
College Station, Texas 77840
Lot 88 C. H. Woodlands
Thurmand, Frank J.
3501 Pkwy Terrace
Bryan, Texas 77801
Lot 89 C. H. Woodlands
Ha 11, Wm S.
804 Gilchrist St.
College Station, Texas 77840
Lot pt 90, pt 91 C. H. Woodlands
Darnell, Rezneat M.
9UO Gilchrist
College Station, Texas 77840
Lot pt 90 C. H. Woodlands
Gladden, James K.
806 Gilchrist
College Station, Texas 77840
Lt. pt 91, pt 92 C. H. Woodlands
Cox, Eleanor R.
906 Gilchrist
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk. Lt. pt 92, 93 C. H. Woodlands
Darron, M. D. Mrs.
910 Gilchrist
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk 5, Lt. 20 University Oaks
Jarmek, Mary Anne
1728 Lake Shore Dr.
Ft. Worth, Texas 76103
Blk 5, Lot 21 University Oaks
Junek, Clifton J.
2913 Broadmoor
Bryan, Texas 77801
Blk 5, Lot 22 University Oaks
Strawser, Robert H.
919 Park Lane
Bryan, Texas 77801
Btk 5, Lot 23 University Oaks
Ruch, Carlton E.
4304 Maywood
Bryan, Texas 77801
Blk 5 Lot 24 University Oaks
Allen, John W.
1406 Post Oak Circle
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk 5, Lot 25 University Oaks
Clark, Roger
829 Dominik
College Station, Texas 77840
Lt 16-1 Woodland Estates
Almanza, Jesse
1001 Dominik Dr.
College Station, Texas 77840
Lt 15-2 Woodland Estates
Coppinger, John T.
1003 lJomi n i k
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk 13, Lot 6 Carter's Grove
James, Wesley P.
754 S. Rosemary
Bryan, Texas 77801
Blk 13, Lot 7 Carter's Grove
Johnson, Jerral D.
1002 Dominik Dr.
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk 13, Lot 8 Carter's Grove
Ramirez, Santos A.
1000 Dominik Dr.
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk 3 Timber Ridge
Blk 2, Lts 1,2,3,4 Timber Ridge
Blk 1, Lts 21,22,23,24 Timber Ridge
Mayfield, John C. Jr.
1700 Puryear #170
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk 2, Lts 21,22,23,24 Timber Ridge
Timber Ridge Venture
1700 Puryear #170
College Station, Texas 77840
Blk 4, Pt Reserve Tr. 6.82 University Oaks
Cripple Creek Partners Ltd.
Property Tax Service Co.
510 Colonial Savings Towe
Houston, Texas 77036
Blk 4, Pt of Reserve Tr. C University Oaks
Ryan Interest Inc.
Property Tax Service Co.
510 Colonial Savings Towe
Houston, Texas .77036
Blk 4, Pt of Reserve Tr. 1.00 University Oaks
French's School Inc.
P.O. Box 4404
Bryan, Texas 77801
Sec. 2, Bk-2, Pt of R Greek Village
Martel, Robert u.
P.O. Box 4106
Bryan, Texas 77801
Blk 13, Lot 13~A Carter's Grove
T.J. Kozik
1010 Dominik Dr.
College Station, Texas 77840
HOME OCCUPATIONS DEFINITIONS
LONGVIEW
A home occupation is an occupation carried on in the home by a member of the occu-
pant's family, without the employment of additional persons, without the use of a
sign to advertise the occupation, without offering any commodity for sal e on th e
premises without th e use of equipment other than that customarily found in a house-
hold and which does not create obnoxious noise or other obnoxious conditions to abut-
ting r es idential property such as emission of odor, incr e ased traffic or gen e ration
of light or smoke, and where the use is carried don in the main structure only. A
home occupation may include the teaching of music in th e home but sp e cifically ex-
cludes the operation of a repair garage, antique shop, beauty shop, barber shop,
plumbing shop or similar sales or service activity.
ODESSA
A home occupation is an occupation carried on as an accessory use in the hone by
a.member of the occupant's family, without the employ ment of additional persons ,
without the use of a sign to advertise the occupation, without offering any co mm o-
dity or service for sale on the premises, which does not involve the storage in the
open of vehicles or material and which does not create obnoxious noise or other
~ obnoxious conditions to abutting residential property such as emission of odor,v
increas e d traffic or generation of light or smo ke, and where the use is carried on
in the main structure only. A home occupation shall specifically exclude the opera-
tion of a repair garage, plumbing shop or similar activity.
Hom e Occupation is further defined:
instructional or economic enterprise
use of a dwelling as a residence and
(l) No person other than members of
An occupation, profession, domestic craft,
carried on, incidential and subordinate to the
which meets all of the following criteri a :
the family who reside in the dwelling may engage
domestic craft, instructional or economic enter-
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
in such occupation, profession,
prise.
The area utilized for home occupation shall not exceed 25 % of the total floor
area of the principal building ...
The appearance of the structure shall not be altered or the occupation be con-
ducted in a manner ;which would cause the premises to differ from its residential
character either by the use of colors, materials, construction, signs, lighting
or the emissions of sounds, noises, or vibrations except as allowed by ordinance.
All material, equipment, and/or supplies shall be completely enclosed and no
exterior storage, temporary or permanent shall be allowed.
An accessory building may be used in conjunction with the activity so long as
the total square footage does not exceed the 25 % maximum under item no. 2 above.
No stocks, goods, wares, or merchandise shall be sold on the premises except
as included in the course of instruction.
Home occupations shall include but not be limited to teaching or tutoring music,
dancing or other arts with instruction limited to six (6) students at any one
time.
Home occupation shall not include:
(a) Barber or beauty shops
(b) Pet grooming
(c) Repair shop on premis e s
' ,
PLAINVIEW
Definitions
Home Occupations Continued
page 2
A 11 home occupation 11 is a business occupation, or profession conducted within a resi-
dential dwelling unit by the resident thereof, and which shall have the following
characteristics:
(a) The activity shall employ only members of the immediate family or the resident
of the dwelling unit.
(b) There shall be no external evidence of the occupation detectable at any lot 1 ine,
said evidence to include advertising signs or displays, smoke, dust, noise,
fumes, glare, vibration, electrical disturbance, storage of materials or equip-
ment, or traffic or parking of vehicles in a manner evidencing the conduct of
a business.
(c) Said home occupation shall not have a separate entrance for the business and
shall not include continual visits by the general public.
Any business, occupation, or profession conducted within a dwelling unit and which
does not meet the aforesaid characteristics shall be construed to be a commercial
activity and shall therefore be cause for the City to order a cease to all such
activity within said dwelling unit.
Home Occupation in Residential Districts
Any occupation that is customarily carried on at home that does not involve a struct-
ural change in the dwelling unit or in a building accessory to the dwelling unit,
/ that does not require the employment of help other than ~enbers of the immediate
family, the installation of equipment or electric moto r s e xc e eding a total 1 imitation
of 3 horsepower per dwelling unit, provided, however, that the fol lowing uses shall
not be permitted as customary home occupations: Any office in which chattels or
goods, wares or merchandise are commercially created, exchaigedor sold; barber or
beauty shops; beauty culture schools; commercial stables or kennels; doctor's office
for the treatment of patients; and of the display of goods.
LUBBOCK
An occupation, profession, domestic-craft, or economic enterprise which is cus-
tomarily conducted in a 11 residential dwelling 11 as hereinafter defined, subject to
compliance with each of ; the following conditions:
11 Residential dwelling" as used in this Section shall mean a detached building
designed, used and occupied exclusively by members of one (l) family as a
residence.
That no person other than members of a family who reside in the residential
dwelling be engaged in such occupation, profession, domestic craft or economic
enterprise.
That such use be and remain incidental and subordinate to the principal use
of the residential dwelling as a family residence and the area utilized for
such occupation, profession, domestic craft or economic enterprise shall never
exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the total of the floor area of the residential
dwelling.
That, to prevent increased traffic congestion in residential areas, no advertising
Definitions
Home Occupations Continued
page 3
of the occupation, profession, domestic craft or enterprise be conducted by
means of any commercial communication media, or by the use of any other device
such as a sign, display, handbills, or other visible indication thereof dis-
played inside or outside the residential dwel 1 ing.
That the residential dwelling shall
maintain its residential character and shall not be altered or remodeled in
order to create any type of exterior commercial appeal.
That no exterior storage of material, equipment and/or supplies used in con-
junction with such occupation, profession, domestic craft or enterprise be
placed, permitted or allowed on the premises occupied by the residential dwell-
ing.
That there be no offensive noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odors, heat or glare
beyond the property lines.
That such occupation, profession, domestic craft or enterprise be wholly within
the residential dwelling and no accessory building be used in conjunction there-
with.
That no stock, goods, wares or merchandise be sold or kept for sale on the premises.
That only equipment be used in such occupation, professional, domestic craft
or enterprise that is ordinarily used in a private home in a 1 ike amount and
kind.
Provided, however, this Section shal 1 not be constructed as applying to 11 Home
Beauty Shops 11 as defined in Section 2.30 except as otherwise provided therein.
AUSTIN
Home Occupation is grouped under the definition of 11 Accessory Use 11 in Austin.
/Accessory use is defined as a use customarily incidental and subordinate to the
main use; provided further, that a use is an accessory use in a 11 811 residence
or more restrictive use f district only if the use is located on the same lot as
the main use.
11 SR 11 Suburban Residence Districts: Accessory uses, which shall include the fol-
lowing where the primary use is residential: (1) Customary home occupation, such
as dressmaking, seamstress, tailoring, millinery, tutoring, when engaged in by
members of the resident family and employing not more than one person not a member
of the resident family, but not including beauty culture, barbering or appliance
repairing ...
RICHARDSON
Home Occupation, as used in this ordinance, shall mean an occupation customarily
carried on in a dwelling unit by a member of the occupant 1 s family, being inci-
dental to the primary occupancy of the home as a dwelling; without offering,
display or advertising of any commodity or service for sale on the premises;
without the employment of any persons other than a member of the immediate family;
without the use of any sign, 1 ighting or display; without the use of other than
domestic or household equipment or appliances, and the conduct of which does not
generate noise, odor, fumes, vibration or any other condition visible, obnoxious
or detrimental to abutting or adjacent properties.
PORT ARTHUR
Definitions
Home Occupations Continued
page 4
Home Occupation (Residential) :a home occupation is an occupation carried on as an
accessory use in the home by a member of the occupant's family, without the
employment of additional persons, without the use of a sign to advertise the occu-
pation, without offering any commodity or service for sale on the premises, which
does not create obnoxious noise or other obnoxious conditions to abutting resi-
dential property such as emission of odor, increased traffic or generation of
1 ight or smoke, and when the use is carried on in the main structure only. A
home occupation shall specifically exclude the operation of a repair garage, plumb-
ing shop or similar activity.
Home Occupation (Professional) -An office for a doctor, dentist, attorney,
engineer, architect or similar professional person located in the dwelling, which
is accessory to the primary use of the premises for residential purposes, and
which is 1 imited to one non-resident employee. A name plate or professional identi-
fication sign similar to a name plate may be used to identify the occupation or
professional person. A home occupation shall specifically exclude the operation
of a beauty shop or similar activity.
TYLER
Any occupation or activity not involving the conduct of a business which is clearly
incidental and secondary to use of the premises for dwelling purposes and which is
carried on wholly within a main building or accessory building by a member of
a family residing on the premises, in connection with which there is no advertising
other than an identification sign of not more than one square foot in area and no
other display or storage of materials or exterior identification of the home occu-
pation or variation from the residential character of the main building or accessory
building; and in connection with which no person outside the family is employed and
no equipment used which creates offensive noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odor, heat
or glare. A home occupation shall include the use of the premises by a physician,
surgeon, dentist, lawyer, clergyman or other professional person for consulta-
tion or emergency treatment but not for the general practice of his profession.
A home occupation shall not includ~ ~ntique shops, beauty culture schools, beauty
parlors, barber shops, or businesses or institutions of 1 ike character or any
occupation or activity ~hich amounts to the conduct of a business.
MI OLAND
Customary Home Occupations: An occupation customarily carried on in the home by
a member of the occupying family without structural alterations in the building
or any of its rooms; without the installation or use of machinery or additional
equipment, other than that customarily incident to normal household operations;
without the employment of additional persons not members of the household; without
the use of a sign to advertise the occupation; without involving the conduct of a
business or offering any commodity for sale on the premises; which does not cause
~a generation of excessive traffic in the street and which does not involve visits
to the premises from the public or any members thereof in the capacity of 11 cl ients 11 ,
11 patient 11 or 11 customers 1,1 or similar capacities as a daily routine matter; and which
does not create obnoxious noise or other conditions obnoxious to abutting residential
property. A customary home occupation must be an incidental use to one of the
principal uses permitted in the district and shall never be permitted as a principal
use but only as a secondary use when otherwise in compliance with the above standards.
Customary home occupations shall not include barber shops, beauty shops, carpenters'
shops, electricians' shops, plumbers' shops, tinners' shopps, radio or TV shops,
auto repairing, auto painting, furniture repairing, or sign painting, or other
similar uses.
KINGSVILLE
Definitions
Home Occupations Continued
page 5
Home occupations are not 1 isted as a permitted use in any district, but are considered
incidental uses if all tests can be met. The occupation must be conducted by a
family member residing in the dwelling. The occupation cannot result in the keeping
of any stock or the selling of any commodity on the premises. No person may be
employed other than a family member living on the premises. No mechanical equipment
can be used which would be obnoxious or offensive due to vibration, noise, odor ,
dust, smoke or fumes. Signs are not permitted. Beauty culture schools, beauty
shops, barber shops and dancing schools are not home occupations.
AMARILLO
A home occupation is an occupation carried on in the home by a member of the occupant's
family, without the employment of additional persons and without offering any commo-
dity for sale to the general public on the premises, and without the keeping of
stock for trade, and without the storage of supplies and equipment, and with only
the use of a nameplate to identify the occupation. Said occupation must not create
obnoxious noise or other obnoxious conditions to abutting residential property,
such as emission of odors, increased traffic, or generation of 1 ight or smoke.
Home occupations are allowed in all zoning districts except Surface Drainage Districts.
.... DEFINITIONS
CUSTOM PERSONAL SERVICE SHOP -Longview, Texas
Tailor, dressmaker, shoe shop or similary shop offering custom service.
Permitted in Neighborhood Service District, General Retail District, Commercial
District, Commercial District, Central Business District, Light Industrial
District, Heavy Industrial District and Planned Development District
Prohibited in Agricultural District, One-Family Dwelling District, Two Family Dwelling
Districts, Multiple Family Dwelling Districts, Parking District and
Office Districts.
CUSTOM PERSONAL SERVICE -Odessa, Texas
Tailor, dressmaker, shoe shop or similar shop offering custom service.
Permitted in University, Neighborhood Service, Retail, Central Business, Commercial
Light Industrial, Heavy Industrial, and Planned Development Districts.
Prohibited in Future Development, Single Family Residences, Two Family Residences,
General Residential, Multiple Family Residential, Mobile Home and
Parking Districts.
Specific Use Permits issued in Office Districts.
CUSTOM PERSONAL SERVICE -Port Arthur, Texas
Tailor, dressmaker, shoe shop or similar shop offering custom service.
Permitted in Neighborhood Service, Retail, Light Commercial, Downtown, Heavy
Commercial, Light Industrial, Heavy Industrial ,Marine and Planned Development
Districts.
Prohibited in Agricultural, Residential (all), Mobile Home, Parking and Office
Districts.
1
CUSTOM PERSONAL SERVICE -Kingsville, Texas
Not defined in ordinance. Such services are prohibited in all residential and
industrial districts. Personal services are permitted in all of the City's Commer-
cial (retail and commercial) Districts.
CUSTOM PERSONAL SERVICE -Amarillo, Texas
Tailor, dressmaker, shoe shop or similar shop offering custom service.
Not allowed in any residential district. Limited only to Neighborhood Service
districts, and retail, commercial and industrial districts.