Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout56 Regular Meeting 11.22.77AGENDA ZONING BO.ARD OF ADJ1JS'1MENT November 22, 1977 7:30 P. M. 1. Consideration of the minutes of the meeting of October 18, im. 2. Consideration of a request for variance from. Tony Jones Const. Company at 308-310 .Amherst Drive. 3. Consideration of a request for variance from H & S Tires, Inc. at 509 University Drive. 4. Other Business 5. Adjourn ( ! J • I l - 1 ( I I -I NEMBiillS P?..ESENT: HEMBERS J.13SENT: VISITORS: Agenda Item No. 1 MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 18, 1977 7:30 P. M. Chairman Sandra Runnels; Members John Hughey, Henry Hawley, Janet Storts; Council Liaison Larry Ringer; Building Official; Bill Koehler Tom Comstock Don Morrison, Mark Black, Betty Young Apuroval of the minutes of the meeting of July 19, 1977. H:tghey moved that the minutes be approved as read.. The motion was seconded by Storts and unanimously approved. Agenda Item No. 2 ~ Consideration of an appeal from Interlock, Inc. at 1524 Wolf Run. Koehler reviewed the actions taken and the considerations expressed in the records forwarded to the Board. Mr. Morrison asked that the order be stayed until such time as the property was sold. Mr. Black stated that he felt that enforcement of the ordinance was necessary to maintain the land use integrity of all residential zones, no matter how seemingly insignificant the violation. Hughey and Ringer pointed out it was not a prerogative of the Board to modify land use and that resulting hardship was the result o:f the owner's actions rather than the City's regulations. Runnels moved that a variance be granted to allow the business to continue until the property was sold. The motion was seconded by Ringer and failed by the following vote: For: None Against: Runnels, Storts, Hughey, Hawley, Ringer Ringer moved that the Board recommend the Building Official to allow' seven days for the business to move to other quarters and cease activities at this location. The motion -was seconded by Hughey and unanimously approved. Agenda Item No. 3 ~ Consideration of a request for variance from Joe Ferreri at ilO Texas Avenue. Koehler reviewed the applicant's statements in the application and pointed out that the requirement to move the sign from its present location arose from enforcement of the Traffic Code. He added that the City Engineer had reviewed the application and agreed that marking the entrance would enhance traffic flo~ through the street intersection. Mrs. Young said it would be preferable to leave the sign as it was and that mowing it into the parking lot would create a hazard _to traffic in the lot. I ; ( ' HHJUTES, Zoning Board of Adjustment October 18, 1977 .l:'age ~ The Board observed that they could not vary the Traffic Code and the sign would have to be removed or relocated, and that the applicant 1 s statements concerning relocation were correct. Hughey nov~ that a variance be granted to the liJni t of one sign per building plot and in addition that a variance to the ten foot minimum set- back be granted to allow the sign to be as close to the property line as possible. The motion was seconded by Hawley and unanimously approved. Agenda Item No. 4 --Other Business. Koehler mentioned the memorandum of September 26, 19?7 concerning home occupations and said that no notice of appeal had been received. The Board discussed implications of the interpretation. Agenda Item No. 5 .--.Adjourn. Hughey moved that the meeting be adjourned. The motion was seconded by Storts and unanimously approved. ATTEST Secretary I ,, APPROVED Chairman J I CITY OF COLLEGE STATION POST OFFICE BOX 9960 11 01 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 November 17, 1977 MEMORANDUM TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment FRDM: Building Official SUBJECT: Meeting of November 22, 1977 1. Variance request from Tony Jones Construction Company: The attached plat shows the location of the structure. The error in location was discovered by the surveyor at the prep- aration of the house plat for closing of the sale and was brought to our attention by the builder. We would normally have caught this at the slab inspection before the pour, and at a time wen it would be feasible to move the forms. In this case it -was not apparent that the slab was out of place, and neither the builder nor I noticed that there was a problem. The builder' s foreman tells me that they set up the house from a nail set to mark the center of the cul-de-sac. Apparently the mark used was not wat they thought it was. This is an easy mistake to make, and one Wich occasionally befalls ex- perienced surveyors. The error appears to be purely unintentional and one which a builder would not ordinari;lJ..y have discovered on ·an odd shaped lot until a final survey was made. The only alternative to variance would be to demolish and rebuild a major part of ·the structure. The location on the cul-de-sac will make no notice- able di:ffere..~ce in app~ara..~ce, and all other yard area requirements a.re raet or exceeded. 2. Variance request from H & S Tires, Inc.: The appli~ant requests a variance to the setback and size and height require- ments of the ordinance in order to re-construct a sign on an existing pedestal Wich was in use for a similar sign from 1967 to about 1976. A photograph will be available at the meeting showing the proposed sign in relation to the surrounding existing sign. . I I Zoning Board of Adjustment November 17, 1977 !'age ~ The non-conf'ormi ty of the buildings and other signs in this block would appear to render a conf'orming detached sign practically invisible on this site • ?:::.;e 2 of' 2 ?.2:~\.Jl"::ST FOR V !,_rt_IJ.l:CE ?resent zon;ng of land in -question~ R-2 Section of ordina.:.~ce from which variance is sought 5-D (Table "A") ~~~~~"'--~-~~.:...-~---~ 'I!:e following spe:::ific variation from the ord:i.na'lce is requested: __ T_o __ e_?:~~~d __ _ front -setback on existing structure placed in eITor. Tr.Lis variance is necessa.7 due to the following unique a11d special conditions of the land not found in li..~e districts: New Duplex constructed over setback on cul-de-sac. Error not discovered until house complete. The follo....r.....ng alternatives to the requested variance are possible=~---~~-­ Demolish structure · Th:i s variance will not be contrary to the public interest by Virtue of the follow...ng facts: All other setback requ.;Lrements are exceeded. Location on cul-de-sac ~-~-~------:-'--_..;....;... __ ~~-------'~-----.--~-~---~--- "1ill not render the encroachment noticeable. Does not :interfere 'With utilities. Tne facts stated by me in this application are true and correct. Au-olicant Date PZv"IEW AND COMMENT: Building Official: This was not discovered at the slab inspection by our inspector. The builder discovered the eITor upon final survey and brought it to our attention. _ -9._5e 2 o.f 2 File Ho~--------- ?.Z ·~iES'l' FO.:t VA ... Ufi'ICE ?resent zon;ng of la.~d in question CoJ:::]I:).ercial Service Station Section. of c:::-dina..'1.ce fro::i tmich variance is sought __ s_e_c_t_i_o_n_3_-_D _________ _ 'Ih.e follc;.,1.n.g specific variation from the ordina.11ce is requested: __ _ '.lo place our sign on an existing foundation we neccessarily Yi.11 be closer to the street than 10 feet. This variance is necessa..ry due to the follou:i.ng unique-a.11d special conditions of the land not found in like districts~ The property has been and is a service ·station automotiye -repair Tire store Building, and has and existing foundation for a sign •. The ·sign. is an Oil Company Bra..11d ~ign .. similar to Conpeti ti_ve Brands adjacent and in the area. The follow....ng alternatives to the requested variance are possible: T do not see an alta."Y'!lative because of l imited space and practicalit~:y_._. ______ ~ Tb.is variance ui-11 not be contrary to the public interest by v:irtus of the follouing .facts: T:.'"le requested sign _ l. Will not. hinder line of sight from any"1llere ·2. ' Will not take any .nev ground space (existing foundation) 3. · Will not be gaudy nor unattractive for this business zone. The facts stated by me in this application are true and correct_ Applicant Date HEilIEW' J.1-ill COMMENT: Building Official:_---------------------- I 'CD I I . . ~ . r · .. . ' ... , .. --...... (--cs ~ c. ~ .. __ _; I _:;(i/1 T -g;y!JCA..-;;~:rw~,-;-:-~ -~--~ -...... TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN : The Zoning Board of Ad justment will consider a request for variance from H & S Tires , Inc . at their c alled mee t ing in the Council Room of the College Station City Hall at 7 :30 p . m. on Tuesday , November 22 , 1977, the nature of the case b eing as follows : The applicant requests a variance to the sign setback provisions of the Zoning Ordinance in order to construct a sign at 509 University Drive. Further information is available at the office of the Building Official of the City of College Station . William F . Koehler Building Offi cial TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN : The Zoning Board of Adjustment will consider a request for variance from Tony Jones Construction Company at their called meeting in the Council Room of the College Station City Hall at 7 :30 p . m. on Tuesday , November 22, 1977, the nature of the case being a s follows: The applicant requests a variance to the front setback re- quirement of the Zoning Ordinance in order to occupy a duplex constr-Qcted over the line in error at 308 -310 Amherst Court. Further information is available at the office of the Building Official of the City of College Station. William F . Koehler Building Official CITY OF COLLEGE STATION POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 November 17, 1977 MEMORANDUM TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment FROM: Building Official SUBJEDT: Meeting of November 22, 1977 1. Variance request from Tony Jones Construction Company: The attached plat shows the location of the structure. The error in location was discover ed by the surveyor at the prep- aration of the house plat for closing of the s ale and was brought to our attention by the builder. We would normally have caught this at the slab inspection before the pour, and at a time when it would be feasi ble to move the forms. In this case it was not apparent that the slab was out of place, and neither the builder nor I noticed that there was a problem. Th e builder's foreman tells me that they set up the house from a nail set to mark the center of the cul-de-s ac. Apparently the mark used was not what they thought it wa s . This is an easy mistake to make, and one which occasionally befalls ex- p erienced surveyors. The error appears to be purely unintentional and one which a builder would not ordinarilly have dist:rnvered on an odd shaped lot until a final survey was made. The only alternative to variance would be to demolish and rebuild a major part of the structure . The location on the cul-de-sac will make no notice- able difference in a pp earance, and all other yard area requirements are met or exceeded . 2. Variance request from H & S Tire s , Inc.: The applicant reque s ts a variance to the setback and size and height require- ment s of the ordinance in order to re-construct a sign on an existing pedestal which was in u se for a similar sign from 1967 to about 1976. A photograph will be available at the meeting showin g the proposed sign in relation to the surrounding existing sign . Zoning Board of' Adjustment November 17 , 1977 Page 2 The non-conf'ormity of' the buildings and other signs in this block would appear to render a conf'orming detached sign practically invisible on this site . AGENDA ZONING BOARD OF ADJUS™-ENT November 22 , 1977 7:30 P. M. 1 . Consideration of the minutes of the meeting of October 18, 1977 . 2. Consideration of a request for variance from Tony Jones Const . Company at 308 -310 .Amherst Drive . 3. Consideration of a request for variance from H & S Tires , Inc . at 509 University Drive . 4. Other Business 5. Adjourn ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REVIEW AND Cm•fi'.1ENT : Fire Mar s ha l The Zoning Board of Adjustment has examined the facts presented herein and - reflected in the minutes of the public meeting of and have determined that the requested variance (IS / IS NOT) contrary to the public interest and that unique and special conditions (DO /DO NOT) exist as stated herein and as reflected in the minutes of the Board's proceedings and the -variance as requested herein (IS / IS NOT) approved subject to the following terms and conditions: Chairperson, Zoning Board of Adjustment Date Filed NOTE: Any person or persons or any tax~ayer or any officer, department, board, commission or committee of the City, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Adjustment, may present to a court of record a petition, verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in whole or in part, specifying the grounds of the illegality. Such petition shall be presented to the court within ten (10) days after the filing of the decision in the office of the Board. .~.