HomeMy WebLinkAbout99 Agency Records Control 3.20.79 3001 Bypass. .
1.
2.
3 .
4 .
5 .
6.
7 .
\
,.
Al1E ND ED AGENDA
ZO NI NG BOJ\RD OF ADJUS TMENT
:MARCH 20, 1979
7:00 p.rn.
Approval of the minut e s from the me eting of Februa ry 20, 1979.
~ Consideration of a request for a non-conforming use from
Robert Nash, 301 Poplar Street.
Consideration of a req uest for a variance from the set-back
requirement from D. ·R. Cain, Construction Co., ·at 2817 Celinda
Circle .
Consideration of a request for the e"-'J)ansion of a non-confor ming
use from Jerry :Majors, The Dawg House, 107 c·ollege Avenue .
Consideration of a variance from the Agency Records Control, 3001
East Bypass.
Other bu.siness .
Adjourn.
I
--I
C ITY OF COLLEGE STATION
PO S T OF F I CE BO X 9960 11 01 T E X A S A V E NU E
COLL E GE ST A TION, T E X AS 7 784 0
March 16 , 1979
MEMORANDUM
TO :
FROM
SUBJECT:
Zoning Board of Adjustment
. /'l /'#/~
Building Official /111-.
Meeting of March 20 , 1979
1 . The request for variance at 2817 Celinda results from
the builders having erred in locating -the house on the lot .
This is a very easy mistake to make on a cul-de-sac , and
it is also likely to escape the notice of the inspector .
The problem in this case was discovered by the surveyor
preparing a plat for finance purposes .
The house has been completed since June , 1 978 . The hard-
ship involved in removing it is obvious . The problem is
difficult to disc ern ~dthout measurement and the purp ose
of open space requir ements on thi s l ot a ppears to be ful-
filled .
2 . Mr . Nash should be present to explain hi s request . T-wo
of t he persons notified have expressed their opposi tion t o
the proposal.
Mr . Nash has erected a temporary structure whi ch ~d ll have
to be removed if it is not portable . We have not investi-
gated the structure at this time .
\
~ I I ~ "1
i
I
i
I
MEMBERS PRESENT :
MEMBERS ABSENT :
VISI TORS:
MENUTES
ZO:trING BOARD OF ADJU STMENT
February 20 , 1979
Acting Chairman Harper; Mem b er s DuBois,
Jones , Rin ger
Ha vl ey , Hu ghe¥
-
Building Official Ko ehle~, Mr. Ron Smes tuen,
Mr . Jerry Majors
Ag end a' Item Nmn'oer 1 --Approval of the minutes of the meeting of
January 16 , 1979:
Ringer moved that the minutes be approved as presented . The motion
~as seconded by DuBois and un animously approved.
Aaenda Item Number 2 --Con s id er a tion of a request for expansio.!}
of a no n -conf orming use from Ron Sme stuen :
Mr . Sm estuen explained that h e propo sed to add to a non-conforming
sigri to accomodate a n e v tenna nt. He said that h e also intended.
to r emove th e arrovs as a part of thi s construction vhich vou.ld
reduc e the span and apparent area of the sign.
Koehl er expla in ed that th e sign va s non-conforming because of
a moving portion and because it i s part of a building 1-hich exists
because of a varianc e to setba ck regulations.
The Chair mov ed that the request b e approved on the condition that the
arrovs be removed b ecause the proposal 1-1'.ill reduce the degree of
non-conformity and i~ll r educe any adverse effect on the public 's ·
interest . The motion was second ed by Ringer and unanimously approved.
Agenda Item Number 3 --Other Business :
Koehler pres ented material received from Mr . Nash for the purpose
of d etermining whether or not there vas sufficient information to
varrant a h earing on the case. The Board agreed that Mr . Nash '.~ -
pre sence vould be n ec essary to the case b eing heard.
Ag enda Item Numbe r 4 --:-Ad.iourn:
Ther e being no other business the meeting i as declared adjourned .
..
City of C·Jllege Station
llOl Texas Jlven!le
C 11ege Stition , Texas 77840
Attention: 'Ihe Zoning Board of ~djustment
Gentlemen :
Re: 301 Poplar , College Station, Texas
3735 West Bay Circle
Dallas, Texas 75214
March 17, 1979
I ha~e received your notice regarding the request for a non-conforming
structure on the aboue-captioned lot.in the mail today . Inasmuch as I
reside in Dallas and it is impossible for me to rearrange-ry w rk schedule
on such short notice to be able to be present at the meeting on Tuesday,
Ma rch 20 , 1979 , I vl;}!.lld like to submit this letter as a protest .
I own the lot directly adjacent t::> the lot in qu estion . My con c ern is
that granting this variance could cause some problem in the future.
If a new building were erected on my lot, and if I am correct in inter-
preting the set-back cited on the information sheet for ~p Zoning to be
the same ·as that of C Zoning , vJhich would permit lot line b:rl.lding, this
would not leave the necessary 15 feet between structures . lllso , I am
conc erned that if I v-1ere b sell my lot in the ftrture, the overbuilding
on the adjacent lot might might be harmful to the iJal!.le of my pr::>perty.
Therefore, I do not feel this 1.1ariance should be arbitrarily granted
nor is:· essential,since there is adequate space to bu.ild this structure
within the permitted area on the l,t.
\Jh ile I f eel there is n hardship involved, b!lt merely a preference,
which v1ould not seem to me to be adequate gro:mds for violating the City
Ordinance, I d:> not want to inconvenience the adjoining owner and would
have no objectiJn t~ his erecting a portable structure to serve his
purpose in the set-back area, as it could be moued later on if necessary.
Sincerely yours ,
-~.rt )J_J,f-
N. · J . Uilcox
___ ---: ' . t
0
~··
Tos
The Zo n ing Bo a rd of Adjustment
Froms
Ro be rt Nas h
J01 Poplar
Colleg e St ation Texas
77 EJ!+D
I am writing this letter to explain why I mus t violate
the set ba ck distance on my property from b e nty five feet
to sixteen f e et.
The reason is that I want to maintain sixteen feet from
tha house , the fence on tha b a ck side and the fence in
the front of the building on Eisenho~er st ••
I am going to build a twelve foot by twenty four foot
carport and storage building,mostly storage.It will be
built with 2/4-framing with T_111 siding and composition
roofing on a hip roof.
The lot is #5 in the College Vista division BK.B. It is
on the co ~ner of E is e nho~er and Poplar. It is zon e d R/2
duplex ••
A small plan is attached:
Than:C you,
f?~J-U/j(j_.d/l_)
Robert Na s h
... ,,
• . . . r-·-----. ------···-·-
r r
!
I
' ' ! .
'
I
I
I
I
·l
j
I
t-!
I
l
I
i
I
I
!
I
I
I
I"" ~-C: 'f'\: ""T..:.Ll \ __ JY __ ~I . --;(
~! /' ; /, __ -------/ . --I
. : / . . ·."' -,,· ~ _I/._ -"\ ,-
/ ___ _ f\ \-----·-. _·_ - -\
/":-l 1..1 "11 ~-\ -..=.-;.
I
I
I
I
. ;
t
;
f
i
i
!
1 f
f\.\
-----... ---------·-
City of Colleg e Station
Post Office Box 996o
110l Texas ~v e nue
College Station, Texas
J a nuary 23 1979
Dear Sire
This letter is in referance to the storage building
I want to build. First of all I recieved a letter
from City Hall saying there would be a meeting on
Tuesday night but it didnt say tbat I had to be
their. ·But · the r~a son I mi s sed the me e-ting was · -
because I had to work late.I typed the information
asked for and boug ht it in to Niss Albraght
But ·my problem is if I move the storage building
closer to the house I would have to cut down a
tree that I want to save.And if I join it to the
house I would have to cut some large limbs off
atree and that would kill the tree.Also it would
make it hard to get a concrete truck in to pour
.a slab for an add on to the house.
The ~is zoned for duplex and sometime in the
f}/1Cft
future Ihave int entions of adding on between the
! ~ I.
house and storage building.If this plan would be
approved now, this would result in a lower construction
cost in the future.
Your consideration on this would be appreciated.
T~~2z~ R~~rt ·G Nash
77840
•
..CIT Y OI<' ,,.., 0 : T I ·11 ·' G -~,, 'l.~ . -.--4 A JL.::...1 ~-"" . . .
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 l i 01 TEX/\S .AVENLIF
COLL EGE STAflON, TE XAS 778/,0
J anuary 18, 1979
Hr. Rob er t Nash
301 Poplar
College Station, Texas 7784fJ
Dear Hr. Nash:
Th e Zoning Board of Adjustment considered your application
for variance and con cluded that they Ii.ad no information ·upon
which to oase a decision. Your request was denied by unan-
imous vote.
Th e Bo ard is required by ordinance and by statute to grant
varianc es only when th e following facts are s hown by testi-
mony or othe r evid ence submitted by th e applicant:.
1. Th e re is some unique and sp ecial condition of the land
not normally found in like di s tricts.
2. Following the r equirements of the ordinance would
result in unnecess ary hardship .
3. Approval will not be contrary to the public interest.
The Board cannot grant any variance where all of these facts
are not proven.
In view of the waste of public time and money due to inadequate
information, I have directed Hrs. Albrecht not to advert i se
any further application until the Chairman has examined your
application .and agrees to admit it to the agenda. Obviously,
I cannot issue any Building Permit with the layout you have
submitt e d unless the Bo ard approves it.·
Sincerely) . ·] .·,, I·.~_/"/:/ .. ---/~~'j/_. ,.
/,~, / //~·· · .... , --, / .. ' . /. -'//.·1 ////:--~:--/ {/:/-/,"' /! .. ~ -(,;:.-... ~ ... >/· / / ~~ ,.,..,._..-L
William F . Koehler
Building Official
WFK /rm
,1.C/..'l'IC:i?J
H~ne -of Ap .l_)lic cm t ___ D_. __ R . __ C_a_1_· n'-'---
_.<la.res~ 3002 South Texas, Coll ege St a tion ,_T~x.as or ]2......Q.,_B.ill:--1\.Y~ con e.ge
Sta t i on, T exa_s
Pb one 0 9 3-8 8 5 0 _ _.ot Block Subcli vi sion
Description , If a.'pplica b.Le -----------------
Action requested: ·'Awea J
\-.L '
·i ~a~s~fur~~ing _____________________________ _
'\djoiners notified --Mailing Da te -------------------------
1UJ ·1E .ADDRESS
From current . tax rolls , Colle ge S t a tion Tax As sessor
1. Dr. Moses Chung 2813 Ce li nda C i r c 1 e ,_c_g""""l.Jg_g_e StatiQD~xa s
2 . l·:ir . Jim Sh e lby 2815 Ce lind a Circl e , Coll ege Sta ti on , ~xas
3. Mr. Roy Car ne y ~ 2819 Celinda Circle , Colleg e Station , Texas
. 4. Mr . Mike Jones 2816 Ce linda Circle , Colleg e Station , 'i'ex a s
5 . Do ni , Inc . P .O . Bo x AV , College Station , Texas
,. I'-1r • Gary B rown 2810 Ce_l inda,Circ l e, Co)Je ge Station, rr 9x ~ 0 .
7 . fl.~r . ·George All en ?808 Celi nda CircJ e , CoJl~g@ Station , 'T',
8. -Joe Cou rtn e y,-Ioc. :e . Q. }2 Q y 41QS , 'Bryan. Texas •
9 . Joe Courtn ey , Inc. P.O . Box 4305 , Bryan , Texa s
10 . Joe Courtney, Inc . P .O . Box 4305 , Brya n , Texas
11 . Jo e Courtney , Inc. P. 0. ·Box 4305 , Bryan, Texas ·
12 . Jo e Courtney , Inc . P .O. Box 4305 , Bryan , T exas
Chairma n
Planning and Zoning Commiss ion
City of College Station
Col lege S ta tion, T exas 778 4 0
Dear Si r:
COfVlPf-\NY
INCO RPORATE D
HOME B UILDER --LA ND DEllELOPEl?--APARTM E NT O WNER
March 14, 1979
I he r e by request a variance for Lot 26, Block 26, Southwood
Valle y , S ec tion D, loc ally known as 281 7 Cel ind a Circl e , Coll ege
Station, Texas .
This residence i s located on a culd esac and when loc ating th e
house fro m the cente r of the culd e sac an encroachment was ma de df .
the building lin e . This overs ight was not caught and therefore ,
the house was placed with a portion of the garage extend in g in t o
the buildi ng lin e (see attached survey).
Sincere ly,
D. R. Cain
DRC: j c
A ttachemen t 1
3002 SOUTH TEXAS AVENUE --COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 --(71 3) 693-8850
MA I LING ADDRESS: POST O FFICE BOX "AV" COLL EGE STATION, TEXAS 778 40
CIT Y OF COLLEGE STATION
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 11 01 TEXAS . AVENU E
COLL EGE STAT ION, TEXAS 77 840
March 20 , 1979
MEM ORANDUM
TO :
FROM :
SUBJECT :
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Building Offic ial j/~/
Variance, Agency Records Control
1. The applicant claims that the ordinance does not define
a plot of land . This i s incorrect .
Section l-D.14 specifically defines a building plot as being
llbounded by the property line11 •
Whe n Section 8-D .6 prohibits more t han one detached sign on
any one building plot , it is speaking of that area of land
under one o \.Jllership vathout regard to any number of contiguous
seperately described tracts of which the ownership may be com-
posed, and without r egard to any l eases or other private agree-
ments .
2 . The fact of so l arge an area of land being restricted to
one sign appears illogical, but it is certainly not unique .
Most of the recently developed retail connnercial tracts have
simil ar frontage and , in addition , have multitudes of seperate
tennants with more definable outdoor advert i sing needs . They
abide by thi s ordinance as it is ~~itten .
3. The applic ant does not attempt to show any element of
hardship . If the app licant has funds available for outdoor
advertising , a portion of these funds may well be required to
remove the existing sign . The planning and graphic de sign he
may have to do to combine the purposes of both signs into one
structure are not unusual requirement s and are done regularly
by other businesses of lesser size and , presumably , les ser
resources .
Page 2
4. The applicant does not address the public interest. In my
opinion, the public interest would be served best by a regu-
lation which would recognize the obvious differences between ·
a 37 acre tract with frontage on major roads which are not
intervi s ible, and a 50 foo t wide commercial lot in a strip
of s u ch lot s . Thi s , however , i s a legislative function which
should lie with the City Council.
If the Board grants thi s variance, we may be assured of an
inundation of such requests and wo uld have no means to decide
aIDong t hem . The Council, if they saw fit to change the ordi-
nance, could also specify the criteria · wh ich would justify
more than one sign. ~
5. I recomme nd that the Board con s ider denial of the variance
and r e commend to the applicant and to the Council that the
present ordinanc e be amended with re s pect to the number of
detached signs on large tracts . The applicant may initiate
such a change in the same fashion that 11 re-zoning11 petitions
are made.
·.
C . W all is McMa th , J r .
Vice Pres i dent-Engineering
March ~' 1979
) r', J. fJc, 1 r 4
~ .
Ms. Sherry L. Albrecht
City of Co llege Station
P. O. Box 9960
ecor
B . .' .
College Station, TX 778 4 0
Dear Ms . Albrecht:
,-
'
c
Tl ." d
~. -. '
The primary reason for appearing before the Zoning Board of
Adjustment is to request a clarification, and variance if
necessary~ to allow Agency Records Control, Inc. to install
a second detached sign on its property.
In addition to the above request , ARC currently has a park-
ing variance in effect and wishes to inform the Zoning
Board of Adjustment of a minor change to one of the existing
buildings. Either myself or some other ARC representative
will be present at the meeting to answer questions anyone
might have. If you have any questions prior to the meeting,
please give me a call.
Sincerely ,
~~·4A
C. Wallis McM~thi Jr.
CWM:km
..
•· .!:'"'ct g t": I ·..>.1... "-·. ;.pp L ICA1I O?~ /,pplica·Lion D ~:t c --------
Re c 'd by --------
Ad dr e s s 3001 East By-P ass , College Station , Texas 77 840
P hon e 713-6 9 3 -612 2 Lot Bloc :~ Subd.iv-i.c;i on (S e e Attached ) ---· ------
Action r eque sted : (l 1pp eal , Noncon fo:rming Use, Var i anee) Vari._·_a_n_c_e ______ _
, Adjoin e:i::-s notified -Na i ling Date ---------------~~------~
NAl·ill JJJDRESS
Froill curr ent t ax: rolls , College Station Tux As s essor
Hal Dec, Inc. (Allen Swaboda) 1216 Glade , College Station
T. D. Letbetter Box 2616, College Station
James Jett , et al 1 40 0 Tu rkey Creek Road, Col lege Station
C. E. Bertra nd 120 Mi ller Lane, Coll ege Station
Brethren Church o f College Station Unknown
: Page 2 of 2
• ; REQUEST FOR V A ... TLIA.NCE
Pre s ent zonin g of land in que s tion~_M_-_l~~~~
Item 1. 7 -C
Section of ordin.::i.nce from ~hich var iance is sou ght_I_t_e_m_2_. __ 8_-_8_._6 _____ ~~
The follo·...-<n g specific 1""'82'i<:::Li or?. fr o:.n t he 0 1 cli11,,,n ce i~_; requ ested :---------
1. Bring to the Board's attention a cha nge to a cu rrent varia nce
on the number of parking spaces.
2. Ad dition of a second deta c hed sign.
This variance is necessary due to t he following. unique and specia L c on ditio!'ls
of t he land not found iri like district s :
Item 2. Th e ordiance does not define what constitutes
"a plot of land".
The :follo"1ing alternativ-es to the requested variance ·are possible: _______ _
This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the followi.'t'.lg .
facts: The public is not affected.
~------------------------------------~
.The· facts · stated by m~ in this application
~4J4 .
. Applicant
are true and correct.
I' •' '
I -2
'. (', c _,
~ , ' ,. .. /
t
I
I
l
l :
I
•/
;L;'
··,
-/
/ /· -----
.,
,,-
/
.... '· (\
,. ' ./ ,. l\ '--") , / " I , <. -'-· ' ·--.--) ·--
~ .... -
'·
---.. ___ __
/· ! c~ (..L) (
f't<v ·v-( d-.\). __ _r_ __ _
... r
.. , , o fD-:JL G
PAl )O
'..)'"''-~ \
' '-.. 1_
<;~
..... i
l f
"
\
\
\
l
1
" l
I
\
...--;
/-----
1J_J
---
(
\
.+ ..
MEMBERS PRESENT :
MEMBERS ABSE..l'J T:
VI SITORS :
MINUTES
ZONING BOARD OF ADJ1JS'IMEN T
March 20, 1979
7:00 P . M.
Acting Chairman Har p er , Hawl ey , DuBois,
Ringer , Hughey .
J on es
Building Official Koeh l er , Community
Development Di rector Calloway,
Mr . Robert Nash , Mr . Gl enn Wilcox,
Mr . Don Broushard, Mr-. Jerry Ma jors,
Dr . Wallace McMath .
Age nda Item Numb er 1 --Appr ova l of the minutes of the meeting of
February 20, 1979 :
Ringer mov ed that the minutes be appro ved as pres ented . The motion
was seconded by Hawl ey and unanimously approved.
Ag enda Item Numbe r 2 -- Cons ideration of a r e quest for a variance
from Robert Nash , 301 Poplar Str eet :
Harp er reviewed the Board 1 s previous considerati on s of the matter . (Hughey
j oin ed the meeting, but did not assume the chair). Mr . Na s h explained
hi s s ubmi ssion s and hi s absen ce from previous meeting s . He explained that
the position of major trees blocked v ehicular access to a structure
except in this location . He said that further expans ions could be made
without harm to the trees .
Mr . Wi l cox introduced hi s mother 's letter of March 17 , 1979 and said that
their conc ern 1 s were a possible re s triction of u se of their property and
a deter i oration of pre sent value of the ir property due to cr o ~<lin g on
the ad j acent prop erty. He said that there is r oom on the property for the
con struction within the setback requirement .
~u ghey a sked what _ unique c ircumstance existed . Th ere ~Ja.s n o repl y .
Mr . Broushard pointed out his adjoining property and said that he had
no ob j ec tion.
Ko ehler said tha t there would be no effect on adjoining setback, that he
h a d no specifics about Mrs . Arnold 's objection and that he c ould see no
det riment to the City 's i ntere s t in the proposal.
The Chair mo v ed that the variance b e granted because there was no detriment
to the public intere st . The motion wa s sec onded by Ringer and failed by
the foll owin g v.ote :
FO R: None
AGAI NS T: Har p er , Ringer , Hawl ey , DuBoi s , Hugh ey
(
(
•
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
u I
I
I
Minutes / Page 2
Agenda Item Number 3 Consideration of a request for variance at
·281 7 Celinda Circle :
Koehler said that he had not reconLrn.ended to the applicant that he be
present . The Board agreed that a representative of the applicant should
henceforth be pre sent in each case.
Koehler explained that the discrepancy had been found by a survey and
that i t would be difficult to detect otherwise. He pointed out that the
house was complete and Cit y inspe ctors had not noticed the problem.
Harper said that this appeared to be a serious breach of public open
space . Hughey remarked that a var ianc e prevented the-City from making
further complaint . Koehler explained that a complaint could be filed
in Mun icipal Court against the builder for having deviated from plans ,
but that the trauma of a fai lure of closing when an enchroachment is
di scovered renders further penalty superfluous. Ringer r~~arked on the
hardship of removing a part of the structure .
Harper said that if a variance is granted, the structure thenceforth
assumes the status of a non-conforming structure and than any further
building permits, except for interior remode l ing, must have the per-
mission of the Board .
Agenda Item Number 4 Consideration of a request for exPansion of
a non-conforming use from Jerry Majors at 107 College Av enue :
Koehler summarized the proposal and exp lained the previous variances .
Mr . Majors described his proposed structure and said that he had rented
adjacent property for parking, but that his business was mo stl y pede-
strian .
Harper asked about notification . Koehler said that it had not been
sent for this proposal, but it was not required except by policy.
He said that the notice would be id entical to that given for the last
month 's action and that the adjacent ovmers were the lessors to this
business . He remarked that any u se of the property interfered vdth
traffic and was , to that extent , detrimental to a public interest , but
that this would be so whether or not the extensionnis allowed . Harper
remarked that the overall public interest is unclear in this case .
The Chair moved that the extension be allowed because of the unique
shape of the land and because no substantial detriment to the public
interest can be identified . The motion was seconded by Hawley and
unanimously approved.
Agenda Item Number 5 --Con s ideration of a request for vari1mce from
Agency Records Con trol :
Dr . McMath brought to the Board 's attention that his firm had modified
building plans to add 2000 square feet of buildi ng area and explained
l .. ....r
I
I
(
, ..
Mlllutes / .Page j
-the effect on the previou s variance to parking requir ements . The Board
concurred that the varian ce was not affected by the additional area .
Dr . McMath said that his project designers were unaware of the restriction
ori detached signs . He pointed out that the size and configuration of his
trac t was such that the lilnit should not reasonably apply. He pointed
out that if the properties were seperately o't-med more signs would be
allowable. He said that ~is firm 1 s op er a tion was substantially different
from retail uses and the~9for unique , and that he could imagine no
detriment to the pub lic i n t erest . He said that the di s tances involved
made any single sign ineff ecti ve and thus created a hardship .
The Board discussed the qu estion of the logic of the_ regulation and agreed
that the proposal was no t objec tionable . They discus sed the delay -
involved in obtaining an ordinance amendment . They agreed that the problem
had to do with the provision of the ordinance not being appropriate
or applicable to this size of tract, and that a variance would amount
to cha11ging the ordinanc e .
Koehler recommended that the variance be den ied in favor of recommending
to the Council to cha11ge the ordinance because he could see no circum-
stance of thi s tract that was not true of any sub stantial commercial
tract i n the City, He said that he f elt that the public intere st would
be served by change of ord inance rather than stretching the variance
procedure .
Hughey moved that the request be tabled until the next regular meeting
of the Board where the progress of an ordinance change could be eval-
uated . The motion was s e conded by Hawl ey and unanimously approved .
The Board asked the Council Liaison to convey to the Council and
CoIDIDission their recommendation to consider a change in the ordinance
in as early an action as possible .