Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout18 pt 5March 20, 1984 Zoning Board of Adjustment City of College Station 1101 South Texas Ave. College Station, TX. 77840 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is submitted in regard to the application by Doubledaves Pizza Works, Inc. at 326 Jersey. I oppose granting the variance, as requested, for the following reason: the need for the variance (e.g. the seating need will exceed present capacity) has not been demonstrated. Within the past year approximately ten new pizza shops have opened in College Station. Within the year a fast food type restaurant, operating in the same location that Doubledaves Pizza Harks, Inc. will, went out of business. A variance to the zoning ordinance should only be given when an acceptable deomonstrated need exists. Since the business has not started no need has been demonstrated. Due to the nature of the business (e.g. primarily take-out), the fact that there h&s been a large increase in the number of pizza shops in the community within the past year, and a similiar type business failed in the same location, it appears highly unlikely that · a need sufficient to justify the variance requested will arise. I respectifully request that you deny the zoning variance application made by Doubledave Pizza Works, Inc •• 204 Fairview College Station, TX Telephone: 409-696-7202 March 20, 1984 Zoning Board of Adjustment City of College Station 1101 South Texas Ave. College Station, TX. 77840 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is submitted in regard to the application by Doubledaves Pizza Works, Inc. at 326 Jersey. I oppose granting the variance, as requested, for the following reason: the need for the variance (e.g. the seating need will exceed present capacity) has not been demonstrated. Within the past year approximately ten new pizza shops have opened in College Station. Within the year a fast food type restaurant, operating in the same location that Doubledaves Pizza Harks, Inc. will, went out of business. A variance to the zoning ordinance should only be given when an acceptable deornonstrated need ·exists. Since the business has not started no need has been demonstrated. Due to the nature of the business (e.g. primarily take-out), the fact that there has been a large increase in the number of pizza shops in the connnunity within the past year, and a similiar type business failed in the same location, it appears highly unlikely that a need sufficient to justify the variance requested will arise. I respectifully request that you deny the zoning variance application made by Doubledave Pizza Works, Inc •• 204 Fairview College Station, TX Telephone: 409-696-7202 March 20, 1984 Zoning Board of Adjustment City of College Station 1101 South Texas Ave. College Station, TX. 77840 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is submitted in regard to the application by Doubledaves Pizza Works, Inc. at 326 Jersey. I oppose granting the variance, as requested, for the following reason: the need for the variance (e.g. the seating need will exceed present capacity) has not been demonstrated. Within the past year approximately ten new pizza shops have opened in College Station. Within the year a fast food type restaurant, operating in the same location that Doubledaves Pizza Horks, Inc. will, went out of business. A variance to the zoning ordinance should only be given when an acceptable deomonstrated need ·exists. Since the business has not started no need has been demonstrated. Due to the nature of the business (e.g. primarily take-out), the fact that there has been a large increase in the number of pizza shops in the connnunity within the past year, and a similiar type business failed in the same location, it appears highly unlikely that a need sufficient to justify the variance requested will arise. I respectifully request that you deny the zoning variance application made by Doubledave Pizza Works, Inc .. 204 Fairview College Station, TX Telephone: 409-696-7202 March 20, 1984 Zoning Board of Adjustment City of College Station 1101 South Texas Ave. College Station, TX. 77840 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is submitted in regard to the application by Doubledaves Pizza Works, Inc. at 326 Jersey. I oppose granting the variance, as requested, for the following reason: the need for the variance (e.g. the seating need will exceed present capacity) has not been demonstrated. Within the past year approximately ten new pizza shops have opened in College Station. Within the year a fast food type restaurant, operating in the same location that Doubledaves Pizza Harks, Inc. will, went out of business. A variance to the zoning ordinance should only be given when an acceptable deomonstrated need ·exists. Since the business has not started no need has been demonstrated. Due to the nature of the business (e.g. primarily take-out), the fact that there has been a large increase in the number of pizza shops in the community within the past year, and a similiar type business failed in the same location, it appears highly unlikely that a need sufficient to justify the variance requested will arise. I respectifully request that you deny the zoning variance application made by Doubledave Pizza Works, Inc •• 204 Fairview College Station, TX Telephone: 409-696-7202 March 20, 1984 Zoning Board of Adjustment City of College Station 1101 South Texas Ave. College Station, TX. 77840 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is submitted in regard to the application by Doubledaves Pizza Works, Inc. at 326 Jersey. I oppose granting the variance, as requested, for the following reason: the need for the variance (e.g. the seating need will exceed present capacity) has not been demonstrated. Within the past year approximately ten new pizza shops have opened in College Station. Within the year a fast food type restaurant, operating in the same location that Doubledaves Pizza Harks, Inc. will, went out of business. A variance to the zoning ordinance should only be given when an acceptable deomonstrated need exists. Since the business has not started no need has been demonstrated. Due to the nature of the business (e.g. primarily take-out), the fact that there has been a large increase in the number of pizza shops in the community within the past year, and a similiar type business failed in the same location, it appears highly unlikely that · a need sufficient to justify the variance requested will arise. I respectifully request that you deny the zoning variance application made by Doubledave Pizza Works, Inc •• 204 Fairview College Station, TX Telephone: 409-696-7202 SUL ROSS LODGE No. 1300 AN CI ENT FREE AND ACC EP TED MA SONS Pete Normand Bldg. Corrrnittee Sul Ross Masonic Lodge 312 Jersey Street College Station, Texas 77840 19 March 1984 Jane Kee Zoning Official City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Dear Jane: The Building Committee of Sul Ross Masonic Lodge met last night and discussed the variance requested by Doub ·ledave'.s Pizzaworks, Inc., regarding the parking Ordinance 850. As you know, Sul Ross Lodge has occupied its location at 312 Jersey Street since 1952. We have a seating capacity of about 75 persons. We use the building about 2 or 3 nights a week and have an average attendance of about 35 people which represents the same number of vehicles. Generally speaking the corrunittee reacted favorably to the requested variance with some reservations. --The lodge has no objections to the requested variance so long as no new restrictions are placed upon our continued use of the available parking facilities in the shopping center. --Sul Ross Lodge has never marked, designated or reserved any parking spaces as exclusively its own but has allowed the neighboring businesses and their patrons to use them freely at any time. This is a system that has worked well enough in the past and we would hope that this would be a practice that can be followed by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., also. --The major concern left to the Lodge at this time is whether or not the requested variance would preclude a future variance request made on behalf of a potential purchaser of our building . We do intend to sell our building within the next year or so and we would not want to "forfiet" our use of the parking lot. As I stated before we do have fixed seating for 75 people and have had for 32 years. Sincerely, 3 1 2 J E R SE Y S TR E ET C OLL EGE S TATION , TEXA S 778 40 SUL ROSS LODGE No. 1300 ANCIEN T FREE AND ACCEP TED MA SO NS Pete Normand Bldg. Committee Sul Ross Masonic Lodge 312 Jersey Street College Station, Texas 77840 19 March 1984 Jane Kee Zoning Official City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Dear Jane : The Building Committee of Sul Ross Masonic Lodge met last night and discussed the variance requested by Doub ·ledave'5 Pizzaworks, Inc., regarding the parking Ordinance 850. As you know, Sul Ross Lodge has occupied its location at 312 Jersey Street since 1952. We have a seating capacity of about 75 persons . We use the building about 2 or 3 nights a week and have an average attendance of abo ut 35 people which represents the same number of vehicles. Generally speaking the committee reacted favorably to the requested variance with some reservations. --The lodge has no objections to the requested variance so long as no new restrictions are placed upon our continued use of the available parking facilities in the shopping center. --Sul Ross Lodge has never marked, designated or reserved any parking spaces as exclusively its own but has allowed the neighboring businesses and their patrons to use them freely at any time. This is a system that has worked well enough in the past and we would hope that this would be a practice that can be followed by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., also . --The major concern left to the Lodge at this time is whether or not the requested variance would preclude a future variance request made on behalf of a potential purchaser of our building. We do intend to sell our building within the next year or so and we would not want to "forfiet" our use of the parking lot. As I stated be f ore we do have fixed s eating for 75 people and have had for 32 years. '· Sincerely, 3 1 2 J E R SE Y S TR EE T C OLL EGE ST ATION , T EX A S 77840 SUL ROSS LODGE No. 1300 ANCIEN T FREE AND ACCEPTE D MA SONS Pet e Normand Bldg. Cormiittee Sul Ross Masonic Lodge 312 Jersey Street College Station, Texas 77840 19 March 1984 Jane Kee Zoning Official City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Dear Jane: The Building Committee of Sul Ross Masonic Lodge met last night and discussed the variance requested by Doubledave'5 Pizzaworks, Inc., regarding the parking Ordinance 850. As you know, Sul Ross Lodge has occupied its location at 312 Jersey Street since 1952. We have a seating capacity of about 75 persons. We use the building about 2 or 3 nights a week and have an average attendance of about 35 people which represents the same number of vehicles. Generally speaking the conunittee reacted favorably to the requested variance with some reservations. --The lodge has no objections to the requested variance so long as no new restrictions are placed upon our continued use of the available parking facilities in the shopping center. --Sul Ross Lodge has never marked, designated or reserved any parking spaces as exclusively its own but has allowed the neighboring businesses and their patrons to use them freely at any time. This is a system that has worked well enough in the past and we would hope that this would be a practice that can be followed by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., also. --The major concern left to the Lodge at this time is whether or not the requested variance would preclude a future variance request made on behalf of a potential purchaser of our building. We do intend to sell our building within the next year or so and we would not want to "forfiet" our use of the parking lot. As I stated before we do have fixed seating for 75 people and have had for 32 years. Sincerely, Pet e Norm d 312 J E R SEY S TREET C OL L E GE S TATION , T E XA S 77 84 0 SUL ROSS LODGE No. 1300 ANCIEN T FREE ANO ACCEP TED MA SO NS Pete Normand Bldg. Committee Sul Ross Masonic Lodge 312 Jersey Street College Station, Texas 77840 19 March 1984 Jane Kee Zoning Official City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Dear Jane: The Building Committee of Sul Ross Masonic Lodge met last night and discussed the variance requested by Doub ·ledave'.s Pizzaworks, Inc., regarding the parking Ordinance 850. As you know, Sul Ross Lodge has occupied its location at 312 Jersey Street since 1952. We have a seating capacity of about 75 persons. We use the building about 2 or 3 nights a week and have an average attendance of about 35 people which represents the same number of vehicles. Generally speaking the committee reacted favorably to the requested variance with some reservations. --The lodge has no objections to the requested variance so long as no new restrictions are placed upon our continued use of the available parking facilities in the shopping center. --Sul Ross Lodge has never marked, designated or reserved any parking spaces as exclusively its own but has allowed the neighboring businesses and their patrons to use them freely at any time. This is a system that has worked well enough in the past and we would hope that this would be a practice that can be followed by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., also. --The major concern left to the Lodge at this time is whether or not the re quested variance would preclude a future variance request made on behalf of a potential purchaser of our building. We do intend to sell our building within the next year or so and we would not want to 11 forfiet" our use of the parking lot. As I stated before we do have fixed seating for 75 people and have had for 32 years. Sincerely, Pete Norm d 312 JE R SEY S TR EE T C OLL EGE S TATION , T EX A S 7784 0 SUL ROSS LODGE No. 1300 ANCIENT FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS Pete Normand Bldg. Committee Sul Ross Masonic Lodge 312 Jersey Street College Station, Texas 77840 19 March 1984 Jane Kee Zoning Official City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Dear Jane: The Building Co111T1ittee of Sul Ross Masonic Lodge met last night and discussed the variance requested by Ooub~edave'5 Pizzaworks, Inc., regarding the parking Ordinance 850. As you know, Sul Ross Lodge has occupied its location at 312 Jersey Street since 1952. We have a seating capacity of about 75 persons. We use the building about 2 or 3 nights a week and have an average attendance of about 35 people which represents the same number of vehicles. Generally speaking the committee reacted favorably to the requested variance with some reservations. --The lodge has no objections to the requested variance so long as no new restrictions are placed upon our continued use of the available parking facilities in the shopping center. --Sul Ross Lodge has never marked, designated or reserved any parking spaces as exclusively its own but has allowed the neighboring businesses and their patrons to use them freely at any time. This is a system that has worked well enough in the past and we would hope that this would be a practice that can be followed by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., also. --The major concern left to the Lodge at this time is whether or not the requested variance would preclude a future variance request made on behalf of a potential purchaser of our building. We do intend to sell our building within the next year or so and we would not want to "forfiet" our use of the parking lot. As I stated before we do have fixed seating for 75 people and have had for 32 years. Sincerely, Pete Norm d 3 1 2 J E R S E Y S T R E E T C OLL EGE S TATION, TEXAS 778 40 SUL ROSS LODGE No. 1300 ANCIENT FREE AND ACCEPTE D MASONS Pete Normand Bldg. Committee Sul Ross Masonic Lodge 312 Jersey Street College Station, Texas 77840 19 March 1984 Jane Kee Zoning Official City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Dear Jane: The Building Committee of Sul Ross Masonic Lodge met last night and discussed the variance requested by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., regarding the parking Ordinance 850. As you know, Sul Ross Lodge has occupied its location at 312 Jersey Street since 1952. We have a seating capacity of about 75 persons. We use the building about 2 or 3 nights a week and have an average attendance of about 35 people which represents the same number of vehicles. Generally speaking the committee reacted favorably to the requested variance with some reservations. --The lodge has no objections to the requested variance so long as no new restrictions are placed upon our continued use of the available parking facilities in the shopping center. --Sul Ross Lodge has never marked, designated or reserved any parking spaces as exclusively its own but has allowed the neighboring businesses and their patrons to use them freely at any time. This is a system that has worked well enough in the past and we would hope that this would be a practice that can be followed by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., also. --The major concern left to the Lodge at this time is whether or not the requested variance would preclude a future variance request made on behalf of a potential purchaser of our building. We do intend to sell our building within the next year or so and we would not want to "forfiet" our use of the parking lot. As I stated before we do have fixed seating for 75 people and have had for 32 years. Sincerely, d 31 2 JER S EY STREET C OLL E G E S TATION , TEXAS 77840 SUL ROSS LODGE No. 1300 ANCIENT FREE AND ACCEPTED MASON S Pete Normand Bldg. Committee Sul Ross Masonic Lodge 312 Jersey Street College Station, Texas 77840 19 March 1984 · Jane Kee Zoning Official .City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Dear Jane: The Building Committee of Sul Ross Masonic Lodge met last night and discussed the variance requested by Doubledave .'.s Pizzaworks, Inc., regarding the parking Ordinance 850. As you know, Sul Ross Lodge has occupied its location at 312 Jersey Street since 1952. We have a seating capacity of about 75 persons. We use the building about 2 or 3 nights a week and have an average attendance of about 35 people which represen ts the same number of vehicles. Generally speaking the committee reacted favorably to the requested variance with iome reservations. --The lodge has no objections to the requested variance so long as no new restrictions are placed upon our continued use of the available parking facilities in the shopping center. --Sul Ross Lodge has never marked, designated or reserved any parking spaces as exclusively its own but has allowed the neighboring businesses and their patrons to use them freely at any time. This is a system that has worked well enough in the past and we would hope that this would be a practice that can be followed by Doubledave's Pizzaworks, Inc., also. --The major concern left to the Lodge at this time is whether or not the requested variance would preclude a future variance request made on behalf of a potential purchaser of our building. We do intend to sell our building within the next year or so and we would not want to 11 forfiet 11 our use of the parking lot. As I stated before we do have fixed seating for 75 people and have had for 32 years. Sincerely, 312 JERSEY STREET COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 1.7840 City of College Station POST OFFICE BOX 9960 11 0 1 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION. TEXAS 77840-2499 M E M 0 R A N D U M TO: Jane Kee FROM: Lowell Denton RE: Parking Requ ' e ents for Hotel/Racquetball Complex DATE: March 13, 1984 After you and I revie ed the provisions of the ordinance pertaining to parking requirements, I have come to the following conclusions: 1. A cumrnulative parking requirement is not unreasonable under the existing ordinance. 2. Since no listed use appears to come close to the racquetball complex proposed, and yet since the ordinance provides that it is all inclusive, I am certain that the least stringent parking requirement in the table should be applied, as a matter of legal construction. 3. In this situation I would prefer that the applicant request a variance, confirming your interpretation of the ordinance, and that the staff recommend the granting of the variance with cross parking arrangements. If you need anything further in connection with this issue, please advise. LFD:j ls City of College Station POSf OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840-2499 M E M 0 R A N D U M TO: Jane Kee FROM: Lowell Dento RE: Section llb. Zoning Ordinance DATE: March 13, 1984 I have reviewed the entirety of Section 11 relating to the Board of Adjustment and agree with your conclusion that a request for a variance to the number of persons per household is beyond the authority of the Zoning Board of Adjustment under Section 11 of our ordinance. A casual reading of lla might indicate that "special exception" could be granted to this provision, but the cases seem to indi- cate that the nature of a special exception is to allow a specially permitted use upon application, where appropriate. Thus, in my judgment the available special exceptions are limited to those listed under llb.3. As I told you in our conversation, some cases indicate that a variance procedure must theoretically be available as an incident of due process. If that is true, then a variance procedure would be required for every provision in the ordinance, and this con- stitutional requirement would override the provisions of Section llb.5. Whether or not the board wishes to make such a procedure available absent a constitutional complaint from an applicant is a matter best addressed to their preference. If the board would like for us to examine the constitutional implications of this issue in depth, we will probably need a month to do so. LFD:jls TO: FROM: RE: DATE: City o f College Station POST OFFICE 130X 9960 11 0 1 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION. TEXAS 77840-2 4 99 M E M 0 R A N D U M zoning Official Plannin g and Zon·ng Commission Members Zoning Board of djustment Members Low el l Denton Opinion Reque March 5, 1984 This office has been re quested by J ane Kee to answer the following question : Do I have ordinance authority t o view a building compl ex which includes hotel rooms, raqu et ball courts, meeting r o oms, restaurants and lounges in te rms of park ing as indiv i dua l us es? In othe r words, can I impo se a cumulative park ing require- men t rather than vi ewi n g t his as a hotel requir- ing on e spac e per room? No o p inion has been r e n dered o n this question to date. LFD:jls AGENDA CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustment March 20, 1984 7:00 P.M. 1. Approval of Minutes -meeting of February 21, 1984. 2. Hear Visitors. 3. Consideration of a variance to rear setback as required by Ordinance 850 on Lot 14 Block 2 of the Dobrovolny Subdivision (1417 Hol ik). Applica- tion is in the name of Benny W. Lane. 4. Consideration of a variance to parking as required by Ordinance 850 for a restaurant at 326 Jersey. Application is in the name of DoubleDave 1 s PI zzaworks, Inc. 5. Other Business. 6. Adjourn . ( MEMBERS ATTENDING: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF ATTENDING: MINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustment February 21, 1984 7:00 P.M. Chairman Cook, Members MacGilvray, Upham, Wendt and Alternate Member McGuirk Member Wagner & Alternate Member Meyer Zoning Official Kee, City Attorney Denton, Planning Assistant Longley, Planning Technician Volk, and Ass't. City Attorney Locke (present for a portion of the meeting). Chairman Cook opened the meeting and explained the functions and 1 imitations of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of Minutes -meeting of January 17, 1984 Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Upham seconded. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Cook abstained). ·AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Hear Visttors No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of variance to arkin front and side setback requirements as set forth in Ordinance Section 7 and Table A for a business at 509 University Drive. Request is tn the name of Al Gutierrez. This request was tabled on l 0-1 -3. Chairman Cook explained that this request was tabled in October of 1983 pending a revised site plan. Mrs. Kee then explained that the plan being considered on this date is one which the Planning and Zoning Commission has approved, but pointed out that it is signi- ficantly different from the one which the applicant initially presented following the tabling action of the ZBA. She then explained just what the applicant intends to do and then explained the exact variances he is requesting. Al Gutierrez came forward and was sworn in. Mr. MacGilvray expressed surprise at the site plan proposed, stating he recalled the last hearing and the ideas expressed by the appli- cant at the time which did not include a proposal of a two story building in addition to an expansion at ground level. Mr. Gutierrez explained what had previously been proposed, stating that after studies of the area, he felt that plan did not fully utilize the posslbil ities of this business, therefore, he has decided to expand to include both a restaurant and retail businesses. He went on to say that if all the cars which currently park in front of his business were moved to the rear parking lot, he would still have ample parking. Mrs. Kee explained how the required parking figure had been arrived at indicating that any variance beyond what is being considered tonight would have to come back before this Board. General discussion followed concerning the number of variances being requested, how much time the architect had spent studying local codes after which Mr. Upham speculated that the person who drew this plan seemed to have tried to present a plan which would require as many variances as possible. Mr. Upham went on to explain that many of the problems in Northgate have been there for many years, and that this Board Ltrn Minu tes .2-21-84 page 2 has been trying to find ways to 1 ive with the problems, but a plan of this magnitude would in all probabll tty proliferate this already existing problem. Mr. MacGilvray agreed, stating that an expansion of this type would intensify the problem in the Northgate area. He speculated that a plan could be made which would meet all setback requirements by 1 imiting the square footage to a specific size, thus the only variance would would then be required would be a parking variance, but one of less magnitude than this request. After discussion it was agreed that both setback variances involved substantial variance requests, and the plan could quite easily be revised to meet at least some of the require- ments. Mr. MacGilvray said he would not offer any more ideas to the applicant as to plan- ning the site, but said he believed it is up to the applicant to present a plan which would incorporate a compromise which this Board could then consider. Mr. Upham then made a motion to table this item until the applicant is ready to present a compromise plan which would not involve so many variance requests. Mr. MacGilvray seconded the motion which carried unanimously (S-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a re uest for variance to rear setback re uirements as set forth in Ordinance 50 District Use Schedule Table A at the residence at 804 Welsh. Request is In the name of John M. Brown. Hrs. Kee explained the request concerns a 14x40 portable building which has been located on the lot at 804 Welsh and currently encroaches the required rear setback by approxi- mately 4 feet. She outlined alternatives the applicant could turn to in lieu of receiv- ing a variance from this Board which include removing the building from the lot, cutting down the stze of the building or relocating the building which would entail losing a tree in the yard to accommodate the building. In answer to questions from the Board about how this building was placed at this location, Mrs. Kee offered the information that she had advised the applicant prior to locating the building on this lot that he would have to have a building permit and also that he would have to meet the setbacks as required by ordinance, but after that she found out that the building had been moved onto the lot without a permit and the rear setback had been encroached. John Brown, 804 Welsh was sworn in. Hr, HacGilvray announced to the Board and public that he is acquainted with the applicant, but that he has not discussed this request with him. Hr. Brown told of his plans for using the building as a storage, workshop and play area for his children; that the building will be electrically wired to the house; that the building is not set on a foundation, but rather on skids under which concrete pads have been used to level the building. Mr. MacGilvray asked about his moving the building onto the lot without a permit, and Mr. Brown explained that the building had been loaded onto a trailer and he had called City Hall, and "Dan" (Dan Dupies, a former Assistant Zoning Official) advised him to go ahead and unload it until the ZBA could hear the request, even though he had no permit and would encroach the setback. He said that after the building was placed, he applied for the building permit which could not be issued until a variance was granted. Hr. Brown went on to explain that the residence on the lot had been a duplex but that he had opened it up, and now the entire structure is a single family residence. He further explained that his plans are to sell this building when he leaves this area. Hr. Upham said that in his opinion, a building of this size is over- whelming. Hr. Wendt asked Mr. Brown to point out something unique about his situation and Hr. Brown stated that if the butlding is placed in another direction, it will be over sewer 1 Ines and existing trees will have to be destroyed. He went on to tell the Board that no one will be 1 lvlng in the building, and if he is allowed to keep the building, other out buildings on the lot will be moved. Discussion of the neighborhood, non-conform- ities which were grandfathered In at the time of this ordinance, upgrading of the neighbor- hood followed, after which proponents and opponents to this variance were invited to speak. ( L tlA Minu te s .2-21-84 page 3 Mrs. Lambert Wilkes, 501 Welsh Avenue, and -the owner of 902 Welsh Avenue, was sworn in and stated she has concern over the affect a building of this size has on the neighbor- hood. She further stated that the fact that the building was bought and moved in with- out a permit and with full knowledge that a permit was necessary goes against the grain. She summarized by stating that she objects to the building on the basis of the size of the building and the fear that the City will have to watch it continually because it does have air conditioners and could easily become another rental unit. Mr. Upha m assured her that since Mr. Brown has converted what was a duplex to a single family dwelling by opening the wall between the 2 units, the land can never again be used for a duplex again, as the lot is in an R-1 zoning district. Mr. McGuirk informed Mrs. Wilkes that this Board Is not discussing the legalties of the existence of this building except as it applies to the variance requested tonight, that being the required 25 foot rear setback. Mr. McGulrk then 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 unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in like districts and there are alternatives; and because a strict enforcement of th~ provisions of the Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Motion seconded by Mr. Upham and carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration of a request for variance to the Sign Regulations as set forth in Ordinance 850 Section 8 for an office building at 1408 University Drive. Request ts in the name of Larry Landry Company. Mrs. Kee explained that this request is for a variance to the ordinance regulations that there can be no detached signs in A-P zoning districts. She went on to explain that the staff's policy ls to allow small, detached address only signs, and the applicant had been advised of this rule at the time of the Project Review Committee review of the sJte plan, but since the building was erected, staff noticed this sign and notified the applicant that it is in violation of ordinance regulations. She then referred to another variance request by the Texana National Bank, which had been dropped when the applicant learned he could have an address or a directional sign but that he could not have the name of the bank on that sign in an A-P district. Larry Landry, 4018 Ralnvalley Drive, Bryan, was sworn In and passed around a photo of the building and _the sign, stating that the wing walls are attached to the building and were built with the building, but agreed that the center of the wall is detached, as staff has implied. Mrs. Kee said she made her Interpretation because she does not think the wal 1 is attached just because it has a common foundation with the building. Mr. Landry said in his mind the walls and the building are all one structure. Mr. Landry said that he does not consider this a detached sign, and further informed the Board that he has received Information to the effect that the new sign ordinance may allow this type of sign. Mr. Upham informed the applicant that the proposed new sign ordinance is not rele- vant in this case. Mr. Landry asked for clarification, stating that it is now his under- standing that he could block out the words "French Arbor" and leave 11 1408 University Drive" and Mrs. Kee said that is correct. Discussion followed concerning the looks of the wall, the way the wall is built and Mr. Wendt asked for a clarification of the definition of a detached sign. Mr . Upham stated that the sign is not an advertisement of a business, but rather identifies a specific piece of geography. Mrs. Cook asked City Attorney Denton if a variance is being requested or if an appeal of an interpretation is being requested. Mr . Denton replied ( LtjA Minutes 2-21-84 page 4 that the question of the definition of a detached sign must be resolved, and pointed out that the current ordinance does not make a clear definition of attached or detached signs. Assistant City Attorney Locke asked how this sign would differ from the tower at the Chimney Hill Retail Center and Mrs. Kee said she has the understanding that the tower is considered part of the building. Mr. Denton said the tower has four sides. Mr. Upham then made a motion to deny the variance to the sign regulations (Section 8) from the terms of this ordinance on the basis of precedence, i.e ., Texana National Bank sign. This motion died for lack of a second. Mr. McGulrk made a motion to authorize a variance to the sign regulations (Section 8) 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 like districts: (1) Although possibly not legally within the strictures of attached signs, the location of the sign on the land renders it indistinguishable from an attached sign, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in un- necessary hardship to this applicant being: a strictly legally attached sign would not enhance the architecture of the structure, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done, This motion was seconded by Mr. Wendt, and carried by a vote of 4-1 (Upham). Mrs. Cook requested that staff review this case, as she is not comfortable voting for something which is not necessarily considered a detached sign, and requested clarification of the definition of a detached sign, Lowell Denton, 4218 Willow Oak, Bryan (City Attorney for College Station) was sworn in and stated the action taken by this Board tonight is not inappropriate and the Board has now ldentif led a need, He stated that the Board took action on the request as presented by the applicant and by the action taken, has implied that the Zoning Official's inter- pretation is correct and this sign is a detached sign. He reminded the Board that the object of Interpretation of the ordinance is consistency. AGENDA ITEM NO, 6: Other Business Discussion followed concerning action the Legal department has taken following Board action, with Mr. Denton requesting that a legal discussion be placed as an agenda item on the next meeting. Further general discussion regarding the request followed, with Mr. Wendt making a motion to adjourn this meeting and Mr. McGuirk seconding the motion which carried unanimously (S-0). APPROVED: Chairman, Violetta Cook ATTEST: City Secretary, Dian Jones STAFF REPORT TO: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FROM: Jane R. Kee GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Benny Lane Status of Applicant: Owner Location: (Address, Lot, Block, Subdivision) (Lot 14 Block 2 Dobrovolny DATE: March 12, 1984 1417 Ho 1 I k Existing Zoning: R-1 Single Family Residential Requested Action: Variance .to the 25 foot rear setback Purpose: To construct a house and garage Applicable Ordinance Section: Table A PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Lot Dimensions: See plat Utilities: 611 waterl lne along front, sewer in rear Access: will be from Hol lk Topography: virtually flat lot Existing Vegetation: very sparse Flood Plain: n/a ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Other: n/a SPECIAL INFORMATION: Variance Setbacks Required: Front -25 ft.; Rear -25 ft.; side -7.5 ft. Adjacent Structures: House to west side, approximately JO feet; house to north (rear) approximately 60 feet; vacant lot to the east (side) xxx!i)t~~Ri~~xR~R~~~~: xxxR~R~l~8xR~~~~R~~x Other: Dobrovolny Subdivision was platted in July 1973 Use Permit Area of Area of Greater ANALYSIS: Alternatives: 1) Design structure to fit lot. 2) Move house forward which would then require a variance to front setback Hardship: Applicant purchased thJ . lot and entered into a contract with a builder far a specific house, app~~ently without -realizi6g the City bas setback requirements. Ordinance Intent: Setback areas provide open space for privacy, I ight and air Previous Action on this Property: ATTACHMENTS: X Application X List of Property Owners within 200 ft. X Site Pl an x Location Map Other: Enlarged plat None ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Name of Applicant Benny W. Lane Mailing Address 1707A Lawyer, College Station, Texas 77840 Phone (home) hg3-1800 (work) 845-5225 Location: Lot 14 Block 2 Subdivision Dobrovolny Description, If applicable Residential lot in existing subdivision Action Requested: Variance to rear setback Present Zoning of Land in question _R_-_1~S_i_n~g~l_e~F_a_m_i_l~y~~~~~~~~~~~~ Appliable ordinance section Table A ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT COMPLETE T~E FOLLOWING FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST. The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested: Request a variance of the setback requirements from the rear property line. This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of the land not found in like districts: This is an exceptionally small and odd shaped lot. Placing a house that conforms to the size and types of houses in this area will be extremely difficult. State the unnecessary hardship involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance (other than financial). The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: The variance could be from the front of the property instead of the rear. This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following facts: It is not a major encroachment on the property or privacy of any of the neighbors. The facts stated by me in this application are true and correct. ----&-.. ~-cl L-Applicant~nny W. Lane March fi, 1 984 Date ,_, .A/".uc;, P & Z CASE tW . _z_#;_.__(j}_. __ _ CITY OF COLLEGE STATION 3 -~o-ff PUBLIC HE ARING NOTIFICATION FORM TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION TAX OFFICE ONLY AND CERTIFIED BY TAX ASSESSO R'S OFFICE . ALLOW 48 HOURS FOR THE TA X OFFICE TO COMPILE THIS LIST. OWNERS OF PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF ALL PROPER TY LINES OF SUBJECT PRO PERTY: NAME SCHAPERY, RICHARD A. WATSON, JOSEPH C. KURTIN, FRANK CHAIKIN, GERALD L. ETUX DOBRAVA, LARRY J. AKGERMAN, AYDIN DUNLAP, DOSS D. ANDERS KERRY C. SCAMARDO DAVID TAYLOR KENNETH R. WEST EARL RAY CRAWFORD, JOHN MOORE JOHN, A. JR. THWEATT GILBERT W. BRYAN, MARY LIND NATIONAL LIVING CENTERS C/0 ROY BUSBY & CO . LULAC OAKHILL, INC. C/0 PROPERTY TAX SERVICE CO. ·' ;;· ., r I ATTACH ADD ITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESS AR Y. ADDRESS 1205 BROOK HOLLOW/BRYAN, TX. 77801 1415 CLEMENT CT./COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840 1413 CLEMENT/COLLEGE STATION, TX. 77840 1411 CLEMENT CT./COLLEGE STATION, TX . 77840 2615 CEDAR LANE/ROSENBERG, TX. 77471 1414 CLEMENT CT ./COLLEGE STATION, TX.77840 11931 ARBORADALE/ HOUSTON, TX. 77024 1418 CLEMENT/ COLLEGE STATION, TX. 77840 1719 HOLIK/ COLLEGE STATION, TX. 77840 1415 HOLIK DR. /COLLEGE STATION, TX. 77840 1413 HOLIK/COLLEGE STATION, TX. 77840 1101 SANDPIPER DR./DENTON, TX. 76201 ~511 MIDWEST DR./BRYAN, TX . 77801 481 N POST OAK LN./HOUSTON, TX. 77024 209 E. UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE STATION, TX. 77840 13101 PRESTON RD. STE.#210/DALLAS, TX . 75240 510 COLONIAL SAVINGS TOWER/HOUSTON, TX. 77036 CER T I F I CAT I OM 0 F TAX ASSES S 0 R 0 R CL ERK __ a;.;"""'""'-J""""'--1;.;;;;..Li rf._.~O<..Jo·..c.A-'~l<>-. ~..z:Qc:...~_,,cG~··.a.~~· _· __ _ AP PL I CA T I ON FEE "I/ 7 7_ I l -- 1 ~1 I ;) + -1-{rj i 14 --·~ / '· \ 10Cc .1-J' I \ \ I ,,·...-----\ \ \ \ \ -Jo' __ \_! Hou SE. \ \ \ ~ CJ <.. ~ '"'( ~ ,, ~ ~ ~ . u ........ \I) \ \ , \\ ·--·--' \ ' \