HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAR2001-500186CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
R E P R I N T *** CUSTOMER RECEIPT *** OPER: SMESSARRA CT DRAWER: 1
DATE: 8/27/01 00 RECEIPT: 0296310
DESCRIPTION QTY AMOUNT TP
$75.00 IPL 2001 500186
PLANNING & ZONIN
2001 500187
PLANNING & ZONIN
$75.00 *PL
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
CK -5054 & 5055
2 VARIANCE APPLICATI~
SSM
TENDER DETAIL
CK 5054
CK 5055
DATE: 8/27/01
TOTAL
AMOUNT TENDERED
THANK YOU
$75.00
$75.00
TIME: 12:01: 16
$150.00
US0.00
NOTICE OF PUBLI C HE ARING:
The College Station Zoning Board of Adjustment wil l
hold a public hearing to consider a rear setback var-
iance for 316 Holleman Drive, lot 2, block 2 , McCull-
och's Subdivision. Applicant is Habitat for Humanity.
The hea ri ng will be held in the Council Room of the Col-
lege Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue at the 6:00
p.m. mee ting of the Board on Wednesday, October 10,
2001
Any request for sign interpretive services for the hearing
impaired must be made 48 hours before the meeting.
To make arrangements call (979) 764-3547 or (TDD) 1-
800-735-2989.
For additional information, please contact me at (979)
764-3570.
Jessica Jimmerson
Staff Planner
9-26-01
111-"1011 ft caii~s
J~t
q/0'1/0'
PARK
LiNCOLN
CENTER
6itt.f" City of College Station , Texas
~ PLANNING DIVISION 316 HOLLEMAN ~ NOT
TO
SCALE
ZONING
CASE :
ZBA 10/10/01
SETBACK
VARIANCE
CHECK BY:
DATE:
MINUTES
Zoning Board of Adjustment
October 10, 2001
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
6:00P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Hill , Sheffy , Richards , Lewis & Alternate Member Allison
MEMBERS ABSENT: Birdwell absent , Alternate Members Goss & Corley, not needed .
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Grace , Staff Planners Reeves & Hitchcock, Assistant City
Attorney Robinson .
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board.
Chairman Hill called the meeting to order.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consider Absence Request from meeting .
Mr. Birdwell submitted an application that was moved to approve by Mr. Lewis, seconded by Mr.
Richards, and approved by a Board vote of (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of meeting minutes from September 12 , 2001 .
Mr. Sheffy made the motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which
passed unopposed (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a rear setback variance at 316 Holleman Drive, lot
2, block 2, McCulloch's Subdivision. Applicant is Habitat for Humanity. (01-186).
Staff Planner Jimmerson stepped before the Board and presented the staff report . Ms . Jimmerson told
the Board that the variance is to allow for construction of a new home . The subject property is
undeveloped . A house is planned for this lot that will encroach into the required rear setback. The back
of the house will extend approximately 8 feet over the rear building setback line . Thus , the applicant is
requesting a variance of 9 feet (or a 36% variance) to the rear setback to allow for the construction of
the house .
The Board could consider the depth of the lot as a special condition. Although the lot does exceed the
current width requirement of 50 feet, the lot does not meet the current depth requirements for an R-1
single-family residential lot. In this case, in addition to significantly restricting the building options on
the site, having less lot depth reduces the remaining buildable area of the lot to less than that of
surrounding properties .
Page 1
The McCullough Subdivision , where the subject property is located, is one of the original
neighborhoods in College Station and appears to have been platted prior to t he City's adoption of
Subdivision Regulations. Subdivisions that have been platted in more recent years are planned to
accommodate the City 's setback requirements . It also appears that a portion of the front of the
property may have been taken by the City for the expansion of Holleman, resulting in the depth of only
84 feet. Once the front and rear setbacks are applied to properties with the standard 100-foot depth a
length of 50 feet remains for the builder to work within . For this property, with a depth of 84 feet , only
34 feet remain after the front and rear setbacks are applied , significantly restricting the building options
on the side and lessening the buildable area.
The Board must decide if having a lot depth of 84 feet , instead of the now required 100 feet , is a special
condition, or if the situation is a general condition .
If the ZBA considers the reduced lot depth as a special condition, then the resulting hardships would be
the significant reduction in buildable area and the significant restriction on the building options . The
applicant would be unable to build a house of comparable size to the others in the area .
The Board may not consider a financial hardship as the only hardship involved in a case, but it may
considered in addition to other hardships . The subject property was donated to Habitat for Humanity
by the City of College Station on September 13 , 2001 for the purpose of building a house and selling it
to a resident that has been living in substandard housing. At Habitat for Humanity, volunteer-friendly
construction plans are not created for each project, but are used repeatedly by the organization on
different properties to reduce the costs of the homes . The additional cost of preparing a custom plan
for this lot would increase the overall cost of the project, therefor negating the ability to provide low-
income housing at a low cost on this lot.
Staff has identified the following alternatives to granting the nine-foot rear setback variance :
Grant a lesser variance -the applicant has stated that the plan for the house would encroach eight feet
into the required setback. A variance of nine feet would still allow for the construction of the home .
The additional foot would create room for a small margin of error.
Do not grant the variance -the structure is in the planning phase so , at this time , no physical
encroachments exist . A denial will require the applicant to design a house that meets the rear setback
required for the lot. If no house is built on the lot within eighteen months, ownership of the property
will revert back to the City of College Station .
Ms . Jimmerson ended her staff report by showing the Board pictures of the property .
The Board had no questions for city staff.
Chairman Hill opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in favor of the request.
James Davis , Construction Coordinator for Habitat for Humanity, stepped before the Board and was
sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Davis told the Board that this particular lot is small. Mr. Davis
explained to the Board that since the road is considered a minor arterial, they have chosen to put in a
circular drive rather than backing out on to the street.
ZBA Minutes October I 0, 200 I Page 2 of 11
That decision has somewhat complicated the construction of the home . Mr. David ended by saying
other than these two items; th ere are no other cons iderations .
Mr. Lewis asked if the home plan is the smallest plan that Habitat uses . Mr. Davis answered that it is
the shortest plan .
Mr. Hill questioned the home plan not having a garage . Mr . Davis replied that none of Habitat for
Humanity home plans has garages due to added costs .
Art Roach, Housing Development Coordinator for the City of College Station College Station
Community Development Office, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill . Mr .
Roach told the Board that the CD office is lending their support to the variance request.
With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition to the request , Chairman Hill closed
the public hearing .
Mr. Lewis made the motion to authorize a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of this
ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest , due to the following special conditions : part of
the lot was taken for street widening , the lot was platted before the existing setback regulations and the
lot is not square; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in
unnecessary hardship to this applicant being : impossible to build on the lot due to its shallow depth;
and such that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the
following special conditions : variance of 9 feet . Mr. Sheffy seconded the motion .
Chairman Hill stated that he commends Habitat for Humanity for what they are doing m our
community.
Chairman Hill stated that he would like the motion to mention something about the shallow depth of the
lot.
Mr. Lewis amended his motion to add " due to its shallow depth". Mr. Sheffy seconded the
motion to amend. The Board voted (5-0) to amend the motion.
Chairman Hill called for a vote on Mr. Lewis's motion to authorize a variance and Mr. Sheffy's
second. The Board voted (5-0) to grant the variance.
AGENDA ITEM 5: Consideration of a rear setback variance for 320 Holleman Drive, lot
4, block 2, McCulloch Subdivision. Applicant is Habitat for Humanity. (01-187)
Staff Planner Jimmerson stepped before the Board and stated that this case is similar to the last one and
therefore did not go through the complete staff report . Basically the difference between the two cases is
the amount of the variance being requested. The variance requested is 5 feet but only 4 feet is needed .
The additional foot would create room for a small margin of error.
Ms . Jimmerson ended her staff report by showing the Board pictures of the property.
ZBA Minutes October 10, 2001 Page3of11
The Board had several minor questions of concern .
Chairman Hill opened the public hearing and asked for those wanting to speak in favor of the request.
James Davis stepped before the Board . Chairman Hill reminded Mr. Davis that he is still under oath.
Mr. Davis stated that on this home he was not able to extend the porch out into the front setback
because of the circle drive like he was able to do on the other home . The driveway for this home will be
off of Phoenix Street.
With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition of this variance , Chairman Hill closed
the public hearing .
Mr. Richards made the motion to authorize a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of
this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions :
part of the lot previously taken for street widening , lot platted prior to current ordinances and it is a
square lot ; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance would result in
unnecessary hardship to this applicant being : impossible to build on the 85 foot lot depth; and such that
the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following
limitations : a variance of 5 feet. Mr. Sheffy seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a front setback variance at 3325 Piccadilly, lot 14,
block 4, Westminster Subdivision. Applicant is Southern Estate Homes. (01-199).
Staff Planner Reeves stepped before the Board and gave the staff report . Ms . Reeves told the Board
that a 10-foot variance to the 50 front setback is requested . A front setback of 50 feet is required for
A-OR Rural Residential Subdivision . The subject property has a 50-foot CITGO pipeline easement
running all the way across the front portion of the property . During preparation to build the house the
applicant discovered that he would not be able to meet the 50-foot front setback requirement. To be
consistent with the neighboring homes the home at 3325 Piccadilly would have to be 40 feet from the
front property line ; thus the applicant is requesting a front setback variance of 10 feet.
The applicant states as a special condition that the 50-foot pipe line easement runs through the property,
reducing the buildable area of the front of the lot as compared to neighboring lots .
The applicant states that the hardship if this case is threefold . First , locating the house behind the
pipeline easement would result in the front of the house being behind the rear of the neighbor's house .
This is not desirable for either property. Second , by moving the house to the right would cause the
removal of the only large oak tree on the street and also place the house so close to the neighbor on the
right, it would be inconsistent with the other houses on the street which are all located in the center of
their lot. Third, the location of the pipeline in the easement is 15 feet from the front line easement. If
the house were to meet the front setback requirement, a comer of the house would be uncomfortably
close to the pipeline (even though this is a liquid petroleum line and supposedly not a hazard).
The staff has identified building towards the back of the property as an alternative . The house would be
out of the line with the neighboring houses , but the subject home could meet all of its setbacks .
Ms Reeves ended her staff report by showing the Board pictures of the property.
ZBAMinutes October 10, 2001 Page4of11
The Board had no questions for staff
Chairman Hill opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in favor of the request.
Noble Handy, the applicant , stepped before the Boa.rd and was sworn in by Chairman Hill . Mr . Handy
told the Board that he got a signed agreement from all property owners on the street ag reeing to the
variance request.
Mr. Lewis asked for the size of the home . Mr. Handy replied that it was 2500 sq . ft . Mr. Lewis asked
Mr. Handy ifhe considered any options of making the house wider and not so deep . Mr. Handy replied
that a plan like that would be spread out and narrow.
Mr. Hill stated that he had gone by to look at the property and noticed that the slab had been poured .
Mr. Hill asked if the slab is placed based on a 40-foot setback . Mr. Handy replied that was correct.
Mr. Hill asked Mr. Handy when he set the forms and poured the slab if he was aware of the 50-foot
setback requirement. Mr. Handy replied no that he was not aware of the requirement. Mr. Handy
added he was issued a permit and he felt that no one checked the zoning assuming that the subdivision
was a regular residential development, which has a 25-foot setback. He stated that he knew it had a 50
foot architectural control requirement. He contacted the architectural control board and asked if there
would be a problem. The control board told him there would not be a problem. He then applied for his
building permit and started the slab . During a discussion with Carl Warren with the Building
department it was discovered the zoning was R-01. Mr. Handy stated that he thought it was a 25-foot
setback and the 50-foot setback was the architectural control requirement.
Ms. Reeves told the Board that the city building department made an error in issuing the permit. The
permit was issued during a time when the entire city was ex periencing computer problems . Mr. Hill
asked Ms . Reeves if the builder was operating in good faith . Ms. Reeves replied yes .
Mr. Hill asked Mr. Handy if he lays out the slabs or if a surveyor does it. Mr. Handy replied that
usually he does the lying out of the slabs but he does have surveyors who work on some . Mr. Hill
stated that he is a little bothered that the forms would be set and the slab poured not checking the
ordinances . Mr. Handy replied that he has been building in the City of College Station for 15 years and
he was totally unaware of an R-01 subdivision and that requirement being larger . Mr. Hill asked Mr.
Handy at what point was the error discovered and how was it discovered . Mr. Handy replied at the
time the slab was poured. The city was in the process of getting their computers up and processing
permits, his permit was alread y issued and he was in the process of building . Chairman Hill asked who
discovered the error. Ms . Reeves replied that it was an inspector in the field .
With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition of the request, Chairman Hill closed
·the public hearing .
Mr. Richards stated that the hardships stated are logical. The property with a pipeline going through it
is not a piece of property that you could build under normal conditions . If the home were placed behind
the easement the house would be out of line from the rest of the houses on the block. Chairman Hill
stated that he would agree with that.
ZBAMinutes October JO, 200 I Page5 ofll
Mr. Lewis agreed that the pipeline is a special condition and also the fact that an error was made in
issuing the permit. Mr. Lewi s stated that he coul d also understand the confusion for the setback.
Chairman Hill agreed that there was confusion but he is less willing to grant that point because it is the
builder 's responsibility to check the requirements for where he is building .
Mr. Sheffy made the motion to authorize a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of this
ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest , due to the following special conditions : the
city made a mistake in builder complying with ordinance and thus was issued a permit ; and because a
strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this
applicant being : that the house slab has already been reported to city staff and had been approved ; and
such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the
following limitation : allowing a 5 foot variance . Mr. Richards seconded the motion .
Mr. Lewis made an amendment to Mr. Sheffy 's motion to add another special conditions: the 50
foot pipeline easement and change the limitation from a 5 foot variance to a 10 foot variance. Mr.
Allison seconded the amendment , which was approved (5-0).
Chairman Hill called for the vote on Mr. Sheffy's motion and Mr. Richards second. The Board
voted (5-0) to grant the variance.
AGENDA ITEM NO 7: Consideration of a front setback variance at 316 Pronghorn Loop,
lot 2, block 4, Steeplechase Subdivision Phase VI. Applicant is Oakwood Homes. (01-208).
Staff Planner Hitchcock stepped before the Board and presented the staff report. Ms . Hitchcock told
the Board that the request is to receive a variance for an error made during construction . During
construction, the builder estimated that if he placed the house 27 feet back from the front of the
property, he would be able to stay outside of the front setback area. Front setbacks on cul-de-sacs or
curving streets curve with the arc of the property line . The house was not placed far enough back on
the lot to keep the structure outside of the setback; thus the applicant is requesting a front setback
variance of 0 .68 feet for the home and 1.11 feet for the garage (as measured diagonal).
For a special condition, the applicant would like for the Board to consider the fact that the curving
street made it difficult to measure the setback. For hardships, the applicants states that the home is
complete and ready to close .
Staff has identified that removal of the encroachment is the only alternative to a variance for the house
to be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance .
Ms . Hitchcock ended her staff report by showing the Board pictures of the property .
The Board discussed items presented in the staff report for clarification.
Chairman Hill opened the public hearing and asked for anyone wanting to speak in favor of the request
to step forward .
ZBA Minutes October JO, 2001 Page6of11
Alton Ofczarzak, President of Oakwood Homes , stepped before the Board and was sworn in by
Chairman Hill. Mr. Ofczarzak t old the Board t ha t he bu ilt all the ho mes on th at row and all the homes
are all built 27 feet off of the property line . Mr. Ofczarzak stated that it is difficult to layout homes on a
curve . Mr. Ofczarzak ended by saying that no one in that area is opposed to the variance due to the fact
that all the houses are in alignment.
Mr. Sheffy stated that if a builder knows what the minimum setbacks are , and should be, what is the
reason for going over the setbacks . Mr. Ofczarzak replied that it is a human error. The curve makes it
more difficult to check the points . Mr. Ofczarzak stated that the field supervisor wanted to align the
houses on that street across the front so they all would be lined up down the street and he must not have
checked the comer points .
Chairman Hill asked if the field supervisor is a qualified surveyor. Mr. Ofczarzak replied no he is not
but he has been in the construction business for about 30 years . Chairman Hill asked if there was a
qualified surveyor with his company . Mr. Ofzcarzak replied that usually they do all their field platting
and most builders do . Mr. Ofzcarzak stated that he has been strict on making sure all the points are
done on the property so when the inspector makes his inspection there is not a problem. Mr. Ofzcarzak
stated that he did not feel the inspectors checked them .
Mr. Richards asked Mr. Ofzcarzak how long he has been in business . Mr. Ofzcarzak replied he has
been building for 24 years and this is the second variance he has requested . Mr . Richards stated that the
site plan submitted to the city was within all regulations and the house turns out not to be . Mr.
Richards asked where is the breakdown . Mr. Ofzcarzak replied that we are all human and we would
not have this Board if there were not special conditions . Mr. Ofzcarzak stated he is asking for a
hardship in this case . Mr. Richards asked based on what . Mr. Ofzcarzak replied based on the fact that
the house is already built. The conforming of the subdivision is not taking away from the value of the
property and it is not making the other homes look ugly by one house sticking out further than the other
one. Mr. Richards stated that the hardship was created by not following the site plan . Mr. Ofzcarzak
replied that was correct. Mr. Richards stated that the home is occupied now . Mr. Ofzcarzak replied
that was correct. The buyers are waiting to close on the house, waiting on the decision of this Board .
Mr. Lewis stated that he and the Board are very sympathetic to human errors but for them to grant a
variance there are two things the Board looks at and that is a special condition and hardship . Mr. Lewis
stated that it is a challenge to build on a cul-de-sac but that is not a special condition . Mr. Ofzcarzak
replied that the special condition would be , if they had to cut off the comer of the house the house
would look ugly . Mr. Lewis stated that might be a hardship but it is not anything special or unique to
the lot. Mr. Ofzcarzak questioned the two cases on Holleman presented earlier that the Board
approved variances for. The homes could have been redesigned . Mr. Lewis replied there were special
conditions presented . The home at 3325 Piccadilly had a pipeline easement and that makes the lot very
different.
There were continued discussions on the previous cases .
ZBAMinutes October 10, 200 I Page 7 of II
Chairman Hill stated that the previous cases have nothing to do with this case .
Mr. Lewis stated the point he was making is there is no special condition for this case .
Mr. Sheffy stated that he agreed with Mr. Lewis .
Mr. Ofzcarzak asked if it was written somewhere that unusual cul-de-sacs have different setbacks.
Chairman Hill asked staff if there was anything in the ordinances . Ms . Hitchcock replied no . Mr.
Ofzcarzak asked if the comers of the home were cut off if that would look good to the neighborhood .
Mr. Sheffy stated that should have been looked at before the house was built.
The Board continued discussions with Mr. Ofzcarzak.
Chairman Hill stated that each case has to stand on its own merits and you can not reference another
case. Chairman Hill explained that the Board has very specific legal requirements that have to be met to
grant a variance . One of the requirements is the hardship can not be solely financial.
Mr. Ofzcarzak ended by stating that the home is in alignment with the other homes in the area . It is two
small corners encroaching . Mr. Ofzcarzak stated he made a mistake and he is there to ask for a
vanance.
Mr. Richards stated that if he accepted the variance based on the report that a supervisor miss-guessed
the placement of the home, he did not think that adds to the value of the industry in the city .
Mr. Lewis stated that there appears to be plenty of room in the rear where the house could have been
pushed back.
The Board continued discussions concerning the lot.
With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition to the variance , Chairman Hill closed
the public hearing .
Chairman Hill stated that he has trouble with this type of case . In this particular case there are two very
small comers of the slab that are extending into the setback. It is so minimal. The affect of granting the
variance would not be a large impact.
Mr. Richards stated his concern is not with the size of the variance but how it happened . Mr. Richards
stated that is the way it happened and he can not condone it.
Mr. Allison made a motion to authorize a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of this
ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest , due to the following special conditions :
variance is deminimus ; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result
in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being : causes encroachment ; and such that the spirit of this
ordinance shall observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations : variance be
limited to the existing structure, and a front setback variance of 0 . 68 feet for the home and 1. 11 feet for
the garage be granted . Mr. Sheffy seconded the motion.
ZBA Minutes October I 0, 200 I Page8 of11
Chairman Hill asked since the variance runs with the land , can a restriction be placed that the variance is
for the current existing structure. Ms . Robinson re plied that because the var iance ru ns wit h the land
that restriction would not be enforceable . Chairman Hill stated that the variance would have to be
granted like a single setback variance of 1. 11 feet for the entire setback line across the front of the
property. Ms . Hitchcock replied that when this was discussed at staff level , it was understood that
when a variance like this is granted it is tied to the site plan , and to the areas, and it would not legitimize
a shorter setback for the whole property line . There would need to be two separate variances .
Chairman Hill stated that the motion offers the two variances but the Board was told they could not
necessarily enforce restriction to the existing structure. Chairman Hill stated to him the two issues are
going head to head . Ms . Jimmerson stated that during the discussions with Senior Staff, it was said that
the variance needs to be tied to the land and not to the structure . The variance request is being seen as
a variance to the small specific area that the encroachment exists.
Chairman Hill requested that the wording of the motion be modified so that the language does not tie
the motion to the existing structure, but rather ties it to the existing lot and reflects the two areas of
encroachment.
Mr . Allison made an amendment to his motion to add under limitations : "a front setback variance of
0 .68 feet for the home and 1.11 feet for the garage be granted . Chairman Hill suggested adding some
wording to tie the motion to the particular area . Ms. Hitchcock stated that the 0 . 68 was for the garage
and the 1.11 was for the home . Mr . Allison added as an amendment "to the areas of the lot shown on
the survey presented to the Board."
Mr. Richards asked what is the hardship listed on the motion . Mr. Allison replied causes encroachment.
Mr. Lewis stated that the encroachments are so small but there is no hardship . Mr. Richards stated that
it is a self-imposed hardship. If the site plan had been followed the case would not be before the Board .
The Board continued discussions on the hardship .
Chairman Hill allowed Mr. Ofzcarzak to approach the Board again. Mr. Ofzcarzak told the Board that
a hardship could be that it would take away from the ordinary houses in the neighborhood . Mr. Lewis
responded that at this time the city does not have a policy of enforcing encroachments . Mr. Ofzcarzak
replied that he did not know that. Ms. Jimmerson stated that right now that is not being enforced but
they also are not writing letters which is a problem with lenders .
Mr. Sheffy asked Mr. Ofzcarzak if the encroachment is keeping the buyers from getting a loan for the
home Mr. Ofzcarzak replied yes.
Mr. Allison offered again as an amendment under limitations " the limitations shall be to the
areas of the lot shown on the survey as presented the Board. Mr. Richards seconded the
amended motion. The Board voted (5-0) to amend the motion.
Mr. Richards asked if there was any change to the hardship .
Chairman Hill had Mr. Allison re-read the motion with the amendment. Mr. Richards stated that he
does not see how they can accept the hardship under the rules of the Board .
ZBA Minutes October 10, 2001 Page 9of II
The Board continued discussions on the hardship .
The Board discussed a previous case they approved that had a deminimus encroachment. Mr. Lewis
stated that he did not remember what the Board accepted as a hardship . Chairman Hill replied that they
accepted that it caused an encroachment. Chairman Hill asked if anyone could offer a better hardship .
Mr. Sheffy made the motion to accept Mr. Allison 's motion and call for a vote .
Chairman Hill called for the vote on Mr. Allison's motion to grant the variance and Mr. Sheffy's
second. The Board voted (3-2). Mr. Richards and Mr. Lewis voting against granting the
variance.
AGENDA ITEM NO 8: Update on the Unified Development Code.
Ms . Hitchcock handed to the Board Members a timeline leading up to the approval of the Ordinance .
Once the draft copy is made available for public review, copies will be made available to this Board.
Ms. Hitchcock stated that she would get with Senior Staff and find out the sections that would involve
this Board and the items they would have control over. Ms . Hitchcock encouraged the Board that if
they would like to make a formal statement to the City Council or the Planning & Zoning Commission
about any concerns to do so .
Mr. Lewis asked if in the proposed ordinance does it give city staff the ability to approve such small
variance cases like they heard earlier. Ms . Hitchcock replied that Senior Staff is working with the
Consultant and the discussion is for staff to take those smaller cases and they would have separate
requirements . That has not been drafted yet but it has been discussed to allow city staff the ability to
handle 20% variances and that was agreeable. Ms . Hitchcock encouraged the Board to take a look at
that area and then they could make their recommendations on specific issues . Mr. Lewis asked if it
would be appropriate for this Board to put together a recommendation or a resolution of support to be
included in the ordinance. Chairman Hill replied that he thought it would be appropriate after such time
that they have had the opportunity to read the draft and discuss it.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Future agenda items.
Discussion and possible action pertaining to the Unified Development Code.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: Adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned .
ZBA Minutes October 10, 200 I Page IO of II
APPROVED:
,,//~~"~
ZBAMinutes October JO, 2001 Page 11of11
I
. ......... ...-..-
I
7.S-t-e.(l-I
I
I
----'
~'fl'~ose ~
t;-,c..\-(.
')v'~"c,
~v-of o5eJ \,\oqs.e.
Loca-tion
--
+1~ ~01\t.wlC.Yl
Lot ?-(3 loc..K ~ M cC1.1ilot\\~ 5L1\)di iJ ;slt1n
-' -----
I
I 1.S ~cci-
1
l
I
I
I
I
I·
g" 'b~Y,o"'J
\ . '.'.#'.,;(
\_,_------------------------~
/
CALE 1." s : x
1·
I
i
\
I
I
\
}
LEGEND:
COl'fCRETE
1 .· • ·5 ...
/ . '.
= io·
\.
LOT 1
BLOCK 2
31to
LOT J
BLOCK 2
LOT 25
BLOCK 2
BEARING SYSTDA SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON
GRID NORTH IS £STABUSHED fROIA CITY or
COLLEGE STATION C.P.S. MONUMENTS.
FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMAlTOO, SEE
MEITS & BOUNDS .PREPARED MAY, 1997.
/
NOTE: BUILDING SETBACK LINES PER CITY
OF COLLE.GE STATION ORDINANCE NO. 1638.
/
R£VISED: 05--05-97; Pl.AT CALL & TITlE BLOCK
LAND TITtE SURVEY Pt..;a.T
OF A
0.104 ACRE TRACT
PORTION OF LOT 2, BLOCK 2
McCULLOCH'S SUBOMSION
VOLUME 122, PAGE 91
CRAWFORD BURNETT LEAGUE, A-7
COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY. TEXAS .
:5QOlEl 1. INCll -20 FIEr
SVIM)'" DlllE: 05-2D-V7
Pl.AT EWE< 05-21-97
.iotl NVWER: 97--37• '
Oii) -= !17-'!7!1
CR5 fl.£: l4CCIA. (-i); 97-$79 (j.6)
. PREPN!ED er:
KOIR SURVEWfC CO.
llOS CtfJRat SlMET. P.O. BOX 26'
~()
~~~ ... ?:!'., ·:1 L-----------:------=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=====--_.:.....--~------.. ;"-"
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Jessica Jimmerson
Email: jjimmers@ci.college-station.tx.us
Date : 10 -01-01
ZBA Meeting Date: 10-10-01
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
PURPOSE:
Habitat for Humanity
Setback Variance
316 Holleman (Case #01-186)
To allow for construction of a new home.
GENERAL INFORMATION,
Status of Applicant:
Property Owner:
Applicable
Ordinance Section:
Property Owner
Habitat for Humanity
Section 7, District Use Schedule -Table A
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Zoning and Land Use:
Subject Property:
North:
West & East:
South:
Frontage:
Access:
Topography &
Vegetation:
Flood Plain:
Zoned R-1 Single Family Residential, currently vacant.
The property is approximately 84 feet by '55 feet. Please
see the enclosed survey plat for more detail.
Across Holleman is the Lincoln Center.
Vacant property that is zoned R-1.
R-1 developed property .
55 feet on Holleman.
Holleman is classified as a minor arterial on the
Thoroughfare Plan. An access point must be granted. For
safety purposes the applicant is proposing to have a circular
drive to prevent backing maneuvers onto Holleman.
Relatively flat topography with few trees.
Not located in the floodplain.
VARIANCE INFORMATION
Setback Required: A rear setback of 25 feet is required for R-1 Single Family
homes.
Setback Requested: A rear setback of 16 feet.
J:\PZTEX1\PZ05464.DOC Page I of3
Case Overview:
ANALYSIS
The subject property is undeveloped. A house is planned
for this lot that will encroach into the required rear setback. The
back of the house will extend approximately eight feet over the
rear building setback line. Thus, the applicant is requesting a
variance of nine foot (or a 36% variance) to the rear setback
to allow for the construction of the house.
Special Conditions: The ZBA could consider the depth of the lot as a special
condition . Although the lot does exceed the current width
requirement of 50 feet, the lot does not meet the current depth
requirements for an R-1 single-family residential lot. In this case,
in addition to significantly restricting the building options on the
site, having less lot depth reduces the remaining buildable area
of the lot to less than that of surrounding properties .
Hardships:
J :\PZTEXT\PZ05464. DOC
The McCullough Subdivision, where the subject property is
located, is one of the original neighborhoods in College Station
and appears to have been platted prior to the City's adoption of
Subdivision Regulations. Subdivisions that have been platted in
more recent years are planned to accommodate the City's
setback requirements. It also appears that a portion of the front
of the property may have been taken by the City for the
expansion of Holleman, resulting in the depth of only 84 feet.
Once the front and rear setbacks are applied to properties with
the standard 100-foot depth a length of 50 feet remains for the
builder to work within. For this property, with a depth of 84 feet,
only 34 feet remain after the front and rear setbacks are applied,
significantly restricting the building options on the site and
lessening the buildable area.
The Board must decide if having a lot depth of 84 feet, instead of
the now required 100 feet, is a special condition, or if the
situation is a general condition.
If the ZBA considers the reduced lot depth as a special
condition, then the resulting hardships would be the significant
reduction in buildable area and the significant restriction on the
building options. The applicant would be unable to build a house
of comparable size to others in the area.
The Board may not consider a financial hardship as the only
hardship involved in a case, but it may be considered in addition
to other hardships. The subject property was donated to Habit~t
for Humanity by the City of College Station on September 13t ,
2001 for the purpose of building a house and selling it to a
resident that has been living in substandard housing. At Habitat
for Humanity, volunteer-friendly construction plans are not
created for each project , but are used repeatedly by the
organization on different properties to reduce the costs of the
homes. The additional cost of preparing a custom plan for this
lot would increase the overall cost of the project, therefor
negating the ability to provide low-income housing at a low cost
on this lot.
Pa ge 2 of3
Alternatives: Staff has identified the following alternatives to granting the nine-
foot rear setback variance request:
1. Grant a lesser variance.
The applicant has stated that the plan for the house would
encroach eight feet into the required setback . A variance of
nine feet would still allow for the construction of the home.
The additional foot would create room for a small margin of
error.
2. Do not grant the variance.
The structure is in the planning phase so , at this time, no
physical encroachments exist. A denial will require the
applicant to design a house that meets the rear setback
requirement for the lot. If no house is built on the lot within
eighteen months, ownership of the property will revert back to
the City of College Station.
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Ordinance Intent: Building setback requirements usually allow for some degree
of control over population density, access to light and air ,
and fire protection . These standards are typically justified
on the basis of the protection of property values.
Other information: There are several of the Community Development
Department's Optional Relocation Program (ORP) houses in
this area . To meet the City's Consolidated Plan's goals of
facilitating the development of affordable housing and
providing housing that promotes self-sufficiency, the City of
College Station has made the development of this lot as low-
income housing possible .
Number of Property
Owners Notified: 14
Responses Received: One call of inquiry was received.
ATTACHMENTS
Location Map
Application
Site Plan
Property Survey
J :\PZTEXT\PZ05464 .DOC Page 3 of3
FOR OFFICE USE . '\
CASE NO
ATESUBMilTED:-r-f""-?l("HJC...~
11. tr
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
_!/-Filing Fee of$75.00 . ~pplication completed in full. ~ffeuest form completed in full.
-d~~~tional materials may be required of the applicant such as site plans, elevation drawings, sign details and floor
' plans. The Zoning Official shall inform the applicant of any extra materials required.
APPLICANf/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project):
.,
Nam~ J am es Davis , Co n str u ctio n Coor d . B/CS Ha b i t at for Huma n ity -------
1 1 9 Lake Street
z· Cod 77801 1p e _____ _ TX State ----
City Bryan
Habitat @
E-Mail Address txcyber . com
9 7 9-775 -7412 979-823-7200
Phone Number Fax Number ----------------------------
PROPER1Y OWNER'S INFO ~~:""
N Ci t y of CS ~don a te th i s proper t y on 09/13 /01
ame ----------------------------------~
Mailing Address
------~--------~
City __________ _
State ----E-Mail Address -------------Zip Code ------
Phone Number Fax Number ----------------------------
LOCATION OF PROPER1Y:
Address .jA 16 Ho 11 e mNn
I
Lot 2 Block 2 Subdivision Mc Cu 1 1 o ch ' s
Description if there is no Lot, Block and Subdivision ----------------------
Action Requested: (Circle One) G aclc variallee)
Parking Variance
Sign Variance
Appeal of Zoning Official's Interpretation
Special Exception
Other ________ ~~-
Current Zoning of Subject Property Re s i d e n t i a 1 s i n g 1 e f a mi 1 y
Applicable Ordinance Section
The applicant~ prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached
hereto are true, correct and complete.
ZBA APPUCA TION
ZBMPP .DOC Ylf5l99
Date
1 of2
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CASE NO.: ____ _
DATE SUBMITI'ED:
VARIANCE REQUEST
The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested : q dJl1l ri dl ~ r,~-
Ha bi tat for Humanity is requestin a ~ variance on
the rear setback line. This would result
setback rather than the usual 25 foot setback.
This variance is necessary due to the following special conditions :
The lot is only 84 .11 feet deep and the setback totals 50 feet .
The shortest house plan available to us is 37 feet 10.5 inches,
w h i ch e x c e e d s the bu i 1 d in g s e t back s r e q u i r e d b y n e a r 1 y lf'1e ·e t .
Access is via a minor arterial street and room is required for
The a tu rnar o un d .FLt. theed f r on t . o ~'-th e .hou sen... dinan th th fin · 1 ha dshi · I unnecessary barClShlp \SJ mvolv by meetmg u1e proV1s1ons or u1e or ce o er an anc1a r pis are :
The CS Community Development Office plAns to donate this lot
to B/CS Habitat for the construction of a sin g le family dwelling
for a single parent family that has been livin g in a substandard
dwellin g . We have a sponsor read y to fund the construction but
no other lots are ava i lable. We plan to begin on 10/2 0.
The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible :
Turn the house sideways on the lot (40 .0 7 ) feet available) but
as the porch on the house extends four (4) feet from the front
of the house, it would project approximately two feet into the
7.5 foot setback on the side by about 2 feet, which is more
desirable.
This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following facts :
A rear variance into the 25 foot setback is less intrusive than
any other alternatives available and should not reflect
negatively on the adjacent properties.
The fucts stated in this application are true and correct .
VARIANCE REQUEST
VARIANCE.DOC Jn.S/99
Date I
2of2
"' --. • .• ....._ ...... ' ~· ... -.·.~ . ,. :> .. .,_ ... ., \, ·' • ..i.~ l b II" 3 1n • 31 10' "' Cl>" 3 112 • 31n • 3· 4' 10' ~· I . I ·\·-·· r 'I "~~-",,~" il Y ~--· · ! I ' I rlh · i!ffiw•\f-y31 A1'i ~ '° !• I tl I Cl ~ ',, .. 1 ~j I -It. . ' r. . 1~// I·~ 9 ~· ... I -I • "I '"'rr·=-!!) J; Q" "' :~ -~ • I [J s "' KITCl-1EN I -· I / I I I I I I I CJ ... },~: <>-l~~I -· l ~ 3D!'>c BATµ -(J" \:;· I I / / _ _JT_ ~ I 1\ I Q'1 ) 1 I <fl I\ I :n: ,' \ \ : ~: ,' \ \: ~I~' \\: l----\ >·,_ ' / --· 4')1'4 POST ...... ' '· / --~ BEDROOM 2 LIVING /·.9 _, I /. I )'.) ~TWIN f>l.I 4)'4 POST -·-····· ···-··-·:--------i. ~ ~ ~ '1 I· l . ··-··· .. ···-··--···. 1~:.:.io· ----· ___ J. ____ 16_'.0.' ________________ J . ·Floor Plan •C<!ls 1/4' • 1'-0' __ ... }·
FACSIMILE COVER SHEIT
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
I IOI Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone (979)764-3570 I Fax (979)764-3496
· Date: \ \) -:::..,. ~ D\ #of pages including cover:8
If you did not receive a complete f~ please ca// our office immediately for a new transmittal.·
FAX:3t~
RE: ·------------------------
FROM: v .( :l:'\"O._QR _ PHONE: (979)764-3570
REMARKS: D Urgent D For your review D Replay ASAP D FYI
------------------------~.
j
t I •
l •
f -•.
I J
I-
r
I
lU /UJ /Ul
TRA SMISSION OK
TX /RX NO .
CON ECTION TEL
CON ECTION ID
START THIE
USAGE TIME
PAGES
RESULT
1.ID•.C.~V.l ~J.,.l. Ul'VU
••••••••••••••••••••••••••• *** ACTIVITY REPORT *** •••••••••••••••••••••••••••
9654
9p7643785
C S COMM DEVELOP
10 /03 15 :24
03'39
8
OK
FACSIMILE COVER SHEET
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone (979)764-3570 I Fax (979)764-3496
· Date: \ 0 -~-()\ # of pages including cove8
ff you did not receive a complete f~ please calf our office immediately for a new transmittal
T0:1cf ~".;;;i ~ \S
COMPANY: ___________________ _
PHONE: (979)764-3570
REMARKS: D Urgent D For your review D Replay ASAP D FYI
------------------------~
_.
... , ..... :
. "
. <:
!'
......
t; . J L
-~ . c -( ....... ,,, ' ·--..... • I .... ~
,..
l
I
lU/UJ /Ul l:>: .i:U
TRA SMISSIO N OK
TX/RX NO.
CO NE CTION TEL
CO NNE CTION ID
ST ART TIME
USAGE TIME
PAGES
RES ULT
*************************** *** ACTIVITY REPORT ***
***************************
9652
9pp7757412
10 /03 15:14
05 '23
8
OK
• • •
• ?
i -• .
i
(
SCALE : 1'' = 20·
~
<><l?
~ ~ ~ ~o
...
)
\
BEGINI
LOT
J' BLOC
\,}>.
/\..> ~-~o-, ~v ~1-~ "
~\_ ' //
ef>o/ ~
) ¥
0.104 ACRE TRACT / <
.$"~
..>
/.I -~-~ 1'
~>. ~~ ~-4~;;;-~°'# 1-~
~ \<' v
~ ,re> .rr
LOT 1
BLOCK 2
5/6" !ROH
ROD SO
\l<ri,
0
-·L/ ___ _ BEARING SYSTE
GRID NORTH A~
COLLEGE STATIC
82·DG N a1'~~se61L.~t3E STATION Chec k type of mail or serv ice : Affix St amp Here ..
(If issued as a '? oE"i r ~2.(;::1'-1 •
P.O . Box 9960 0 Certified 0 Recorded Delivery (I nternational) certificate of mailing, * 0 COD 0 Registered or for additional ";; ~ 4 -· • College Station , TX 77842 0 Del ive ry Confirmation 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise copies of this bill) " . <>ttf.l rt * 0 Express Mail 0 S ignature C onfirmation Postmark and ~~ SU Z:S·o 1. z ~-·I~' . = 1 ..2 5 -* -* 0 Insu red Date of Receiot -* I H and ling A ct ual \i -:\...~ PBMnn * ·e, Street, and PO Address Postage Fee * Charge if Regist * 7114367 U.S. POITAOE • 01-186 •
Ewlice E . Williams Revocable Living Trust
IO 11 Eleanor Street
College Station, Texas 77840-6174
01-186
Atllie C, Floyd H & Leroy C Clark
910 Eleanor Street
College Station, Texas 77840-6126
::...
~ ..
01-186 ~
> ·-Mary Lee Steen ~~Tc ·-Cl)
r-::-.... -(.) -.
311 Hollemann Drive West {$ ~ t\~ m ~ cu
College Station, Texas 77840 c c Cl a:
',{ ~ ·-...
1-1 </J"?0:; JC.), ·-,, Cl) -.. .. .. :i?: cu c .. :I 01-186 c --,.., u -Esther R. Steen Thomas ~ ~~ ~~ o-:c .. GI
1-.1 ... ·-.. .. a: .. ::: II) 5913 Bogey Lane Pr~
·m--Lo· -.. ::: ....
Waco, Texas 76708-9743 -0 a: .. (.) u ·-(~
c GI CL
01-186 0 .. en
Marcellus Stewart i;,)-_:I ..
C/O Carrolyn Porch ::... ~ .. c
P .O. Box 1673 -~-... ;
College Station, Texas 77841 -1673 > ·-·-en -
15 1
...
..
Total Number f~es Total Number of Pieces Postmaster, Per (Name of receiving employee) The full dec laration of value is requ ired on a I domestic and inte rnat io na l re gis tere d mail. The maxim um inde mni ty pa ya ble for the
Listed bvJ>e nd Received at Post Office oJJL re cons tru ction of nonn ego ti abl e docum ent s und er Express Ma il doc um ent reco nstructio n insurance is $500 per piece subject to ,---_5 add itiona l li mitat ion s for mu ltiple pieces lo st or dama ges in a sing le ca tas trophic occurre nce . Th e maxi mum inde mn ity payable --)
on Exp res s Mail merch and is e insuranc e is $500 , but opt ion al Expr ess Ma il Service merchandise insurance is available for up to
$5 ,000 to som e, bu t not all co untries . Th e maxi mum Ind emn ity payab le is $25 ,000 for registered mai l. See Domestic Mail
Manual R900 , S913 , and S921 for limitatio ns of cov erag e on insure d and COD mail. See In te rna tional Mail Manu al for li mitations
of coveraae on international ma il. Soecial handl ina charaes aoolv on lv to Standard Mail (Al an d Standard Mail (Bl oarcel•.
I .L'nmnlAtA hv Tvru~writer . Ink. or Ball Point Pen
r.•
62-DG
tfrV~OOt:l~ STATION
P.O. Box 9960
College Station , TX 77842
01-186
Edgar L . & Doris J Banks
1999 Revocable Trust
436 Higate Drive
Daly City, CA 94015-3903
01-186
Billie Jean Lee ET AL
1109 Arizona Street
Collee:e Station. Texas 77840-4201
01-186
W .L. Sisson
1005 University Drive E STE 105
College Station, Texas 77840-2145
Jose G & Maria T Benavides
1102 Phoenix Street
College Station, Texas 77840-4218
01-186
Malvonee Merchant
1104 Phoenix Street
College Station, Texas 77840-4218
14
15 .-
To ~ r.•u111 u.,r o f Pieces Total Number of Pieces
Li -der Rece ived at Post Office
.~ J s
-Check type of ma il or service : Affix Stamp Here '-=== -~-Z.(a>w I
'I • • • •
(If issued as a
D Certified D Recorded Delivery (International) certificate of m a iling, ~ 't.GE S ~ -~~~ ~ -D COD D Registered or for additional
D Del ivery Confirmation D Return Recei pt for Merc ha ndise copies of this bill) ~ .. tf.1 j~SEP 2 S'O 1 ~, fl~ll' : 12 5 -n ~v,..roee •A""'il D S ignature Confir mation Postmark and -Date of Receio t -
Na me, St reet, and PO Add re ss Postage Fee Handling Actua l Valu e
PBMETIR Charge if Registerec ·. 'r 'If 71143'67 U.S. POSTAGE
~
>-.. .... .. -> . .: ·-41 -(,) r-
1.71 Q G>
c c a:
--0 ·-""' ~~ N ·-"O 41 -.. ..
"' c .... :::J ',, c -;: ,,. (,) ....
0 , "<...',¢ )~; o-:c ... G>
..,~ ·-.. .... a: ~ 7C ·-fy .. --"' \~~ ~~y.I E .. ,:;: -0 (,) a: .. (,) ·-dl
.............. '.JI ~ c G> a.
-· 0 .. ti)
~ ~:s ..
>-"' .. c
v .::::· > ·-ti) -""
Postmaster, Per (Name of receiving employ ee) The f ull declaration of value is requ ired on a I domestic and intern atio na l re gis te re d mail. Th e ma ximum in demn ity payable for the
rec on struction of nonneg oti abl e doc um ent s un der Expres s Mai l doc um ent reco nstruc tio n insur ance is $500 per piece subject to
add ition al lim itat ion s for mu ltiple piec es los t or damag es in a si ngle ca tastro phic occurre nce . The maxi mum ind emn ity paya ble
on Expr ess Mai l merc hand is e insura nce is $500, but opt ion al Express Mail Service me rchan dise insura nce is availab le for up to 8fti.A. $5 ,000 to some, but not all countri es. Th e ma xi mum ind emn ity payable is $25,000 fo r registered mail. See Domestic Mail
Manual R900 , S913 , and S921 for lim it at ion s of cove rage on insu red an d COD mail. See International Mail Manual for limitations
llV'"" -of coveraae on internationa l mail. Soe ci al hand li na chara es aoo lv onl v to Stan da rd Mail (A) and Stan dard Mail (B) pa rcels .
( ~nmn t Aho! bv T voewriter, Ink, or Ball Point Pen
* • ..
* • * • * ._.
/
Address of Sender
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
P.O . Box 9960
College Station, TX na42
Line Article Number
I
01 -186
Minnie Ruth McNeal
1106 Phoenix Street
College Station, Texas 77840-4218
01 -186
Guillermina & Ofelia Banuelos
400 Holleman Drive
College Station, Texas 77840-4297
01 -186
Lucille Granville Estate
C/O Alfred McGowan
753 28th Street
Ogden, UT 84403-0257
'
01-186
Kimme & Latonia Chambers D aily
1213 Arizona Street
College Station, Texas 77840-4257
14
15
I
Total Nuy1 ir of Pieces Total Number of Pip
"''lj~ Received at cff e
I ---I
Check type of mail or service: Affix Stamp Here
(If issued as a D Certified D Recorded Delivery (International) certificate of mailing,
0 COD D Registered or for additional
D Delivery Confirmation D Return Receipt for Merchandise copies of this bill)
D Express Mail D Signature Confirmation Postmark and
D Insured Date of Receiot
.-
t= -~2~.;a!J_'I ·-'='" .... C)£ s,.. ~ A
.... ,. ~~ 1.0 0 = IC> 0 " ,; -.t. SEP i 6'0 \ 2 t rJ.• .. ~ --
.. • • • • • • * * •
Addressee Name , St reet , and PO Address Postage Fee Handling Actual V
Charge if Regist
PBMfftA
T,. 7114167 U.8. POSTAGE • .. • ..
~ ~
> .. ..
' -V' =-A.G-1 ~);.>, > G.I ·-~ (.)
lo'{ Sf'p"\·:; . \ a'I Q Qi
.>\ c c a: ,. ~ .,.... \. . i t"I ·-"" -
l-\<~ ~(i •. } ·-'ti Cl) .... .. ..
1/:1 j ,..., C'll c .. ::s c -;: ... (,) ....
~f r; ~ o-:z: .. G> ·-.. .. a: .. ; Cl> ft! -E ... ,;: ...,
0 ~ a: .. () ·-c G> a.
0 .. en
Q--_:s ..
> C'll .. ; ... .=::-> ·-C/) -...
,_~O'~ The full declaration of value is requ ired on a I domestic and interna tio na l regi stered mail . The ma xi mum ind emn ity pa ya ble for the
reconstruct ion of nonnegotiable documents under Express Ma il docum ent recon st ructi on insurance is $5 00 pe r piec e sub ject to
add it ional lim itations for multiple pie ces los t or damages in a si ng le cata stro ph ic oc curre nc e. The maxi mum ind emni ty pa ya ble
on Express Ma il merchand ise insuranc e is $500 , but opt ion al Express Ma il Service me rchand ise insurance is avail ab le fo r up to
$5 ,000 to some , bu t not all countries . The max imum ind em nity payab le is $25 ,000 for regis tered mai l. See Domestic Mail
Manual R900 , S913 , and S921 for limitatio ns of coverage on in sured and COD ma il. See lnlern atio nal Mail Manual fo r limi tatio ns
of coveraae on international ma il. Soecial hand li na charaes aoolv onlv to Standard Ma il (Al and Standard Ma il (Bl oarcel•.
C,t'o!J)(>lete by Typewriter, Ink, or Ball Point Pen
I
•··
LEGAL NOTICE
DATE TO BE PUBLISHED: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2001 ONLY
BILL TO:
Deborah Grace
The City of College Station
P.O. Box 9960
College Station, TX 77842
MasterCard # 5478-9900-0018-2794
Expires March 2004
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
The College Station Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing to consider a
rear setback variance for 316 Holleman Drive, lot 2, block 2, McCulloch ' s Subdivision .
Applicant is Habitat for Humanity.
The hearing will be held in the Council Room of the College Station City Hall , 1101 Texas
Avenue at the 6 :00 p .m . meeting of the Board on Wednesday, October 10, 2001
Any request for sign interpretive services for the hearing impaired must be made 48 hours
before the meeting . To make arrangements call (979) 764-3547 or (TDD) 1-800-735-
2989 .
For additional information, please contact me at (979) 764-3570 .
Jess ica Jimmerson
Staff Planner
September 26, 2001
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Re: Variance request for 316 Holleman Drive.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
This is to notify you that the City of College Station is considering a variance request for
the following property:
Applicant: HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
Subject Property: 316 HOLLEMAN DR
(See attached location map.)
Proposed Variance: Rear Setback
The Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, October 10,
2001at 6:00 p.m. to consider the request. The public hearing will be held in the City Hall
Council Room located at 1101 Texas Avenue South, College Station, Texas.
All owners of the subject property and property owners within 200 feet of the subject
property have received notification of this request .
Any request for sign interpretive services for the hearing impaired must be made 48 hours
before the meeting . To make arrangements call (979) 764-3547 or (TDD) 1-800-735-
2989 .
For additional information, contact the City Planning Office, (979) 764-3570 .
Jessica Jimmerson
Staff Planner
BCAD_ID
R103836
R29554
R29562
R29563
R32202
R32203
R32204
R32221
R32222
R32223
R32224
R32243
R32244
R32245
R32262
R32265
R32266
R32267
OWNER_NAME
COLLEGE STATION , CITY OF
WILLIAMS , EUNICE E
CLARK , ATHIE C &
STEEN , MARY LEE
THOMAS , ESTHER R STEEN
STEWART, MARCELLUS
BANKS , EDGAR L & DORIS J
LEE , BILLIE JEAN ETAL
COLLEGE STATION , CITY OF
SISSON , WL
COLLEGE STATION , CITY OF
BENAVIDES , JOSE G & MARIA T
MERCHANT ,MALVONEE
MCNEAL, MINNIE RUTH
BANUELOS , GUILLERMINA & OFELIA
GRANVILLE , LUCILLE ESTATE
DAILY, KIMMIE &
COLLEGE STATION , CITY OF
ADDRESS_1_
ATTN : ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT
REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST
FLOYD H & LEROY D CLARK
311 HOLLEMAN DR W
5913 BOGEY LN
C/O CARROL YN PORCH
1999 REVOCABLE TRUST
1109 ARIZONA ST
ATTN : ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT
1005 UNIVERSITY DR E STE 105
ATTN : ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT
1102 PHOENIX ST
1104 PHOENIX ST
1106 PHOENIX ST
400 HOLLEMAN DR
C/O ALFRED MCGOWAN
LA TONIA CHAMBERS
ATTN : ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT
ADDRESS_2_
PO BOX 9973
1011 ELEANOR ST
910 ELEANOR ST
PO BOX 1673
EDGAR L & DORIS J BANKS CO-TR
PO BOX 9973
PO BOX 9973
753 28TH ST
1213 ARIZONA ST
PO BOX 9973
ADDRESS_3_
436 HIGATE DR
CITY STATE
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
WACO TX
COLLEGE TX
DALY CIT CA
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
OGDEN UT
COLLEGE TX
COLLEGE TX
ZIP
778427973
778406174
778406126
77840
767089743
778411673
940153903
778404201
778427973
778402145
778427973
778404218
778404218
778404218
778404297
844030257
778404257
778427973
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Trish ,
Art Roach
Trish Burk
9/18/01 2:02PM
ZBA Applications , 316 & 320 Holleman
The ZBA applications that Jim turned in had incorrect addresses on them (416 & 420 Holleman instead
of 316 & 320 Holleman). I advised Development Services to go ahead and change the 4's to 3's . Please
make the changes on your copy as well.
Thanks ,
Art Roach
Housing Development Coordinator
City of College Station
(979) 764-3811
CC: Debora Grace
Page 11