Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgendaAdditionally, it is the opiniot J the staff that the variance is not nek ,ary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, nor do extraordinary or special conditions affect the subject property such that a strict application of City codes and /or ordinances deprives an applicant reasonable use of his or her property. Chairman Goss opened the public hearing. Tres Watson, the applicant, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Mr. Watson spoke in favor of the variance. Mr. Benn asked Mr. Watson if his concern is if the carport has to be built within the ordinance, the construction of the driveway might kill the Ash tree. Mr. Watson replied that he would either have to remove the tree or the driveway would be close enough to the tree where it might cause damage. Mr. Benn asked Mr. Watson if the variance was not granted, what he would do. Mr. Watson replied that it would allow roughly a 23 -foot carport overall. He believed the eve has to also be out of the setback. If you add in the posts on either side he would probably have to take out a couple of feet. He figured that would leave him right at 20 -feet. He added that that would be enough to get a car in if you came in at an angle. He was not sure how that would work. Mr. Dictson asked if you could overhang in a setback. Mr. Hard replied that the eve can extend 18- inches into the setback. Mr. Watson ended by saying that he would accept a lesser variance as staff indicated as an alternative i in the staff report. With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition, Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. There were discussions among the Board Members as to what the special conditions and hardships were. Mr. Sheffy made the motion to not authorize a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest, due to the lack of any special conditions, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Dictson seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing, presentation, discussion and possible action of an Appeal to the Zoning Official's Interpretation concerning whether a specific use is appropriate in C -1 (General Commercial). Applicant is Clint Schroff, Clarke & Wyndham. (05 -198). The Administrator issued a Written Interpretation stating that the use proposed by the applicant is not permitted in the C -1 General Commercial zoning district. Please see the attached letter of Written Interpretation issued on November 3, 2005 for background information and for the Administrator's final determination. The Written Interpretation has been appealed by the applicant, Mr. Clint Schroff, CCIM, Senior Property Manager for Clarke & Wyndham, Inc. The proposed use includes pr.,,arily fabrication, storage of scientific . ruments for maintenance and calibration, pallet storage, training. This use also requires the installation of an 8 -foot roll up door and loading zone on the property. The Administrator does not believe that the use is consistent with the } intent of the C -1 General Commercial zoning district. Section 5.3 of the Unified Development i Ordinance states the following as the purpose of the C -1 General Commercial zoning district: "This District is designed to provide locations for general commercial purposes, that is, retail sales and service uses that function to serve the entire community and its visitors." It is the Administrator's opinion that the proposed use would be more compatible with the R &D Research and Development zoning district, the M -1 Light Industrial zoning district, or possibly the C -2 Commercial Industrial zoning district, all of which permit similar uses. It is important to note that the Administrator's interpretation does not apply to any particular property, but to the C -1 General Commercial zoning district in general. Any decision by the Zoning Board of Adjustments will apply to all C -1 General Commercial property within the City of College Station. Mr. Simms ended his staff report by showing the Board pictures of subject property. Chairman Goss opened the public hearing. The following persons stepped forward to speak in favor of the variance and were sworn in by Chairman Goss. — Clint Schroff, the applicant — Frank Wilford, Lease space tenant After lengthy discussions on what the actual use of the lease space would be, Mr. Schroff stated that he made a mistake. He filed the building permit in haste with the floor plan showing the fabrication area and wood working shop. He stated that these functions will not take place at this location. Mr. Benn stated that if the lease space is not going to be for these functions, could the application be withdrawn and a new building permit filed stating the correct use. Mr. Wilford stated that if that would be the best way to approach this and he could get some assurance that that is all he needed to do, he would do that. Mr. Simms stated that he would recommend that the Board vote to uphold the Zoning Official's Interpretation and the applicant could go through the process of amending the building permit application. Mr. Benn made the motion to uphold the decision or interpretation by the Administrator in the enforcement of the Unified Development Ordinance, as the decision or interpretation meets the spirit of the Ordinance and substantial justice done. The motion was seconded by Mr. Braune and passed unopposed (5 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 : Public hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action, to consider a parking variance for 1351 Earl Rudder Freeway, Lot 1 -R, Block 1, in the High Ridge Subdivision. Applicant is Natalie Ruiz, IPS Group — Planning Solutions. (05 -205). Staff Planner Lindsay Boyer presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting the variance to reduce the number of required parking spaces for the Varsity Ford Auto Dealership by 77 spaces.