HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Re: Variance request for 2iV Lee Ave.
We would appreciate your granting this request in view of the fact that the present
garage was built before property restrictions and this would just be an extension of the
garage to the south which will not affect anyone's property.
Our neighborhood would appreciate your focusing on two problems that have not been
addressed. 1. The house on Lee rented by students. I understand that only four
unrelated people can live in one house and there are more than that. They have
evaded detection by parking in the back. 2. We ask that you focus on having the lot
located on the corner of Suffolk and Park Place (that is covered with weeds and broken
pieces of concrete) cleaned up.
Thank you,
,, Q
Janet Loveless (206 Lee Ave.).
0 W -D C O P. (D
C
3 -0 3
D
7 W N " < (D tm _ O O
(D O O r W0 n -0 O
o Qr,. a0 mxmrncn 3w — 000 0-
3 a - ww fa) X. ( `< * �' rC) m m
3 aw 55. 5. w 3 -• = a) 3 5_ www OCD a N
O o 5. w w -6.(O (D w a •' a D S?° (D < < 0
cu' m ac° C �, w -, aw a -I - 0 0Dw w. z
a s �
•
aa) ao3orn000m wPa � aw3 D z
0 o -, cwn3 -o -- o 6n - � ,:'< w' 0 O
w D o w < (D . - D w. ,-* 0 GO
w C * (D0) om -, m _ 0 a) c a O
m w N ? o * — w �-* � >
cn o0 o - w a CO 3 — o c 33
-a w Q , o co O w m o a N m 0
1
0 - w (D (D (ap ' W o 0 0 0
c co, 000a CD 0 0 7 o D
`< w oDr- ( 9. mw `z m - 0
c� � aT3 7 (DCa) N 0) m o c
c 30 � co � wm o mn � m H
(D w 'c° -° -h r a<< CD
w W0 -, o 3 ,rt
X03 0 � 0o (I) � � 7 > m
,-� 0 3 x3 * o6 � < z
w � r � - -fi zH
r.,. (n (D — co a) o ,--. • CD
N -0 < w Cn D 0 O= p 0
a o O o D -.
o w a ° m
a 0- m comp '-' a CD 2
m m a) x. co _,, . Qo
CT) m m
w 5 o a) o •y 0 0(0m
3
m in � a m wm �
Ci (�D o -1- C ° (D O 0
3 m co' � a
Sm ,-I- m
S o a
LJ
1
U
4
d
4
Kelly Templin -C D Claycamp-Construction at 210 Lee Page 1
From: Kelly Templin
To: Carla Robinson; Harvey Cargill; Lance Simms; Molly Hitchcock; Terry Boriskie
Date: 6/16/03 4:17PM
Subject: C D Claycamp-Construction at 210 Lee
Folks: I just got off the phone with Mr. Claycamp. I told him that, after consulting with staff(including the
City Attorney)that Dr. Hoekstra could construct a building up to 35 feet in height. I explained that the
height of the structure was not limited by the Board when they considered the variance and therefore staff
would have to permit anything up to the maximum height.
Mr. Claycamp explained that he had just spoken to the contractor and had had a heated exchange.
However, he conceded the point that the height was unlimited up the 35'and that he had not made his
appeal within the allotted period. He said he would have to forego watching sunsets and would have to
train himself not to look in the director on the garage. -Kelly
6.11 .2003
Mr. Kelly E.Templin
Head of Development Services
City of College Station, Tx
Re: Variance Hearing for 210 Lee Additions and Modifications
The following represents, to the best of our recollection, the proceedings of the hearing.
1 . A building permit was granted for remodeling and new construction and was granted prior to
the variance hearing. The proposed eave height was to be 12'6". This information was not
discussed at the time of the variance hearing.
2. It was noted that "the eave and the eave height of the new garage will be similar to the eave
and the eave height of the existing structures." The eave height of a structure, though not a
zoning consideration, would have a direct influence on the decision of the neighboring property
owners to support, or not support, the requested variance.
3. The written information presented at the hearing labled the structure as a single story garage
to be used for the restoration of 4 antique cars. There was no reference made concerning a
two story structure erected approximately 2'6" from the property line.
The first time the Oakwood Neighborhood Association learned the garage was to be a two story
structure was when it was erected on Sat. May 31, 2003, after the standard time allowed for a
new hearing had passed. Upon seeing that the height and details of the garage were
comparable with two-story construction, it was discovered that the building permit was granted
on the basis of a garage with an eave height of 12'9". I have been told by more than one
neighbor, had they received correct information about the height of the structure, they would
have most certainly not supported the variance. The structure as being built is not the
approved 12'9" eave, nor is it a single story. It has a 15'9" eave height with two floors.
I have been informed that there is an available appeal process, however the timeframe for
appeal has elapsed and that option is no longer available. Therefore, I respectfully request that
the Zoning Board of Adjustments and Appeals revisit their decision to grant the variance, due to
the fact that their decision was based on misinformation.
4100. ♦Alr / r, 41.
C.D. Clays- p
300 Lee Ave. Col -•e Station, TX 77840
cc:Harvey Cargill, Jr., City Attorney
George C. Jessup Chair, Oakwood Neighborhood Association
Billy J. Kling
Fred Gardner
Betty Woods
Jay Goss
! - ' - -
7.24.2003
glefep '.earitor aait'ices
College Station, City Council t^�-� �/ ���
Re: Zoning Adjustments
9.7
This letter is to inform you of how Planning and Zoning requirements can be ignored.
Residents of College Station Historic District who live adjacent to 210 Lee Avenue became aware of
this fact on May 31, 2003. The activities of the Zoning Board of Adjustments were nullified by a
• knowledgeable builder and owner.
To build a 24'0" high single story garage the procedure followed by Richard Jefferson -
Contractor and Bruce Hoekstra - Owner was this:
1. A Partial Building Permit was granted on an incomplete set of plans.
2. They requested a hearing asking for zoning adjustments to the side and back yard.
The plans and elevations were not presented.
3. The owner provided the neighbors with information that leads one to believe the 4
car garage would be similar in character to the existing garage. The existing garage
is a single story wood frame approx. 12 'high.
4. ZBA questions to the owner and contractor were answered in a guarded way to
encourge the board to pass the variance requested. In this case a board member
said to Bruce Hoekstra ?ell us about the structure, how high will it be? The answer
was "it will be a single story structure and have architctural lines similar to the
existing house." Please see the enclosed photos of what was actually built.
5. The contractor then requested a building permit for a two story garage and received
approval. The building official said he had no obligation to limit construction to a height
less than 34'. (It made no difference that the owner told, ZBA It would be single
story building.)Once the building official takes over his only interest is in building code
compliance, not the spirit of ZBA variance.
6. The contractor and owner did nothing that let the ZBA or the neighbors know what
was going to be built until 30 days had passed. The ZBA hearing was on March 4,
2003, the neighbors learned on May 31, 2003 what was to be built. This prevents the
neighbors launching an appeal.Thirty-one days after the hearing any structure can
be built within building code restrictions. In this instance a 24'high structure was
built. The contractor claims it to be a single story structure. The plan examiner
questioned the size of the second floor joist, so there was no doubt the Building Offical
thought it to be a two story structure.
Had the neighbors known what the building official knew before the dead line passed they
could have appealed the variance. Had the owner answered the question, "How high will the
structure be?" honestly with it will have a 15'-9" eave height and be 24' to the ridge", no variance
would have been granted Had the Building Official required a SINGLE STORY GARAGE to be
built as ZBA was informed at the hearing construction would have been stopped.
All of these"iifs" aside the fact is, my wife and I will never again be able to look to the
northwest out of our living room at 300 Lee Avenue and enjoy evening sunsets we have enjoyed for
36 years. This has been taken away from us by 600 al of aluminum siding and over 400 s.f. of
red metal roof similar to many businesses in the community. At this stage in our lives we are very
sad about this fact. We hope no one else goes through a similar experience. You can keep this
from happening to other citizens of College Station by passing the ordinance necessary to close
this loophole.
Respectfully requested by:
M j
A. C?
ycamp C i. CI-y camp
300 Lee Ave.
College Station, Texas
7.22.2003
Re: Property at 210 Lee Avenue
Attached: Letter to College Station City City Council
Progress Prints of 24' high single story garage at 210 Lee Ave
From: C.D. Claycamp
300 Lee Avenue
College Station, TX 77840
Ph. 696-3056
CC 1 pr-r
0,2„.„
45i49
zz 5