The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/21/1989 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTES • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustment March 21, 19$9 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ruesink, Members Thompson, Gilmore, Gentry {arrived late) and Council Liaison Birdwell MEMBERS ABSENT: Members Henry and Alternate Members Garrett 8: Baker STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner Kee, Assistant Gity Attorney Banks and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Gall to order - explanation of functions and liaitations of the Board. Chairman Ruesink called the meeting to order and explained the functions and limitations of the Board. Additionally, he informed the audience that because any positive action by this Board requires an affirmative vote by 4 of the 5 members action taken at this meeting will require a unanimous vote. (Member Gentry had not yet arrived at the meeting; Council Birdwell was asked to serve as a voting member of the Board.) AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Approval of sinntes - meeting of March 7, • 1989. Mr. Birdwell referred to the paragraph at the bottom of page 2 of the draft minutes, and stated that the phrase "it is common in the neighborhood for 5.0' setbacks and" had been deleted from the original motion at the time it was amended by him, and he would like the minutes to reflect this. Mrs. Volk asked what she should do if the official motion form actually reads as reflected in the draft minutes. Mrs. Kee suggested that perhaps the form itself should be brought back to the next meeting so Mr. Birdwell, Mr. Thompson and Mr. Ruesink can make the necessary change and place their initials by the change. All agreed this would be the best way to handle the form. With the deletion of the previously stated phrase, Mr. Birdwell made a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Thompson seconded the motion which carried unanimously (4- 0). J AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Hear visitors. No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: Consideration of a request for a variance to sign regulations at the Cedar Creek Condos located at 1000 E. University Drive in the One Lincoln Place subdivision. Owner is Cedar Creek Ltd. Mrs. Kee began her brief review of the staff report by identifying the applicant, the • property owners, the request {for a variance to the sign regulations to change an existing subdivision sign to an apartment sign by changing only the copy on the existing sign) and the applicable ordinance section. Mr. Gentry arrived at the meeting at this time. • Mrs. Kee then made a slide presentation while describing the physical characteristics of the subject property, including area zoning and land uses, the dimensions of the property, the private access easement into the property which serves all tracts in the subdivision and the topography of the area. She continued her report by reading Section 12.3.C. of the zoning ordinance (Ordinance No. 1638) which applies to apartment identification signs. She explained that the existing subdivision sign, while in the subdivision, is off-premise from the apartment project and is located on property which is zoned for commercial uses rather than multi-family uses. She stated the sign was erected in 1984 prior to the current sign regulations, but its size and height fall within the current regulations for apartment signs. She explained that its present location does not meet the current apartment sign regulations doe to (1)the zoning classification of the land and (2}the fact that the location is not on the apartment groperty. She then read the charge to the Zoning Board of Adjustment as contained in the zoning ordinance, stated 3 area property owners had been notified of this request and none had responded, and then offered to answer any questions. Mr. Birdwell asked if the street into this subdivision is truly a private street and not a dedicated right-of-way and Mrs. Kee replied that it is a private access easement which provides access from University Drive to all tracts in this subdivision. Mr. Birdwell asked if this type easement rather than a dedicated right- of-way would be allowed now to which Mrs. Kee replied that it would be, and additionally, that although the zoning ordinance has been revised since the subject • sign was erected, the subdivision regulations are the same. Mr. Birdwell stated that there seems to be no problem with this type of access now, but when commercial development begins to take place on the other lots in the subdivision, they will have totally individual interests, and he foresees difficulties. There were no other questions of staff, to the applicant was invited forward. r~ U unique/special condition not generally found within the City as being that the Cedar Creek complex is the only one in the City that sits so far back from the road that it cannot be seen. Gwen Walter, the applicant and manager of the Cedar Creek Condos at 1000 East University Drive came forward and was sworn in. She stated that the hardship which had developed from strict adherence to the ordinance is that when an emergency vehicle is needed, valuable time is lost while the emergency services vehicle tries to locate this complex. She explained that the condo complex/property is not readily visible from University Drive, and there is no street sign or any markings to show the location to traffic on University Drive. She went on to identify the Mr. Ruesink asked why the name on the sign is "One Lincoln Place" rather than Cedar Creek Condos and Mrs. Kee explained that "One Lincoln Place" is the name of the whole subdivision and the sign as it exists is a "subdivision" sign which is allowed by ordinance. She added that the actual location of the sign is on property zoned C-1, which is also allowed. Then she explained that "Cedar Creek Condos" is the name of the specific complex which cannot be easily seen from University Drive, and that complex is located on a lot which is zoned R-4 Low Density Apartments. She continued her explanation by pointing out that if the name on the existing sign is changed to read "Cedar Creek Condos", it will become anoff-premise sign (which is not allowed by ordinance} for an apartment complex; and additionally, that the sign will not only be off-premise, it will also be in an entirely different zoning district. ZBA Minutes 3-21-89 Page 2 • Mr. Thompson asked what would happen if an office complex is developed on one of the A-P lots between this complex and the C-1 lots along University Drive and Mrs. Kee replied that because of the location and type of subdivision, the existing sign can be used for the entire subdivision, except for the apartments, since that would make it an off-premise sign. Mr. Birdwell made a motion to authorize a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due to the following unique special conditions not generally found within the City: the sign will be located in the median of a private street, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in substantial hardship to this applicant being: Due to the distance from a public street, a sign in accordance with the ordinance could not be seen, and such that the spirit and intent of this ordinance shall be preserved and the general interests of the public and applicant served, subject to the following limitations: sign to be no bigger than existing sign. Mr. Gilmore seconded the motion. Mr. Thompson asked if it should read "private street" or "private access" and Mrs. Kee replied that the terms are interchangeable. Mr. Birdwell then stated that he sees problems in the future with additional development for this type of situation, and he thinks the street should have a name and be a public street. Votes were cast on Mr. Birdwell's motion, and the motion carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Other business. • There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: Adjourn. Mr. Gentry made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Thompson seconded the motion which carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. APPROVED: ATTEST: ----------------------------- City Secretary, Dian Janes Acting Chairm n, Michael Gentry ZBA Minutes 3-21-89 Page 3 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • FORMAT FOR POSITInB MOTION Variance to Sign Regulations: From Section 12 Ordinance 1638 I move to authorize a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due to the following unique special conditions not generally found within the City: ----------- -------------------------- i'YI ~'~it/~'l yr ,6- ~'~'/ ~',~g•~'~" and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in substantial hardship to this applicant being: -------- ------------------------------- ~-cdLb /G '~'r -------- w~ ~_ ~'P'd _~ar- --------- --- --- and such that the spirit and intent of this ordinance shall be ~ preserved and the general interests of the public and applicant ~fi~1~`'~ served, subject to the following limitations: ' ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Motion made by: ___~I CK ~ I 1~+~ELL~s.~________ _ `~ Motion seconded by: _~u-,~_ _~.~~~~_______ Voting resul --1- -------------------------- Cy -~ ------ --------------- -~~~~ ~~-~-f~---- Chair sign ture date • BONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GUEST REGISTER • DATE P4ARCH 21, 1989 NAME _ ADDRESS 2. 3- 4: 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. il. • 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. I 21. 22. 23• 24. ~ ~5. i