Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/1992 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS City Hall Council Room February 18, 1992 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Henry, Vice Chairperson Baker, Members Lane, Sawtelle, and Alternate Member De Loach. MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Yarbrough and Alternate Members Kennady, De Otte and Phinney. STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planner Kuenzel, Assistant City Attorney Coates and Planning Technician Thomas. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to Order -Explanation and Functions of the Board. • Chairman Henry called the meeting to order and explained the functions and limitations of the Board. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Approval of minutes from regular meeting held January 7, 1992 Vice Chairperson Baker moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 7, 1992 as written. Mr. Sawtelle seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Approval of minutes from special meeting held January 14, 1992 Mr. Sawtelle moved to approve the minutes of the special meeting of January 14, 1992 as written. Vice Chairperson Baker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (S - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a rear setback variance request by David and Betty Wright at 8704 Driftwood, to allow for an addition to the e~sting house. Planning Assistant Kuenzel presented the staff report requesting an addition to 8704 Driftwood of 350 square feet to encroach into the rear setback by approximately 5'. The Board must decide if the location of the house in relation to the lot, the angle of the rear property line in relation to the street and other lots, and the existence of trees constitute special conditions. The applicant argues that the additional room is needed for the kitchen and living room area. There appears to be enough room to build on to the north side of the house. Some trees may have to be removed, and this option may not fit well into the architecture; or a smaller addition could be designed that would meet setback requirements. • The ordinance intent is to control population density and provide for adequate light and air. Fifteen property owners within 200' of the subject property were notified with one inquiry and one opposition. Applicant Betty Wright approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. She stated that the house is setback further from the street than most houses along Driftwood, to preserve the cluster of trees at the front of the house. The addition would allow a rear • opening into the back yard. The house is approximately 1900 square feet, which is 100 square feet less than the average square footage in Emerald Forest. There are no other adequate alternate locations because of the trees and the purpose of the addition to expand the kitchen, which is located in the rear. Mr. Lane moved to authorize a variance from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638 to the minimum rear setback requirements from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: currently existing R- 1A zoning allows a similar minimum rear setback on adjacent properties m the same neighborhood, and large industrial tract to the rear of the property will not be adversely effected; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: that otherwise desirable house placement with respect to maintaining existing large oak trees on this site could be negated by removal of the trees to accommodate another possible scenario; and such that the spent of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: that the permit be granted within the parameters of the information furnished to this Board regarding size of addition, proposed setback, etc. Vice Chairperson Baker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Consideration of a special exceplion request by Phdip Cri'bson and Jesse Burdett, to convert the e~asting budding at 303 College Main into group housing. Planning Assistant Kuenzel presented the staff report requesting to convert the building at 303 College Main into group housing: The subject property is the vacant Planned Parenthood building at 303 College Main. This building was built some time ago and is . nonconforming in terms of setbacks, parking, and landscaping. Setbacks are nonconforming as follows: Front required 25' Front provided 18' Side required 7.5' each Side provided 2.5' each There is a paved area in front and extending along the side of the building that currently serves as harking. Although these areas do not meet ordinance standards, they do supply roughly eight spaces. The applicant plans on providing 10 bedrooms. The Zoning Ordinance would require 20 parking spaces, calculated at two spaces per bedroom. Fourteen property owners within 200' of the subject property were notified with two inquiries expressing concern about parking. The ZBA may grant a special exception to "allow the substitution of one nonconforming use for another nonconforming use when the extent to the substituted use is found to be less detrimental to the environment than the first". The parking requirement for Planned Parenthood would have been 20 spaces, which is also required for this use as group housing. Group housing is listed as a conditional use in this zoning district. The applicant must therefore apply for and receive a conditional use permit, to be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, before a building permit may be issued. Applicant Phil Gibson approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He informed the Board that they would target foreign students who do not have personal automobiles; by targeting students who lack personal transportation, parking requirements • would be minimized. The building is configured so that it could be modified to house ten students maximum at only one student per room. ZBA Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 2 • Mr. Gibson added that there is a possibility that the lot adjoining the subject property could be used for additional parking. However, he does not want to enter into a written contract until he has approval from the Zoning Board of Adjustment and the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposed group housing will have less of a traffic impact than the previous Planned Parenthood. Howard Nelson, owner of adjacent parking lot, approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He stated that he is currently working with another entity on leasing the parking lot and that it may not be available to the applicant. However, he will be willing to work with the applicant. Tom Sistrunk of Our Saviors Lutheran Church approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He stated that he had no objections to the proposed use and that it would improve the area by occupying a vacant building; however, he is concerned with the applicant providing adequate parking. Harold Owens of A & M United Methodist Church approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He agreed with Mr. Sistrunk and stated that he was concerned about parking. The Pastor of Our Saviors Lutheran church approached the Board and stated that he is concerned with the overflow parking from the group housing project, using the church ' parking lot and inconveniencing the members of the church. Staff should monitor parking during the week to get an accurate count of the parking congestion in the area to include the A & M employees and students. • Mr. Sawtelle moved to deny a special exception from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638, of the substitution of one non-conforming use for another because the extent of the substituted use is not less detrimental to the environment than the first. Mr. De Loach seconded the motion which failed (2 - 3). (Chairman Henry, Vice Chairperson Baker and Mr. Lane voted against the motion.) Mr. De Loach stated that he was concerned about parking. The Board cannot guarantee that the owner will lease to residents without personal vehicles. Chairman Henry agreed and stated that there will still be a parking problem with any use that occupies this vacant building. Vice Chairperson Baker agreed that there is a parking problem in the Northgate area; however, this is not a variance and the applicant will still have to get approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposed group housing is less intense than the previous medical clinic. The applicant could put in the same type of previous use, that may or may not be as intense as group housing, without coming before the Board. Vice Chairperson Baker moved to authorize the special exception from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638, of the substitution of one non-conforming use for another because the extent of the substituted use is no more detrimental to the environment than the first. Chairman Henry seconded the motion which failed (2 - 3). (Mr. Sawtelle, Mr. De Loach, and Mr. Lane voted against the motion.) Mr. Sawtelle stated that this use could possibly create a worse parking problem than the previous Planned Parenthood clinic and create a conflict between the neighbors who have • adequate parking. The burden of proof is on the applicant and not the Board. He added that he does not want to be responsible for creating confrontations between the neighbors. ZBA Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 3 • Mr. Sawtelle moved to deny a special exception from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638, of the substitution of one non-conforming use for another because the extent of the substituted use is not less detrimental to the environment than the first. Mr. De Loach seconded the motion which passed (3 - 2). (Chairman Henry and Vice Chairperson Baker voted against the motion.) AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Other business. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn. Mr. De Loach moved to adjourn the meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Ms. Baker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). APPROVED: ~~~e~ hairman rett enry ATTES lann g echnician, atalie omas • • ZBA Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 4 ZONII~iG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variance from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638. I move to authorize a variance to the yard (Section 8.7) lot width (Table A) lot depth (Table A) rear minimum~setback ~-;` _~ ~'I parking requirements (Section 9) • and done ~e ~4. ~' `~- ~~~ ~'. result in ktJZ~ - ~ ~5 ~J . ,,, to the follo g limitations: L ~ ,~, ._ Motion made by Seconded by Chair Signatu~ ~l hc~g ~a~er r, v V Date o2-~$-qZ Voting Results ',~ substantial justice .. Y.4RP1638.D~C from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: ~c~ s ~.-„,, , and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: i=~. G ZONIl~iG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • FORMAT FOR NEGATIVE MOTION Special Exceptions -From Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638 I move to deny the: a. substitution of one non-conforming use for another because the extent of the substituted use is not less detrimental to the environment than the first. b. enlargement of a building devoted to a non- conforming use where such enlargement is not necessary and incidental to the existing use of such building and does increase the area of the building devoted to anon-conforming use more than 25% and does prolong the life of the non-conforming use and prevents a return of such property to a conforming use. . c, reconstruction of anon-conforming structure on the lot occupied by such structure as the cost of reconstruction is more than 60% of the appraised value of the structure and. because the reconstruction would prevent the return of such property to a conforming use and increase the non-conformity. Motion made by ~ ~ Motion Seconded by y~ Voting Results ~ t'o, Chair Signature ~ ~ ' ~'~ Date 2 - ~~ ' g Z v SPCN1638.DOC • ~J ZONII~iG BOARD OF RDjUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Saecial Exceations -From Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638 I move to authorize the: ~j~_c~.~ ~~=-Q----~~, ~.~,--f~--r-J 0.~ ~-- ~~ ~~ a. ~ substitution of one non-conforming use for another because the extent of the substituted use is -~esa NO m o ~'C, detrimental to the environment than the first. • b. enlargement of a building devoted to a non- conforming use where such enlargement is necessary and incidental to the existing use of such building and does not increase the area of the building devoted to anon-conforming use more that 25% and does not prolong the life of the non- conforming use or prevent a return of such property to a conforming use. c. reconstruction of anon-conforming structure on the lot occupied by such structure as the cost of reconstruction is less than 60% of the appraised value of the structure and because the reconstruction would not prevent the return of such property to a conforming use or increase the non-conformity. Motion made by Motion Seconder Voting Results Chair Signature Date Z _ /8 - 9?/ SPCPI 638.DOC 1~ u 2 ~Y'' _ ~ ~a~n_S~ • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GUEST R GISTER DATE Q NAME ADDRESS 1. 2 4 . `. ~o-w~. ~ 6. 7- 8. 9- 10. • 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. ig. 20. 21. 22. • 23• 24. 25. ,,,~`~ ~ • MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS City Hall Council Room March 17, 1992 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Henry, Members Lane and Sawtelle, and Alternate Members De Otte and Phinney. MEMBERS ABSENT: Vice Chairperson Baker, Member Smith and Alternate Members De Loache and Kennady. STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planner Kuenzel, Assistant City Attorney Coates and Planning Technician Thomas. AGENDA TI'EM NO. 1: Call to Order -Explanation and Functions of the Board. • Chairman Henry called the meeting to order and explained the functions and limitations of the Board. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Approval of Minutes from the meeting of February 18, 1992 Mr. Sawtelle moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of February 18, 1992 as presented. Mr. Lane seconded the motion which passed unopposed (S - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a special exception re nest bbyy James W. Gray for Sort & Classic Motorcars, Ina, to allow the substitution of a w~olesale car business for a cabinet factory at 3206 Longmire. - Staff Planner Kuenzel presented the staff report to allow a primarily wholesale business, with limited retail and storage, of specialty cars. The building is currently vacant and is the former site of Kent Moore cabinets. The building is nonconforming because its parking area does not meet current city specifications such as raised and landscaped end islands. In addition, there is a gravel area in the rear that would not be permitted under current codes. The previous Kent Moore cabinets had employed up to 120 employees that manufactured cabinets on a rotating shift. The property backs up to duplex development. There had been complaints of odors released by the chemicals used by the business, and of noise late at night. The rear parking area closest to the duplexes was used by shift workers. The applicant employs seven persons and plans to use only the paved parking area located in the front of the building. There will be a mechanic on duty that will get the stored cars ready to sell. There will be no other auto maintenance work. Hours of business should be normal • working hours; however, the Board may wish to ask the applicant the exact times of operation. Twenty-four property owners within 200' of the subject property were notified with five inquiries. One property owner expressed concern of the business working on stereos and playing them after hours. I` .. _r • Applicant James W. Gray approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He stated that he owns a similar operation at 2213 South Texas Avenue across from Allen Oldsmobile in Bryan. The hours of operation will not exceed 7:00 pm. Stereos will not be worked on after hours and there should not be any loud noise late at night. Mr. Gray informed the Board that he buys from other dealerships and restores the vehicles to sell. The warehouse would help protect the cars from the environment until they are sold. Mr. Gray stated that he does not perform many maintenance duties after the sale of the car; many of the cars are sold as is. He plans to have seven to fifty cars on the site at one time. The proposed business is not a salvage business and will be well maintained. There will be some display on the paved parking lot of restored vehicles. Only three employees have vehicles and they will be asked to park in the rear. Mr. Gray stated that the footprint of the building may change because there is a section of the building that is void of a roof. Approximately 35 cars can fit inside the building with the current footprint. Chairman Henry stated that the proposed use is clearly less intense than the cabinet manufacturing business that occupied the building previously. There is a similar business operating almost directly behind this site. The only difference between the two businesses is that one meets current parking and landscaping standards and the other does not. Mr. De Otte questioned staff as to the design of the slab. Storing 35 cars will place a heavy load on the slab; if not designed properly, storing of these vehicles may destroy the slab as well as the building. Mr. Gray responded that Kent Moore use to load and unload trucks as well as operate fork lifts inside the building. I' • John Grillo, owner of some adjacent duplexes along Lodgepole, approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He questioned staff as to current parking and landscaping requirements within the City. Staff Planner Kuenzel explained these requirements and showed Mr. Grillo the applicable sections in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Grillo stated that he had no problem with the proposed business. He concluded that it is inconvenient for him to travel to the post office to sign for a certified letter. He suggested that staff send notices by regular mail so that surrounding property owners are not inconvenienced. Charles Ballck of Ballck Laboratories approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He informed the Board that he is located next door to the proposed business. He stated that he had no problem with the proposed use and that the applicant has already improved the property. Mr. Ballck questioned the applicant as to what chemicals will be stored in the building such as solvents; particularly chlorinated solvents. The storage of gasoline and solvents may effect the outcome of some of the testing done in the laboratory. Mr. Gray stated that there will be no on site storage of gasoline. There will be some engine degreaser and general cleaning supplies stored on site. Kent Moore probably stored more chemicals on site than this business. He added that he would be happy to work with Mr. Ballck in keeping contaminants to a minimum. Mr. Gray stated that he did not want to come into landscaping and parking requirement compliance. He will improve the property but he does not want anyone to tell him how to do it. He will set an example for the adjacent strip center and will probably plant some trees as well. The requirements in College Station are too restrictive to promote small business. The zoning ordinance requirements are detrimental to business people without a lot of capital. He concluded that • he never dreamed that he would have to landscape and construct parking islands at an existing building. ZBA Minutes March 17, 1992 Page 2 Mr. De Otte stated that he sympathizes with the applicant; however, the zoning ordinance • has done a lot for the appearance of College Station. The idea of the ordinance is to try and make parking lots better through a fair latitude in design. Landscaping can be developed beyond the minimum requirements. Mr. Sawtelle stated that the Board must look at the public interest including the surrounding property owners. This area is developing due to the location of Humana Hospital and CIC Insurance. The success of the overall development in this area depends on its appearance. • C7 Mr. Lane moved to authorize a special exception from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638 for the substitution of one nonconforming use for another because the extent of the substituted use is less detrimental to the environment than the first. Mr. De Otte seconded the motion which passed (4 - 1); Mr. Sawtelle voting in opposition to the motion for approval. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Other business. Assistant City Attorney Coates informed the Board that they would not be able to approve the minutes from the Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting of March 3, 1992 because only two members that were present at that meeting are present tonight. The approval of minutes can be rescheduled for the next available meeting. Mr. De Otte suggested that staff research the possibility of sending two notices to each of the surrounding property owners in a Zoning Board of Adjustment case. One letter should be sent certified to meet state statute requirements and one should be sent by regular mail so as not to inconvenience the property owner of having to make a trip to the post office to pick up the certified letter. The letter sent by regular mail should reference the certified letter sent to the post office. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Adjourn.. Mr. Sawtelle moved to adjourn the meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Lane seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). ATT ~/ Plann g echmcian, atalie Thomas APPROVED: tiZL airman, Brett enry ZBA Minutes March 17, 1992 Page 3 • ZONII~IG BOARD OF ADJUSTMEN'P FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Special Exceptions -From Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638 I move to authorize the: a. Y substitution of one non-conforming use for another because the extent of the substituted use is less detrimental to the environment than the first. • b. enlargement of a building devoted to a non- conforming use where such enlargement is necessary and incidental to the existing use of such building and does not increase the area of the building devoted to anon-conforming use more that 25% and does not prolong the life of the non- conforming use or prevent a return of such property to a conforming use. Motion made by Motion Secondec Voting Results ~- Chair Signature Date '~J ~ /7- ~?~- reconstruction of anon-conforming structure on the lot occupied by such structure as the cost of reconstruction is less than 60% of the appraised value of the structure and because the reconstruction would not prevent the return of such property to a conforming use or increase the non-conformity. SPCP1638.DOC f J1 I