Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/21/1995 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTES • Zoning Board of Adjustment CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS March 21, 1995 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Sawtelle, Members Poston, Hollas and Rife and Alternate Member Alexander. (Alternate Member Ochoa was in the audience.) MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Birdwell and Alternate Member Blackwelder. STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner Kuenzel, Planning Technician Thomas, Staff Planner Dunn and Assistant City Attorney Shively. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -explanation of functions of the Board. Acting Chairman Sawtelle called the meeting to order and explained the functions and limitations of the Board at 7:15 p.m. The applicant for the variance request at 3410 Shire Drive was not present. AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Approval of minutes from the meeting of February 7,1995. Mr. Rife moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of February 7, 1995 as written. Ms. Poston seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration of a variance request to the side setback requirements for a new home to be constructed at 3410 Shire Drive, lot 11, block A of the Devonshire Subdivision. Staff Planner Dunn presented the staff report and informed the Board that the current Zoning Ordinance requires a side setback of 7.5' from both side property lines. In order to place the floor plan on the lot, the applicant is requesting a smaller side setback of 5.5' on the southeast side of the lot, thereby requinng a variance of 2'. The applicant offers special conditions such as lot shape and placement of the adjacent house as special conditions. The lot width varies from 76' in the front to 80' in the rear. The existing house on lot 10 is located 12' from the shared property line. The resulting separation between structures would be 17.5', which is still greater than the minimum 15' separation. Staff has determined that the total buildable area, the area of the lot minus the area of the required setbacks, could also be considered a special condition. The total buildable area of the subject lot is approximately 3,843 square feet, which is 873 square feet less than the average non cul-de-sac lot in Devonshire Subdivision. Staff has identified two alternatives to the variance request. One, alter the proposed floor plan to fit within the existing setbacks. The applicant is not m favor of this alternative, due to the fact that a 2' reduction in the • plan would be an "unworkable" layout for bedroom sizes. The second alternative is to move the plan further to the rear, where the lot is wider. This alternative would probably still require a variance to the side setback, but less in magnitude. • • Staff Planner Dunn stated that in the past, the Board has granted side setback variance requests due to special conditions such as lot configuration or other natural conditions. Most of these requests however, dealt with garages and other accessory structures. On February 18, 1986 and March 1, 1986, the Board denied two consecutive requests to allow for the encroachment of a fireplace into the side setback. This encroachment, however, was apre-existing mistake made by the builder. Twelve surrounding property owners were notified with one call and one letter received in opposition to the variance request. Both property owners live on Mustang Lane in the Devonshire Subdivision. Acting Chairman Sawtelle opened the public hearing. Seeing no one present to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposed variance request, he closed the public hearing. Mr. Hollas stated that Devonshire is a new subdivision and the building knew the dimensions of the lot including the buildable area when he purchased the lot. The plat for the subdivision meets all ordinance requirements including minimum lot dimensions. Mr. Rife stated that there are no special conditions or hardships in this case. Ms. Poston stated that there are several alternatives to the variance request including building the preferred floor plan on another vacant lot available in the subdivision. Although the intent of the ordinance is maintained if the variance is granted, there are no hardships in this case. Mr. Rife moved to deny a variance from section 15, Ordinance number 1638 to the minimum setback requirements 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 this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Hollas seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Other business. Senior Planner Kuenzel approached the Board to clarify a question on the application of the landscape ordinance from the last Board meeting. The question centered around the consistent application of the landscape ordinance with respect to the College Station Junior High School. Senior Planner Kuenzel presented the landscape plan from that school and explained that the school district approached the City Council to try and implement a variance procedure in the landscape ordinance. Currently there is no variance procedure to the landscaping requirements outlined in the ordinance. The City Council denied their request and the school was forced to comply with the landscape ordinance. The school did phase the development of the site which included the landscaping; however, the phasing of any project is allowed in the landscape ordinance. AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Adjourn. Mr. Hollas moved to adjourn the meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Ms. Poston seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). ;~ // Pla 'ng echnician, Natalie Thomas ZBA Minutes March 21, 1995 APPR D: Chairman, Dic Birdwell Page 2 of 2 ZONI1~iG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR NEGATIVE MOTION Variance from Section 1S, Ordinance Number 1638. I move to deny a variance to the yard (Section 8.T) lot width (Table A) lot depth (Table A) minimum setback parking requirements (Section 9) 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 this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. • Motion made by Seconded by Date ~~~1)~~ Voting Results ^ Chair Signature v,~xrvissa.DOc Zoning Board of Adjustment i• i• i• Guest Register Date r ~ Name Address 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.