Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/1996 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS June 4, 1996 7:00 P.M. • MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Hollas, Member Rife and Alternate Members Blackwelder, Ochoa and Alexander. MEMBERS ABSENT: Members Sawtelle and Poston. STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planner Dunn, Planning Technician Thomas, Assistant City Attorney Shively and Development Coordinator Volk. AGENDA ITEM NO. l: Call to order -explanation of functions of the Board. Acting Chairman Hollas called the meeting to order and explained the functions of the Board. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Approval of minutes from the meeting of May 21, 1996. Mr. Blackwelder moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of May 21, 1996 as written. Mr. Rife seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration of a rear setback variance request at 1704 Austin, lot 10, block 10 of the Southwood Valley Section One Subdivision to allow an expansion of the existing home. The applicant is Matthew Whiteacre. Staff Planner Dunn presented the staff report and explained that the applicant wishes to make an addition to the house in the area of the existing kitchen. The kitchen area is located on the southeast corner of the house, which is approximately 3.5' from the rear setback line. The applicant proposes to build a 209 square foot addition to the kitchen which would extend approximately 12.5' out from the existing house, and 9' into the required 25' rear setback. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance of 9' to the rear setback. The location of the existing 38" caliper tree is offered as the primary special condition in this case. The original builder placed this house as well as several other houses in the area relative to the location of the existing trees. This house was placed closely to the left side and rear setbacks in order to preserve the existing tree and allow driveway access to the garage. The applicant feels that though it was beneficial to preserve the existing tree, the placement of the house on the lot restricts the expansion of the kitchen area. Other buildable areas inside of the building setbacks have been identified along the front and southwest sides of the house. However, the applicant considers these alternatives to be unworkable due to the distance from the existing kitchen and undesirable due to visibility from the street. The 3.5' strip of buildable area in the rear is not considered to be a possible alternative because it would not provide enough habitable space. However, as in any variance request, the Board may grant an amount less than what is requested. Approximately twenty-two surrounding property owners were notified of the request with several inquiries and no opposition. Mr. Hollas opened the public hearing. Applicant Matthew Whiteacre of 1704 Austin approached the Board and was sworn in by Mr. Hollas. He stated that the kitchen area cannot be expanded without a variance to the setback requirements. There is no place within the house to have asemi-formal dinner and the dining room is far removed from the kitchen area. Mr. Whiteacre stated that he spoke with the owners of lots 16 and 17 and they did not i seem to have a problem with the variance request. The owner of lot 11 agreed that the addition is a good idea. The remaining neighbors have not expressed opposition and seem to be non-committal. Habib Rahman, the owner of 1701 Austin, approached the Board and was sworn in by Mr. Hollas. He stated that he is concerned with the precedent that the variance could set including the devaluation of the neighborhood if it becomes more crowded due to encroachments into the setback area. Mr. Hollas closed the public hearing. Mr. Ochoa 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: location of an existing 38" caliper tree, since the original builder placed this house as well as several others in the area relative to the location of the existing trees; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: placement of the house on the lot (due to the desire to preserve the existing tree) restricts expansion; and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Alexander seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a side setback variance request at 800 Camellia Court, lot 39, block F of the Eastmark Phase Two Subdivision to allow for the construction of a new single family home. Applicant is Randy French for Stylecraft Builders, Inc. Staff Planner Dunn presented the staff report and stated that on May 21, 1996, the Board granted a variance of 5' to the rear setback at 815 Azalea Court to allow a garage to be placed 15' from the edge of the private access easement. The request was granted due to the special conditions that the 20' rear • garage setback had not been well enforced in this area and that the resulting 20' distance to the pavement edge met the intent of the ordinance. Based on the same requirement that setbacks must be measured from the access easement boundary, the applicant is now requesting a similar variance for another property located at 800 Camellia Court. This property also contains a rear access easement; however, the variance request involves an additional access easement along the right side property line. The applicant is proposing a 0' setback from the side access boundary. In this case, the total distance from the side property line would be 15', and the distance to the pavement edge of the access drive would be 5' if approved. Therefore, the total variance requested is 7.5' to the side setback. As discussed in the previous case, the requirement that building setbacks be measured from the access easement boundary rather than the edge of the pavement has not been well enforced in this particular subdivision. This oversight has in fact given other properties in the area more buildable area than they should have. In addition, the existence of two private access easements on one lot may also be considered a special condition not generally found throughout the City. The strict enforcement of the ordinance in this case results in an unusually narrow building width and smaller buildable area. The width of the house would be limited to a maximum of 19', which is considerably more narrow than the typical 35' width allowed by the minimum 50' lot width. The total buildable area is also considerably smaller than most lots in the subdivision. Twenty-three surrounding property owners were notified with no response. Mr. Hollas opened the public hearing. Applicant Randy French of Stylecraft Builders, Inc. approached the Board and was sworn in by Mr. Hollas. He stated that the house can only be 19' wide ~f all the minimum setback requirements are met. The proposed house is only 27 1/2' wide and it is the narrowest that Mr. French has ever built. He stated that it is unusual to have two alleys on one lot. The only other lot in the neighborhood with the same situation clearly violated the setback requirements when it was built back in the early 1980's. Mr. French stated that once a house is built on the lot, it should look normal and keeping with the neighborhood. • Building a 20' wide house will not be in keeping with the neighborhood. The proposed home is only 1200 total square feet. ZBA Minutes June 4, 1996 Page 2 of 3 Mr. Hollas closed the public hearing and expressed concern with possible visibility problems if the variance request is granted. • Staff Planner Dunn stated that the proposed home meets the minimum visibility triangle measured from the curb if the variance is granted. In this case, there is almost 25' from the front of the building to the curb which meets the City's visibility standards for driveways. Mr. Rife moved to authorize a variance from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638 to the minimum setback requirements from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: an unusually small lot and the existence of two private access easements adjacent to the lot; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: unreasonable limitations being placed on the lot owner's ability to develop the lot; and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: the variance be limited to the 7 1/2' being requested. Mr. Ochoa seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Other business. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Adjourn. Mr. Blackwelder moved to adjourn the meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Rife seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). r1 U A E ' Planni ec nician, Nata ie Thomas C, APPR Chairman, Dick Birdwell ZBA Minutes Ji~rre 4, 1996 Page 3 of 3 1 r~ ~~ ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variance from Section 1 S, Ordinance Number 1638. I move to authorize a variance to the yard (Section 8.T) lot width (Table A) t depth (Table A) minunum setback parking requirements (Section 9) r~ from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: i and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: n ~.c~ h ~ uM~dO M ~ .... ~^ bd 7' ~ 'ter--.~o~c= ~ (~ .,,. ~7 c~ ~ D ~ Z I 'vz+~:-r--~-- Motion made by L'~/ Seconded by Chair Signature Date Voting Results YfIRP1638.DOC ,n~ I U ~4 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTNiEN*P • FORMAT FOR POSI'T'IVE MOTION Variance from Section 1S, Ordinance Number 1638. I move to authorize a variance to the yard (Section 8.Z) lot width (Table A) lot depth (Table A) r eo~r' minimum tsetback parking requirements (Section 9) from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: / ` t~ L4GGtT70.-, .~~ ~ ti°~xi~i ~i1g ~~ GG~.~iPt~- ~ ,Sin~G • ~ ~ 6~~ ~~ / ~ ~~~ o~ ~ .~~ ~ ~,.-~ oT ~ t.~ i /~ 7 Ci .cam ~y-"~-6~ ~^ -Y~ l~ ~i'i.c~ -~ ~+l c. l o GG-I~e-:. 4T' ~° ~i 1~ ~%~ j '~Gl and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: / ~~G/h ti. f' Q 1- ~~L ~~~.1 ~ Or, TiC.~. ~ o~T ( c!v Z yGp l~ u ,~~i ~ d~j r.~... ~ p,-r ,.~.-.~ ~i~ ~ r~ ~fi:-.. 7~~.. 1 r~J ~,--,:.-f7 ~f~~ ~~rfJ / ~ .~ ' and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: Motion made by C_ arT ~~~... Date ~~~~y ~ Seconded by Chair Signature Voting Results S^ Y~IRP1638.DOC Zoning Board of Adjustment Guest Register /, • Date Ll Na Address 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. • 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. • 24. 25.