HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/19/1980 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• MTNUTFS
City of College Station
Zoning Board of Adjustment
February 19, 1980
Members Present: Chairman Harper, Upham, Wagner,Daughety,Burke,
Council Liason Boughton
Members Absent: Mathewson
Staff Members Present: Zoning Official Callaway, Planning Assistant Longley
Agenda Ttem No.l - Approval of Minutes, Meeting of January 19, 1980.
Harper moved to approve the minutes of January 19, 1980. The motion was
seconded by Upham and passed unanimously.
Following the approval of the minutes Harper swore in new Board Members
Wagner and D~u.ghety . Harper asked Boughton and Daugiiety to serve as voting
alternates to the Board.
Agenda Item No.2 - Consideration of a reauest fora variance in the name of
L.A. Garrison, 1008 Madera.
• Mrs. Garrison stated that she would be available to answer questions
concerning the request fora variance.
Callaway asked the Board to consider what constitutes a unique and special
condition of the land.
Burke stated that poor construction, resulting in the small size of the
existing kitchen, is a unique feature of the land.
Upham stated that poor planning may not be a unique feature of the land,
but that the Board should use common sense in granting relief where necessary.
Upham moved to approve the requested variance to the front setback
requirement. The motion was seconded by Wagner.
Harper asked for comments on or discussion of the motion before the Board.
Harper pointed out that the Board does not have authority to amend the
Zoning Ordinance, that approval of a request for which there were no
unique and special conditions would constitute a change of the Ordinance
and make it difficult to deny similar requests in the future. Harper further
stated that there were no unique conditions present in the case before the
Board, but that the conditions in this case were common to lots in College
Station.
Upham stated that the case before the Board was a mis-use of the land, that
• all requests before the Board would be considered on an individual basis,
and that he would not have made his motion if he felt that it wouls have set
a precedent.
Minutes-2/19/80
Page 2
Robert Feiklman spoke in favor of the request, citing the full approval of
adjacent neighbors, and the fact that existing vegetation would screen the
• extension.
The motion before the Board was then voted upon, and passed by the following
vote:
For: Boughton, Upham, Daughety, Wagner
Opposed: Harper
Abstaining: Burke
Harper appointed Burke to replace alternate Daughety in voting on the
following business before the Board.
A enda Item No.3 - Consideration of a r uest for a variance in the name of
General Telephone, Block 7, Tauber Addition 200 Nagle .
Callaway presented the staff's recommendation of allowing the front setback
included inalternative No.3 with no side setback variance, for the proposed
expansion to the telephone exchange building.
Representatives of GTE (these individuals did not enter their names into
the record and will herein be referred to as "GTE") presented their three
alternatives for expanding the exchange building at 200 Nagle. Alternatives
included variances to the front, side, and rear setbacks as necessary to
provide the needed expansion.
• Chairman Harper inquired as to the use of that building as a public office.
GTE replied that this was no longer a public office.
Upham inquired as to the number of parking spaced available for employees
and the number of employees at that location.
GTE replied that there would be three or four full time employees at that
location with occassional additional employees.
Boughton inquired as to whether there is a need for public parking.
GTE replied that there was no need for public parking. GTE went on to point
out that alternative No .3 was least desirable for their expansion due to
cable installations and equipment layouts.
Upham pointed out that such pro b1 ems were not unique to GTE.
GTE replied that this is true, but they prefer not to encounter such problems.
Wagner inquired as to the importance to be placed on the fact that GTE is
a community serveice.
GTE replied that the expansion would provide switching service to the
University.
Harper replied that the facility was in the public interest and the absence
• of opposition from the area indicated compatability with surrounding uses.
GTE inquired as to the Fire Marshall's objections to Alternative No.l.
Minutes-2/19/80
Page 3
Callaway replied that the Fire Marshall had objected to a variance to the
• rear setback as this would not allow for access to the rear of the building,
if the adjacent lots were fully developed.
Harper agreed that Alternative No.l could create a fire problem.
Upham stated that Nagle was a narrow street with heavy pedestrian traffic,
and that he was opposed to encroaching on the front setback so as to restrict
pedestrian traffic.
Harper stated that due to the heavy pedestrian traffic, and the fact that
GTE utilizes street right-of-way for parking, it would not be unreasonable
to require GTE to provide for a sidewalk through their property.
Callaway pointed out that where sidewalks are provided, they are usually
located within the street right-of-way, and that the result of Alternative
No.2 would be to create a 2 foot overhang of parking into street right-of-way
along the proposed building expansion.
Following further discussion of the alternatives presented by GTE, Upham
moved to grant a variance, accepting Alternative No.3, subject to a zero
lot line clearance along the interior lot line with appropriate firewall
construction. The motion was seconded by Burke and passed unanimously.
Agenda Item No .4 - Adjourn
• Harper moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Burke and passed
unanimously,
•