Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/24/1981 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTES ~, ,~ ~1 • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Zoning Board of Adjustment March 24, 1981 MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman, Mathewson, Burke, Upham, Wagner; Alternate, Boughton MEMBERS ABSENT: Harper STAFF PRESENT: Zoning Official, Calloway; Planning Assistants, K,ee and Longley _AGENDA ITEM N0. I - Consideration of a request for the expansion of a non-conforming use in the name of Johnny A. Martinez, 203 Fairview Street. Zoning Official Calloway presented background information concerning the construction which had been accurring without a permit at the above address. A stop work order was issued and Mr. Martinez was notified of the necessity of acquiring a building permit and that the Zoning Board of Adjustment would need to authorize the permit since Mr. Martinez was expanding a non-conforming use. The Building Official informed Mr. Callaway that the structure is actually a residence with a separate living unit attached in the rear. The structure is in an R-1, single family zone. • Mr. Callaway informed the Board that Mr. Martinez's request involved changing the interior layout of the structure which would result in two living units of approxi- mately equal size and enclosing the front porch. Mathewson asked about the general character of the neighborhood. The Board discussed that the area is largely a single family neighborhood east of Fairview i,,r~th smaller rental units and non-conforming uses along portions of Fairview and west of Fairview. Elizabeth Martinez, representing the applicant, explained the request. She informed the Board that the structure was a duplex when Mr. Martinez purchased it and that it needed repair. Upham stated that the situation appears to be an attempt to go from essentially a single residence with a minimal possibility of being called a duplex to a formal duplex situation. He stated that the Board's mandate is to try to avoid perpetuating a situation which is out of phase with the City's Plan. Burke questioned if the aim of the Plan is to bring this area back into a single family area. • Mathewson asked if anyone called to object to the request and Callaway replied that no one had objected. Mathewson moved that the request for a variance on the property located at 203 Fairview Street be granted on the grounds that the granting of the variance would not represent a threat to the health, welfare and morals of the citizens of College Station. Burke seconded the motion. Minutes page 2, Zoning Board of Adjustment March 24, 1981 Upham stated that this is the first case of this nature for this area to come before • the Board and the Board should realize that a precedent will be set if it grants this variance. This area will be receiving the Board's seal of approval to go from a basically single family area to a duplex area. Wagner asked for an interpretation of Section 4-1.3. of Ordinance 850 referring to the 25% limit on enlargement of a non-conforming use. Does this include rearrangement of interior space? Callaway responded that the Staff had discussed this issue and is looking to the Board to resolve this point. Mathewson stated that the Board had, in a previous case, set a precedent that if any part of a structure is non-conforming then the entire structure and its associated structures on the lot are non-conforming. Callaway explained that in the same case the Board established a policy that in future cases non-conformities of the type where there is a detached structure, then the principal structure, in residential cases, would not have to come to the Board. The Board agreed. Burke stated that in her opinion, enlargement is an addition or an increase in the size of a structure. Wagner agreed. Callaway pointed out that a key point is whether this proposal will prolong the life of the non-conformity as stated in Section 11-B.3.b. of the ordinance. • Uphan stated that the intent of Ordinance 850 is fundamentally in opposition to this request. After further discussion, the question was called. The motion failed by the following vote: Against - Burke, Upham, Wagner, Boughton. Callaway asked the Board if they would like to consider the enclosure of the porch separately as it falls below the 25% expansion limit outlined in Sections 4-C.3 and 11-B.3 of the Ordinance. Mathewson moved that the variance be granted to property located at 203 Fairview Street for the purpose of enclosing the screen porch with a permanent wall and that this would not represent a risk to the health, welfare, or morals of the Citizens of College Station. (Mathewson clarified that this motion involves only the porch and not the interior design or use). Upham seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. • MINUTES City of College Station . Zoning Board of Adjustment April 21, 1981 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Harper, Upham, Wagner, Boughton MEMBERS ABSENT: Mathewson, Burke STAFF PRESENT: Asst. Director of Planning, Jim Callaway; Zoning Official, Jane Kee; Planning Technician, Joan Keigley AGENDA ITEM N0. 1 - Approval of Minutes of January 20, 1981 and March 24, 1981. Upon motion by Boughton, second by Harper and a unanimous vote, the minutes of January 20, 1981 and March 24, 1981 were approved. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2 - Consideration of a request for a variance to the parking requirements for a restaurant in the name of L & R Foods, Inc., 2700 Texas Avenue. Chairman Harper announced the agenda item and opened the floor to discussion. Mr. Johnny Lampo, Chairman of L & R Foods, Inc. stated that he and his two sons were interested in purchasing the property located at 501 University Drive E., for the purpose of opening a restaurant. He further stated .that in that area • there was not sufficient parking to meet the zoning requirements; but the nature and type of their business and the hours of operation, 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. should cause less problems than the present business in operation there. He stated that he and his sons have a contract of purchase on the property at this time, but have not closed the deal, and do not intend to do so unless they have a favorable ruling from the-board to waive the parking requirements in that area. Wagner asked Mr. Lampo what seating capacity was planned. Mr. Lampo stated their plans called for a seating capacity of 66. He stated that the present owner is The Answer, which is a non-profit organization, and his feeling is this new use as a restaurant will actually decrease the amount of parking re- quired. Chairman Harper asked how many employees they planned to have. Mr. Lampo stated a maximum of seven employees, and most of them would be students and would probably walk to work. Mr. Upham states his main concern was there are only 3 parking spaces available, and he was not convinced that most of the employees would walk to work, rather, he felt most likely whatever parking was available would be used by employees and not be available for customers. Chairman Harper stated it was his feeling that the hours of operation proposed by Mr. Lampo would not be exacerbating the existing parking problem; but the local • churches in the area already complained of their parking lots being used by customers of businesses in the area which conflicted with evening meetings. • Minutes Zoning Board of Adjustment April 21, 1981 7:00 p.m. Page two. Mr. Upham asked what arrangements or guarantee for arrangement for parking space for employees would Mr. Lampo make. Mr. Lampo stated they would have to negotiate with other property owners in the area. Mr. Wagner stated he felt most of the problems were up the street from this location and the hours of operation proposed by Mr. Lampo were a plus Chairman Harper pointed out to Mr. Lampo that only four board members were present and it required four votes for a motion to be passed. Chairman Harper then presented the following motion for consideration: That the variance for minimum off-street parking requirements on the property in question be approved since it does not represent a substantial change from the present use in parking and it would be in the best interest of the community to approve the variance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wagner and failed with the following vote. In Favor: Boughton, Wagner, Harper Abstaining: Upham Mr. Upham stated part of his pnca•blem was his personal acquaintance with the applicants, and prior conversations with regard to the property with Mr. Lampo's son; and he wanted to make it clear that Mr. Lampo's son was not aware that if any variance was required they would have to appear before a board upon which Mr. Upham served. He stated if there was a way it could be handled to assure the other board members there was indeed no conflict of interest, he would vote on a motion, if presented. Chairman Harper asked Mr. Lampo would he guarantee they would lease additional parking spaces for their employees? Mr. Lampo stated he would be glad to make that guarantee, provided he had a source for such parking, but at this time, it was impossible to firmly guarantee they would be able to secure additional parking. He assured the board they would make every effort to comply with this request and would agree to report their arrangements to the zoning department. Chairman Harper then presented the following motion for consideration. That the variance request as presented be approved based on the assurance of the applicant that adequate parking will be secured and provided for his employees, and reporting to the zoning department of the arrangements that had been made. Second was given by Mr. Upham and received unanimous approval. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 - Consideration of a request for a variance to the rear set- back requirement in the name of Anthony Home Builders, Inc. Mr. Callaway stated that this lot is located in the Emerald Forest Subdivision. The applicant has made this request because of topographical problems with the lot • and the construction of the house on that lot. Anthony R. Boatcallie, applicant for the variance request, explained that the minimum square footage requirement in Emerald Forest is 1,800 sq. ft. The house proposed for construction is a split level house. There is a 7 ft. drop in the lot which does not Minutes Zoning Board of Adjustment April 21, 1981 7:00 p.m. Page three lend itself to satisfactory construction of this house with the required rear set- • back. Mr. Upham stated that in order for this board to be able to approve a variance request of this type, there needed to be unique and unusual circumstances which made such approval justifiable. Chairman Harper pointed out that he believed there were five unique and unusual cir- cimstances involved with this application; they are, topography, size of lot, shape of lot, location of lot and the square footage construction requirement. After a discussion it was determined that the needs of the applicant could be met if the rear set-back was cut down from 25 ft. to 10 ft. Chairman Harper presented the following motion for consideration: That there five unique and unusual circumstances affecting the lot upon which the variance request is made; and the developer's problem can be eliminated by approval of the board of reducing the required rear set-back from 25 ft. to 10 ft. Second was given by Boughton and the motion was unanimously passed. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4 - Discussion of policy concerning non-conforming uses. Mr. Callaway reported to the board that he had been working with the City Attorney in developing a policy concerning non-conforming uses. • The following determination has been made: Building Permits requested for a structure on a lot where other structures are non-conforming and the non-conformity is not one of use, but involves set-backs, signs, etc., and the request is in compliance with all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, then the permit shall be issued. Mr. Callaway stated this is the procedure which has been followed in the past with residential property, and should be beneficial to use in all cases in the future. At this time Mr. Callaway introduced Jane Kee who is now the Zoning Official and will be making the presentations to the Zoning Board of Adjustment in the future, and Joan Keigley, Planning Technician who will be helping with minutes and records. There being no further business to come before the body, upon motion by Mr. Upham, second by Mr. Wagner, the meeting was adjourned. •