Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/2002 - Regular Agenda - Zoning Board of Adjustments MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment S June4, 2002 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Hill, Shelly, Richards, Lewis & Alternates, Goss, Corley & Allison. MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Birdwell. STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Grace, Staff Planner Hitchcock, Staff Planner Reeves and Planning Intern Flannery, Assst. City Attorney Robinson, Customer Service Representative Smith. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order—Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Hill called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consider any absence request forms. Mr. Lewis made the motion to approve the absence request from Mr. Birdwell. Mr. Goss seconded the motion,which passed unopposed (5-0). illAGENDA ITEM NO.3: Consideration, discussion and possible action of meeting minutes from May 7, 2002. Mr. Goss made the motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Allison seconded the motion, which passed unopposed(5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration, discussion and possible action on a lot width variance for 304 Cooner, lot 3, block 3, Cooner Addition Subdivision. Applicant is Holster & Associates. (02-100) Staff Planner Reeves stepped before the Board and presented the staff report. Ms. Reeves told the Board that the applicant is requesting the lot width variance to increase the buildable space of the lot. The subject property and surrounding properties are within an R-5 Zoning District (Apartment Medium Density). The subject property currently has a single-family dwelling. The adjacent properties to the east and the west currently have single family dwellings. The subject property is located in the Cooner Addition. The subdivision is bounded by Cooner,Eisenhower,Nimitz&University Dr. This case involves a lot in an older neighborhood, which does meet the lot requirements for R-5, but to construct duplexes in an R-5 Zoning District you must build to R-2 zoning restrictions. However, due to the width of the subject lot and the new buffer ordinance requirements that was adopted by Council May of 2001, it makes it difficult to develop any kind of multifamily on this lot. This subject property 0 and surrounding properties in this area are currently on the City of College Station's Land Use Plan as a redevelopment District. ZBA Minutes June 4,2002 Page 1 of 4 This applicant has approached the City of College Station Planning Department on the subject property with a concept plan of developing a 4-plex, however the age of the lot and the surrounding neighborhood lots were laid out prior to 1970. (when the City of College Station adopted subdivision • regulations). These lots are very narrow and long. With today's buffer ordinance the requirement of a 10-ft planted buffer on three sides of the subject property would only leave a 45-ft buildable width. As a special condition, the applicant feels that with today's buffer ordinance and with the lot's current configuration, it makes it difficult to develop this lot which makes the hardship of not being able to develop anything on this lot but single family. Building setback requirements usually allow for some degree of control over population density, access to light and air, and fire protection. These standards are typically justified on the basis of the protection of health safety and welfare. The Board has approved lot width and depth variances where unique special conditions existed such as lot sizes in older neighborhoods. There have been 8 phone calls from the public regarding this matter. They were all in favor of the variance. One alternative suggested by the applicant is to leave the existing single family dwelling as is. Chairman Hill asked if there were any questions of staff Mr. Allison made clarification that basically Mr. Holster was asking for a 5-ft variance. Ms. Reeves said that a duplex requires 35-ft for each side. She said that basically it was 2-1/2 foot variance per side, which comes out to 5 feet. • Chairman Hill asked if the 10-ft buffer is included in the 35-ft required. Ms. Reeves replied that the buffer ordinance is activated when you propose to build multifamily. Ms. Reeves stated that buffer ordinance would not allow Mr. Holster to do that because the lot is so long and narrow. He would be required to put a 10-ft planted buffer adjacent to single family, which he has on three sides. Ms. Reeves said with the duplex he would be required to build an efface or brick wall. Ms. Reeves said this is required of duplexes built next to single family. Chairman Hill asked for a clarification on the requirements. Ms. Reeves said the minimum width of the lot for a duplex is 70ft, the current lot is 65ft. Chairman Hill asked what the side setbacks are for duplexes. Ms. Reeves said the side setback is 7 1/2-ft. Ms. Reeves said the duplex layout does meet the setback requirements with the wall included,but he would not need a variance for the setback. Mr. Lewis asked if R-5 was more dense than R-2. Ms. Reeves replied that was correct. Ms. Reeves said duplexes are allowed in R-5 Zoning District. Ms Reeves went on to say that the applicant tried to do multifamily,but it would be too difficult with the current buffer ordinance. Mr. Goss asked if there were other duplexes in the area. Ms. Reeves replied there were along with some multi-family units. ZBA Minutes tune 4,2002 Page 2 of 4 S . Chairman Hill opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in favor of the request. •Jim Holster, the applicant stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Holster said he was there on behalf of Margie Bomar, the owner of the property. Mr. Holster said Ms. Bomar contacted him a couple of months ago about trying to build a four-plex on her lot. Mr. Holster explained that the single-family home is in poor condition and it wouldn't be feasible to try and repair it. Mr. Holster said they looked at the possibility of building a fourplex or triplex, but it wasn't feasible. Mr. Holster suggested building a duplex. Mr. Holster believed that Ms. Bomar has 3 options with the current ordinance: leave the house as it is, renovate the current dwelling, or remove and build a new single family residence. Mr. Holster stated that he feels it isn't practical to build a single family home in an R-5 Zoning District. Mr. Holster ended by saying that there would be adequate parking for a duplex. Chairman Hill asked why Mr. Holster felt it wasn't feasible to build a single family dwelling in an R-5 Zoning District. Mr. Holster said looking at it as rental property, if a single family home was built there could be 4 people living there. He said this would cause awkward parking in a residential driveway. Harry Worden stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Worden said that he lives on a nearby lot, which is in an A-P Zoning District. Mr. Worden said he can't build a new single family home on his lot either. Mr. Worden ended by saying that he thought it would be a good idea to build a duplex there. He ended by saying it would enhance the neighborhood. Chairman Hill opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in opposition of the request. •Marvin Martin stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Martin said he is a local attorney,but he was representing himself Mr. Martin stated that he owns the property next to the property requesting the variance and he had some concerns. Mr. Martin said he was opposed to a wall being built along his property line and was concerned about too many cars being parked out front. Mr. Goss asked Mr. Martin if his preference is not to have a fence between the two properties. Mr. Martin said he would prefer some kind of landscaping instead of a fence. Ms. Reeves added that there is not a variance procedure for the fence. She said it is a requirement right now and the fence would have to be efface or brick. With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition of the request, Chairman Hill closed the public hearing. Mr. Richards said the request seems to be a positive step in the neighborhood. Mr. Richards said he feels it would benefit the neighborhood and he would be for it. Chairman Hill said he doesn't necessarily agree with the comments about it not being feasible to build a single family dwelling in an R-5 area because the area is predominately single family dwellings now. Chairman Hill stated the existing ordinances are trying to restrict the density. ZBA Minutes June 4,2002 Page 3 of 4 0 Mr. Goss made the motion to authorize a variance to the lot width from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to public interest, due to the following special conditions: lot sizes in that area •are narrow and were platted prior to the current zoning ordinance, and would meet all other zoning and setback requirements; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: that the applicant could not build a duplex on the property within a R-5 Zoning District and it would not be feasible to build a single family dwelling. Mr. Allison seconded the motion. There were continued discussions among the Board members concerning the case. Chairman Hill called for the vote. The Board voted (4-1). Chairman Hill voting against granting the variance. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration, discussion and possible action on future agenda items. No items were discussed. AGENDA ITEM NO.6: Adjourn. Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting. AP O - Leslie Hill, Chairman •A ST: 2.:j / Stacey n ' , Customer Service Representative el ZBA Minutes June 4,2002 Page 4 of 4 Deborah Grace-June 4th Meeting Page 1 From:• "Graham Shelly"<chase1ecox-internet.com>To: Date: <dgrace©ci.college-station.tx.us> 6/5/02 10:35AM Subject: June 4th Meeting Sorry, I missed the meeting with no notification. We had an emergency hospital run with my grandson due to a tumor they found on his leg yesterday morning. Ran all the test at Scott and White hosp in Temple yesterday afternoon, but don't know any of the results as of yet.Again Sorry, but grandson's always come first and this was a spur of the moment thing. • a r ..,.. 1 Deborah Grace-RE: June 4 ZBA Meeting Page 11 i From: Dick Birdwell <d.bird@verizon.net> To: 'Deborah Grace'<DGRACE@ci.college-station.tx.us> Date: 5/10/02 2:51PM • Subject: RE:June 4 ZBA Meeting I will be out of town. Dick Birdwell -----Original Message---- From: Deborah Grace[SMTP:DGRACE@ci.college-station.tx.us] Sent: Friday, May 10,2002 10:22 AM To: jgoss@bruchez.com; chasel@cox-intemet.com; rodger@FellowshipCC.org; rallison@mail.tca.net; (hill@tca.net; richards@txcyber.com; d.bird@verizon.net Cc: Stacey Smith Subject: June 4 ZBA Meeting We had 2 applications come in for the June meeting. Please let me know if you are available to attend. Thanks! lip Deborah Grace><> Staff Assistant 4) City of College Station Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue College Station,Texas 77840 979-764-3784 Desk 979-764-3496 Fax dgrace ci.college-station.tx.us www.ci.college-station.tx.us College Station. Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 111 GUEST REGISTER MEETING DATE (p I Ic Z NAME ADDRESS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 110. 1. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. ZONING 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) minimum setback 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: w ' Oela-r�7X-c Gt-� r l t1 � 1 Na,tM-tn) �YY141 (iWti2 AA( n .v 7 ' f_k , ad-to? ar"-1" A-t'i�- t9 l lac 'Lf?5M444� afjj AdhLth. IAAA.R444/44iS- and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: Lid C6 IUD% i ,AA7 91;1 old Un�� N��f keibt.z4.1,6 ›.‘ -‘44,71e -r-a44,4-;-4, 044) /A, • r and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: JMotion made by6a5 Date C ©Z • kg-/tVi)Al( 1/— Chair by Voting Results Chair Signature Y, -,11,fr %'V`7// l VARPI638.DOC