Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/01/2005 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment November 1, 2005 i CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Jay Goss, Josh Benn, Donald Braune, MEMBERS ABSENT: Graham Sheffy, Alternates Derek Dictson & Denise Whisenant (not needed) STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace, Staff Planners Molly Hitchcock, Jennifer Reeves, Crissy Hartl and Lindsay Boyer, Senior Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services Lance Simms. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Goss called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Consideration, discussion and possible action of absence requests. Graham Sheffy submitted an absence request stating that he would be traveling all week checking on hurricane damage. Donald Braune made the motion to approve the absence request. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes for: August 2, 2005 Workshop and Regular Meeting September 6, 2005 Workshop and Regular Meeting Mr. Richards had a word correction on the September 6 regular meeting. Mr. Benn made the motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0.4: Public hearing, presentation, discussion and possible action, to condider a variance for 107 Lee Avenue, portion of Lot 4, Lot 5, and portion of Lot 6, Block 3, in the Oakwood Subdivision. Applicant is Casey Moore. (05-170). Staff Planner Crissy Hartl presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting the variance to allow for the construction of a new home. The applicant has removed an existing structure in order to build a new single-family home. Because of the contextual front setback in this area, the • new home can be no closer than 38-feet to the property line, thus the applicant is requesting a 5-foot variance to the rear setback. The uniqueness of the contextual setbacks for this area provide a buildable area for this lot of 8,049.5 square feet. The applicant states: "In order to comply with the current ordinances in place, the buildable area of the lot is reduced in comparison to neighboring properties". • The applicant has mentioned a 5-foot variance to the contextual setback. The Board my grant lesser variances or divide the variance between the front and rear setback. Staff recommends denial of the variance request. The City of College Station's Zoning Ordinance has traditionally required at least a 25-foot rear setback for Single-Family Residential Districts. With the adoption of the Unified Development Ordinance in 2003, the rear setback for R-1 Single Family Residential was reduced to 20-feet. As a result, buildable area of these lots has increased over time. Additionally, staff applied specific criteria to determine whether this property meets the circumstances for a variance. In the opinion of staff, the subject property is not affected by extraordinary conditions that deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his property, nor is the variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Chairman Gosss opened the public hearing. The following spoke in favor of the variance request and were sworn in by Chairman Goss. Rodney Hill, 119 Lee Avenue Craig Blakely, 701 Hereford Bruce Hoekstra, 210 Lee Avenue Neeley Lewis, 120 Lee Avenue Chairman Goss asked Mr. Neeley to tell the Board what he thinks is the special condition and hardship • is in this case. Mr. Neeley replied that it would be the location of the existing houses on each side. In order to comply, the new house needs to be pushed back further onto the lot. Also, the fact that there is a 20-foot buffer in the back, instead of 20-foot setback there is a 35-foot setback. Mr. Richards questioned if they are putting too big of a house on the lot. Mr. Richards asked why you would purposefully design a home on the lot knowing that it does not conform to City Ordinances. Crissy Hartl made clarification that the 20-feet in the back is not a buffer but rather a 20-foot right-of- way. Casey Moore, property owner, also stepped forward to speak in favor of the variance and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Mr. Benn asked if he could do an alternate house plan to make it work. Mr. Moore stated that the house was designed for that lot. He has talked to the architect to see if something else could be done. Chairman Goss asked what the size of the house is. Mr. Moore responded that it was 6400 sq. ft. heated. The last to speak in favor of the variance, Mark Sicilio, 126 Lee Avenue, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. ZBA Minutes November 1, 2005 Page 2 oj4 With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or in opposition, Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. • Mr. Richards stated he had concerns with the parking. Chairman Goss opened the public hearing for Mr. Lewis to address the parking issue. Mr. Lewis discussed the parking in the neighborhood. Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. Mr. Benn stated that there is no special condition or hardship for this case and he did not feel the Board should grant the variance. Chairman Goss stated that he would be in favor of the variance because they tore the house down not knowing that this would hinder them from rebuilding. The integrity of the neighborhood is being continued with the construction of this home. Mr. Taylor stated that the house could be redesigned to fit within the building setbacks. Mr. Braune made the motion not to authorize a variance to the minimum setback 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 strick enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Benn seconded the motion. Mr. Braune stated that time and effort went into the ordinances, and in a short period of time the ordinances are not being upheld. He ended by saying that he does not see a hardship and the house could be redesigned to fit the lot Chairman Goss called for the vote from Mr. Braune's motion to deny. The Board voted (4-1). Chairman Goss voting against the denial. AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Consideration and possible action on future agenda items - A Zoning Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. Mr. Braune stated that he would like ZBA to make a recommendation to City Council concerning revisiting the ordinance with the contextual setbacks. Mr. Simms stated that he would like to start at staff level so ZBA knows the intent of the ordinance and then if ZBA feels they need to proceed to City Council that can be done. ZBA Minutes November 1, 2005 Page 3 of 4 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn. • The meeting was adjourned. Chairman ATTEST: Deborah Gr ,Staff Assistant • • ZBA Minutes November 1, 2005 Page 4 of 4 ZONING BOARD OFADJUSTM~NT GUST REGISTER MEETING DATE November 1, 2005 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 ~1 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. ~4. 25. NAME ADDRESS ,- 3. Q' a~ /07 l-2.C~ S . TX -t7~40 4. ~`fJ~-tJ COL. t--1 ~.~, t ~ t i--~~~(C'`~ fib. ~,t~ ?~~ C •S1-TX • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning d Development Serviccr ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR NEGATIVE MOTION VARIANCE FROM SECTION of the Unified Development Ordinance. I move to not authorize a variance to the Yard (Article 5) Lot Width (Article 5) Lot Depth (Article 5) ~/ Minimum Setback (Article 5) Section 5.2 & 5.4 Dimensional Standards Parking Requirements (Section 9) Article 7, Section 7.2 Off-Street Parking Standards 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 the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Motion made by Seconded by o~~ fir/ Voting Results Chair Signature Date ~ a ~~