Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/04/2003 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments (2)MINUTES' Zoning Board of Adjustment March 4, 2003 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Leslie Hill, Dick Birdwell, Rodger Lewis, Graham Shelly John Richards. MEMBERS ABSENT: Alternates, Denise Whisenant, Randal Allison & Jay Goss (not needed). STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace, Staff Planners' Jennifer Reeves, Jennifer Flanery & Molly Hitchcock, City Attorney Carla Robinson, Action Center Representative Regina Kelly. AGENDA [TEM NO. 1: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Hill called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration, discussion and possible action of absence requests. There were no requests to consider. AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration, discussion and possible action on approval of meeting minutes from January 7, 2003. Mr. Lewis made the motion to approve. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (S-0). AGENDA ITEM N0.4: Consideration, discussion and possible action on approval of meeting minutes from February 4, 2003. Chairman Hill called before the meeting and made 3 minor changes. Mr. Birdwell made the motion to appr~rve the minutes as amended Mr. Lewis seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (S-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. S: Consideration, discussion and possible action to rehear a rear setback variance at 822 Nimitz, lot 9, block 6, D.A. Smith Subdivision. Applicant is the City of College Station Community Development Office. If the Board votes to rehear this case, the case would be reheard at the Board's regular meeting April 1, 2003. No staff report was given. Ms. Reeves told the Board that the homeowner and a representative from the Community Development Office were in the audience should they have any questions. Mr. Birdwell made the motion to deny the request to rehear. With no second the motion failed ZBA Minutes March 4, 2003 Page 1 of h Mr. Richards made the motion to approve to rehear. Mr. Sheffy seconded the motion. Mr. Lewis stated that he is in favor of rehearing the case because they have given other applicants every . opportunity to have their cases reheard. The Board voted (4-1). Mr. Brrdwell voting agatnst rehearing the case. The motion passed to rehear the case at the April 1 meeting of the Board AGENDA ITEM N0.6: Public hearing for consideration, discussion and possible action on a rear setback variance at 308 Agate, lot 2, block 5, Stone Forest Phase II. Applicant is John McEuen. REHEAR No staff report was given. Chairman Hill opened the public hearing. Mike Gentry, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Gentry spoke on behalf of Mr. McEuen and spoke in favor of the Board rehearing the case. Mr. Lewis asked Mr. Gentry if he could state a special condition and hardship. Mr. Gentry replied that the special condition would be the reasonable effort of the applicant to construct the house in compliance with all the City ordinances. The mistake made by the city in processing the plans would be a special condition. Mr. Gentry described the 8-foot fence that Mr. McEuen had constructed on the 3 sides of the property. As far as a hardship Mr. Gentry stated that home not being marketable and there is no way to fix the problem other than tearing it down. • r n for a variance. Chairman Hill replied that self-mflicted hardships are not g ou ds Mr. Gentry replied that he would argue that it was not self-inflicted. Mr. Gentry added that Mr. McEuen went to the city and sought to comply with all the guidelines and received approval. The city staff supported the application and since then has changed their guidelines on reviewing site plans as a result of it. Ms. Hitchcock stated for public record that there was a letter at their desks from a property owner in opposition of the request. Dale Christian, president of Pebble Creek HOA, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Christian asked Ms. Hitchcock to restate the facts of the case. After the recap Mr. Christian stated that he could not state a formal opinion on the case. Chairman Hill called for anyone wanting to speak in opposition of the request. Sefa Koseoghu, a neighboring property owner, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Koseoghu spoke in opposition to the request. With no one else stepping forward Chairman Hill closed the public hearing. • ZBA Minutes March 4, 2003 Page 2 of 6 Mr. Birdwell made the motion to approve a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: the city approved the site plan and inspected the forms before the concrete was poured and approved it; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to the applicant being: inability to obtain title insurance without a variance; and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: 4-foot variance to the rear setback. Mr. Richards seconded the motion. Mr. Richards reminded the Board about the letter they received from the neighbors. He stated that he spoke to the closest homeowners to the subject property and they are both in approval of the variance. Mr. Richards added that the hardship is a direct result of the special condition. Mr. Birdwell added that this is an unfortunate situation. Mr. Birdwell stated that the ZBA is very critical to builders when they make mistakes, but in this case it was not the builder that made the mistake it was the city. Mr. Shelly stated that he agreed with Mr. Birdwell. Chairman Hill stated that the builder did make mistakes and the city failed to catch them. Chairman Hill stated that Mr. McEuen assumed the rear setback was 20-feet and a simple phone call could have prevented the problem. Chairman Hill added that the neighbors, Dr. Martin-Rogriquez and Sefa Koseoghu strongly oppose the variance and they are asking for the protection that the city ordinances are designed to give. Mr. Birdwell added that the reason for setbacks is population density and this is not going to change the • population density. In this case this house has twice, three times the sideline clearance. So there is plenty of openness and light. Mr. Lewis stated that he agreed with Mr. Richards. The builder has done as much as he can to ameliorate the situation. He added that he could agree with some of Chairman Hills' remarks. He agreed that he did not feel the builder exercised a great deal of diligence in discovering the rear setback but he feels he has done everything he can since making the mistake to improve it. Mr. Lewis ended by saying that he would be in favor of the variance. The Board voted {4-I). Chairman Hill voting against granting the variances The variance is granted AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Public hearing for consideration, discussion and possible action on a side and rear setback variance at 210 Lee Avenue, lots 6 & 7, block 4, Oakwood Addition. Applicant is Richard Jefferson, New Concepts Construction. Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the staff report and told the Board that the variances were for the construction of a new car garage and improvements to an existing garage structure. The owners are planning to make several additions and improvements to their home. One project is the updating of the existing garage and the addition of a new garage. The existing garage was built on the rear property line in 1938, before the city had adopted setback regulations. . ZBA Minutes March 4, 2003 Page 3 of'6 The structure is non-conforming to current standards, and therefor must receive a variance to reconstruct or structurally alter the building, or to change the use of the building; thus the applicant is requesting a 25-foot rear setback variance for the existing garage structure. • The new garage is proposed to be constructed flush with the existing garage along the rear property line. The rear setback far R-1 is 25-feet, but garages are allowed 20-feet from the rear property line. This new structure would also encroach into the required side setback; thus the applicant is requesting a 20-foot rear setback variance and a 41/2 to 5-foot side setback variance for a new garage. As a special condition the applicant would like the Board to consider the existing configuration of structures and driveway. The applicant also describes the alley behind the home as a buffer between the subject property and the home behind it. It is stated that the proposed renovations will not be possible without the necessary variances. Ms. Hitchcock ended her staff report by telling the Board that she had received two letters from abutting property owners. The neighbor to the South is against the side setback variance and the neighbor to the North is in support of all requests. Chairman Hill opened the public hearing. Bruce Hoekstra, the homeowner, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Hoekstra explained to the Board the improvements that will take place to the home, garage and property. Mr. Richards asked how the drainage was going to be handled. Mr. Hoekstra stated they were going to • place cement and gravel that will carry the runoff out the alley. Also when they pour the footing for the garage they are going to pour a curb that will prevent water from being shed into the neighbors property. The water will be routed out the driveway to the front or they will take it to the alley. Mark Sicilio, 126 Lee Avenue, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Sicilio spoke in favor of the variances. Richard Jefferson, the applicant, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Jefferson explained renovation of the existing garage and the construction of the new garage. Chairman Hill stated that his concern is water being diverted on the adjoining properties. Mr. Jefferson stated that the owners are choosing to pave the driveway all the way from the street to the back of the property. There would be something like a swell so the water would stay in the channel. So there should not be any water run off to the side. Chairman Hill stated that it is his understanding that when you pave an area that has not previously been paved you do increase the amount of run off. Chairman Hill asked if the water is being diverted to run North or South. Mr. Jefferson replied that he did not know. But at least by paving the driveway then you can at lease get the water out of their front yard and any water that may be progressing into the left neighbor's front yard. ZBA Minutes March -1, 2003 Page 4 of 6 • Chairman Hill and Mr. Lewis stated their biggest concerns is the side setback. Chairman Hill asked Mr. Jefferson if he had any alternatives so he would not encroach into the side setback. Mr. Jefferson replied that other than not having the doublewide garage he did not know any other alternative. • Dana Hudson, the architect for the project, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Ms. Hudson spoke in favor of the request. Neely Lewis, 120 Lee, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Lewis spoke in favor of the variances. C. D. Claycamp, 300 Lee, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Claycamp spoke in opposition to the variances. Mr. Claycamp expressed his biggest concern as being the side setback. and the drainage. He did not want the structure encroaching on the shared property line. With on one else stepping forward to speak in opposition or in favor of the variance requests Chairman Hill closed the public hearing. Mr. Birdwell made the motion to authorize a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special condition: rear setback conforms with several garages in the subdivision; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: prevents extensive improvements; and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done to the following limitations: rear variance of 20-feet, side setback 1.5-feet and drainage to the front. Mr. Lewis seconded the motion. • Chairman Hill stated that he has no problem with the rear setback but due to the objection of the neighbor on the affected property line he opposes the side setback variance. Mr. Birdwell made the motion for the division of the question. Mr. Sheffy seconded the motion. Chairman Hill made the motion to amend the motion to strike the side setback variances Due to a lack of a second the motion failed Chairman Hill asked Legal if they could divide the question. Ms. Robinson replied that they could divide the question. There were discussions as to the granting of the side setback variance along with the stipulation of the drainage being to the front. Chairman Hill asked is the grading of the property such that it forces the water to drain to the street rather than the alley. Mr. Jefferson replied that he believes everyone in the area has indicated that the natural drainage drains from the back to the front. The Board voted (5-0) to approve the rear setback variance of 20 feet. The Board voted (4-1) to approve the side setback variance of 1.5 feed Chairman Hill voting against granting the variances • March 4 20D3 Pa e S o 6 ZBA Manutes ~ .f The stipulation that the drainage will be to the front will remain in the motion as a limitation. AGENDA ITEM NO. B: Public Hearing for consideration, discussion and possible action on a • sign variance at 2013 Southwood Drive, lot 30, block 11, Southwood Section 24. Applicant is Carol Nichols, Bee Creek Neighborhood Association. Staff Planner Flanery stepped before the Board and presented the staff report. Ms. Flanery told the Board that the variance is being requested to place a neighborhood area identification sign on an existing 3-foot high wall. At the February 4 meeting the Board heard and approved the exact request just across the street from this one. Since then it was decided to move the sign across the street since the property owners for the previous request were never reached to gain permission. Chairman Hill opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in favor of the request. Carol Nichols, President of the Bee Creek Neighborhood Association stepped before the Board. Ms. Nichols spoke in favor of the request. Glen White, Manager of Doux Chene Apartments, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. White spoke in favor of the request. Mr. Lewis made the motion to authorize a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due to the following unique special conditions not generally found within the city: the variance replaces a previously granted variance and brick wall is already existing; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance would result in substantial hardship to this applicant being: unable to participate in City Neighborhood Enhancement • Project; and such that the spirit and intent of this ordinance shall be observed and the general interests of the public and applicant served, subject to the following limitations: 10-foot sign setback variance. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0.9: Consideration, discussion and possible action on future agenda items. No items were discussed. AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned. . ATTEST: ,~~ `, a ~., ~ ~-- t , .,_ .~ ~ ~°t . ~ 4 ~, _ ~ _ _ Deborah Grace, Staff Assistant • ZBA Minutes March 4, 2003 APP VE ~ ? ~ u Leslie Hill, Chairman Page 6 of h ZONING B OARD OF ADJUSTMENT • GUEST REGISTER MEETING DATE C~C~G C C-Y~ ~~ ~~3 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. • 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. NAME ADDRESS ,. ,. ~ji. ~j~ / ~~J ~- ~ , -. '~ -_ ,, -_ C ., Cjli~~ ~ '~ (`f1 ~ ~Z C7 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTM~N'P 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) / minunum setback parking requirements (Section 9) f from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: / --~ Z ~' KYt~75 w'~ ~ J '~r ~( ~--r ~/ (' ~~'r ~;" `7!~ ,L'- a.?-a^ ~~ /r 1,2c /GirsK ~~~ ~ „~ d/.f~~ C ~l C , _. , and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: ~; ti~~yn / / / / /~ / , L' .J / f~ ~ /.'~li ~ ~ L•~r/-/~ (G G' R"C ~~ %~ (~i ~' in 'T~5' / y ~ , ~, i j : G/c~ ~ ~ - - ~9,~~~jdi+ /~Z~.'hy~F T'~`~~~~ ~K ~ ~U'~~ lj ~c1:/ ~~~~r,C1J ~ ,f~°~~~iL ~ ~~i~f. •?erca f7 lr ; and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: • Motion made b Y Seconded by Chair Signature '~ ~%~~~ri L--c~~ti~~. 1~t ~~ f /, `, / c Date ,~/`l/~ Voting Results v~r sse.DOc ZONIiVG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variance to Sign Regulations: From Section 12, Ordinance Number 1638. I move to authorize a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due to the following unique special conditions not generally found within the City: ~-7~- (~14-~ 1/z~ ~~t~ ~/ /~ ~. ~ i A i ~ and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance -would result in sub tantial hardship to this applicant being: ~ ~/r ~ tS ~ ~-L. and such that the spirit and intent of this ordinance shall be preserved and the general interests of the public and applicant served, subject to the following limitations: Motion made by Motion Seconded by Voting Results Chair SignaturE Date • J ~~.~ ,~ ~ _ Cf_ ~~ /~I~ t~l' SRP1638.DOC 1 ~~ ~ ,- I ~ • ZONIIIG BOARD OF ADJUS`I`MENTP FORMAT FOR POSIfiIVE 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 sbecial ccnc~iti~ns- and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: • Motion made b z -r~~Z ~- /~ G~ ~~ Y ~ ~ Date / Seconded by _ ~ ct,~ ~ ~T~S~ Voting Results -1 - ~% Chair Signature a \V. G ~~ V/{RPl 638.DOC ZONING BOARD OF 1~DJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variance from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638. I move to authorize a variance to the s~®1 ~~~~-~ Ur. ~ ~~ a~~ 55 -F-~ - r ~. ~+ ~~ 1-~-}-. ~,.~ a~..vt v~r~~ ~ (~.G~eSS~1 S~i v~.~-~~ r2 yard (Section 8.7) lot width (Table A) lot depth (Table A) ~~ minimum setback ~ a.(ll G{GCPfv V 5~~1~k parking requirements (Section 9) and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: Irv ~~ I and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to tine following limitations: • Motion made b Y Seconded by _ Chair Signature y ~c~SS Date ,~ ~ y_,~ 5 Voting Results ~_ v~~ sss.ooc from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: o~b~~ ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ~~~ FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MO`T`ION 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 R) S ~ ~c~ ~_,e-~-~gac~ J 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: r ~1 r`/ ~ ~; ~ytr~c ,"f~~c~ ~~ ~ ~-f y F~,,,/~ 9~tiot fist' ~ar"t. • ~~r .'t . wW / G ctrl r ~L '. and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in uruiecessary hardship to this applicant being: 1 . ~7 G ~>~j ~ _ ~~"~/l t/~si I% ~i1 l/Y "l i'll~j`1 ~rY//~^e~ ~~+` ~id/C~~ls•~f ~!-gr,-r~~ / V and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: Motion made by J~C~~ rr ~ `~`'~/ii Seconded by ,.~cGr h ~if G, ~~~i~ Chair Signature Date ~ y - ~ 3 _ Voting Results _ ~'D V/IRP16J6.DOC ~.~ ~ I..,e~.. 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 1~) lot depth (Table A) mutimum setback parking requirements (Section 9) from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the followin~special conditions: ti ~ a5~ y and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substanti justice done subject to the following limitations: ~~ ~~~g ~ .y / ~ ~ -l fir. ~- ~ _ ~ ~ ~~~ Motion made by {~~~~-~~_Z, Date ~ ~ ~ ~ r Seconded by C ,J `" Voting Results ~~0,~~ Chair Signature ~.~ / ~~/i- ~~G VM!'l6J8.DOC ZONING BOARD OF XDJUSTMENT • FORMAT FOR POSIfiIVE 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 ~~ A~~~-~ v 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_ , ~'.~ TiV~ ~-~ y''-.f~^~ ~/K cam' i T and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: Motion made by ~~~, /~}f~j~t~.~',~_ Date J ~ ~' 3' • Seconded by .t~i~ /~..r~-fd~Pf1 ~ Voting Results Chair Signature i ..~/~