Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/06/2001 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment �%W November 6, 2001 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Birdwell, Sheffy, Richards, Lewis & Alternate Member Allison. MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Hill, Alternate Members Goss & Corley, not needed. STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Grace, Staff Planners Reeves & Hitchcock, Assistant City Attorney Robinson & Senior Planner Kuenzel. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order — Explanation of functions of the Board. Acting Chairman Birdwell called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consider Absence Request from meeting (Leslie Hill). Mr. Lewis was absent from the meeting at the time Acting Chairman Birdwell called the meeting to order. The Board did not vote on his absence. Mr. Richards made the motion to approve Mr. Hill's request. Mr. Allison seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (4 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of meeting minutes from October 10, 2001 Mr. Sheffy made the motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (4 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a sign variance at 450 Southwest Parkway East, lot 1, block 1, Dartmouth Crossing Subdivision. Applicant is Ray Hansen. (01 -231). Acting Chairman Birdwell asked Mr. Hansen if he wanted to have his case heard with only 4 Board Members present. If so, in order to be granted a variance all 4 members had to vote in favor of the variance. Mr. Hansen replied that he did want his case heard. Staff Planner Hitchcock stepped before the Board and presented the staff report. Ms. Hitchcock told the Board that the applicant is requesting the variance to allow for freestanding signage in a C -N Neighborhood Business zoning district. The owner of the business and property would like to erect a freestanding sign with 50 -sq. ft. for the gas station and an additional 16 -sq.ft. for each of the buildings tenants. �W ZBA Minutes November 6, 2001 Page 1 of 5 Section 12.3 K of the Zoning Ordinance states the "Freestanding commercial signs are allowed only on developed commercial property in A -P, C -1, C -2, C -3, C -B, M -1 and M -2 zones ". Freestanding commercial signs are not allowed in C -N Neighborhood Business districts because the purpose of the v% district is to provide small -scale neighborhood conveniences without large -scale commercial intrusions. Gas price signs are allowed for businesses selling fuel, but the sign is limited to 16 -sq.ft. Thus, the applicant would like a variance to the restriction of freestanding signs in a C -N Neighborhood Business zoning district. In return for receiving the ability to have freestanding signage, the applicant has proposed a reduction in the amount of attached signage on the building. According to the Zoning Ordinance Section 15.2 Powers and Duties [ of the Board of Adjustment], the Board does not have the authority to restrict the abilities allowed a development by the ordinance; but can uphold the and grant variances when it will not be contrary to the public interest and where owing to special conditions, literal enforcement of the ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship. Since the Zoning Ordinance allows the development to have attached signs, the Board does not have the power to restrict the number or the design of attached signs. There would be no process to enforce this proposal that the applicant has made. The applicant has listed two items for consideration as special conditions that relate to the condition of the development and not to the land. The first is that the requested freestanding signs would prohibit distractions to drivers and property owners. The second is that the information and aesthetics would be more effective with a freestanding sign as compared to attached signs. The applicant argues that his signage proposal would look better than other options available to him through the current ordinance. (W The applicant offers three alternatives: 1. rezone the property to a district that allows freestanding signs. The applicant is currently investigating the possibility of a rezoning. 2. Request an ordinance change so C -N districts my have freestanding signs. The applicant went before the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 4, 2001 to do this. The Commission is taking the request into consideration with the Unified Development Code. 3. Utilize the options available to the property — the 16 -sq.ft. fuel price sign and attached signage. Acting Chairman Birdwell opened the public hearing. Mr. Hansen, the applicant, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Acting Chairman Birdwell. Mr. Hansen made a presentation with slides. The presentation showed architectural renderings of the proposed store and canopy; signage that is allowed by city ordinances and the signage proposed requiring a variance. Mr. Hansen told the Board that he went beyond what he was asked to do by the City in the design of the commercial development. Mr. Hansen discussed the signage and showed illustrations of what they could add to the canopy and the building. Mr. Hansen stated that they are simply asking for a sign variance which gives them the right to have 50 -feet of signage for both business trademark and fuel prices instead of the 16 -feet for the fuel prices alone. Additionally, they would like to have 16 -feet for each tenant in the building. That would eliminate a need for ill placed signs of many sizes with one attractive sign. 4 ZBA Minutes November 6, 2001 Page 2 of 5 Mr. Hansen told the Board that City staff said they could approve the sign variance but they could not enforce the fact that signs are going to be placed on the building. Mr. Hansen asked the Board to look at the other two stations they built in town and see how they look. Mr. Hansen told the Board he �% offered to put a tenant restriction of 32 -feet but was told that that could not be enforced. Mr. Hansen told the Board that he would put it in the deed restrictions or what ever it took to assure the Board that they would do the right thing. Mr. Hansen summarized his request as recommending a variance that goes from 16 -feet to roughly 80 -feet and that they honor tenant /deed restrictions of eliminating anything but the signs shown. Mr. Hansen ended by stating that he is not sure why City staff is not supporting this other than the fact that they don't think ZBA can enforce it. Mr. Hansen asked the Board to accept his word that he would add it to the lease and part of a deed restriction. Mr. Richards reminded Mr. Hansen variances that are granted stay with the land and not the owner. Mr. Richards asked Mr. Hansen if he knew what the sign restrictions were when he bought the property. Mr. Hansen replied that he did not. He came into the development after the land was bought. Mr. Richards asked Mr. Hansen what he considered to be a hardship. Mr. Hansen replied that he would consider a driver not being able to see what was in the center. Mr. Richards added that it is a neighborhood shopping center and it is designed for the people in the neighborhood. Mr. Hansen told the Board that he has done everything that he knows to do. Mr. Hansen suggested as a compromise that the Board add restrictions to the deed. Mr. Lewis apologized to Mr. Hansen for being late to the meeting. Mr. Lewis stated that he had driven by the property and he had no question that what is being built is going to be attractive. Mr. Lewis told Mr. Hansen that the Board is bound by rules they must follow. Of those rules, in order for the Board to grant variance they must determine the existence of special conditions other than solely financial, which create an undue hardship. Mr. Lewis stated that the application stated "prohibiting distractions and improving the landscape" but he is not seeing anything that is a unique circumstance for the piece of land. Mr. Hansen replied that in the industry it is very unique for a store not to have a trademark. Mr. Hansen added that it would be very unique to him to have signs on the building but not have one out front saying what is in the center. With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor of the request, Acting Chairman Birdwell called for anyone wanting to speak in opposition of the variance. Tim Jones, 716 Willow Loop, stepped before the Board and was sworn in my Acting Chairman Birdwell. Mr. Jones told the Board he was there representing Planters and Merchants State Bank whom he works for. Mr. Jones told the Board that P &M is building a facility adjacent to the property in review. Mr. Jones stated that he took the initiative early on in the planning process for their new facility to meet with the owners of the property in review to talk about working together. There was a common interest on an entrance to the properties. Mr. Jones stated that his concern relates to the issues the Board has already touched on. ZBA Minutes November 6, 2001 Page 3 of 5 n The fact that the variance goes with the property, there is no doubt of the intent of the current property owners, but the possibility of change in ownership years from now is a concern. A sign of such size could block the view of the bank facility. Mr. Jones ended by saying the reason for opposition is the open - endedness of the variance that goes with the property and that could pass to someone who might want a different use. The Board had no questions for Mr. Jones. Mr. Hansen stepped before the Board and asked them to seek advice from Council to see if there is a deed restriction that can be put into place. And if that was correct the Board should grant the variance. Ms. Robinson replied that the property owner can add deed restrictions but the City can not enforce them. Mr. Hansen stated that there has to be a legal way to accomplish this. With no one else stepping forward to speak, Acting Chairman Birdwell closed the public hearing. Ms. Robinson reminded Acting Chairman Birdwell that due to Mr. Lewis not being in attendance when the staff report was given for this case he would need to abstain from voting. Mr. Richards made the motion to deny a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest, due to the lack of unique special condition not generally found within the City, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would not result in substantial hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit and intent of this ordinance shall be preserved and the general interests of the public and the applicant served. Acting Chairman Birdwell seconded the motion. Acting Chairman Birdwell told Mr. Hansen he is sympathetic with what he is proposing but there is no basis for the Board to approve the sign. The Board can see no special condition or hardship. Acting Chairman Birdwell told Mr. Hansen that the resolution to his problem is to rezone. Acting Chairman Birdwell ended by saying that this Board has to enforce what ordinances exist. Acting Chairman Birdwell called for the vote. The Board voted (4 -0 -1) to deny the variance. Mr. Lewis abstaining from voting AGENDA ITEM 5: Unified Development Ordinance Presentation — Overview of the proposed UDO. The ZBA Chairman is invited to provide written comments to the P &Z at their Workshop on November 29, 2001. Senior Planner Kuenzel stepped before the Board and presented to the Board the Public Review Draft of the Ordinance. She told the Board that the City would be spending the next 3 months gathering and sorting input. The first month is concentrating on making sure the ZBA, Historic Preservation Committee, 4B Development Board and the Parks Board get their input to the Planning & Zoning Commission at their workshop scheduled November 29, 2001. Acting Chairman Birdwell stated that he would put together a recommendation that this Board would like to have authority to approve variance request up to 10% as opposed to the 20% being recommended. Also any request being granted at staff level should be reported to the ZBA. ZBA Minutes November 6, 2001 Page 4 of 5 The Board agreed to place this item on the December 4, 2001 agenda for further consideration. Acting Chairman Birdwell stated that there seemed to be other dates that this Board could make L recommendations at. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Future Agenda Items. Unified Development Ordinance — continued discussions. AGENDA ITEM NO 7: The meeting was adjourned. Adjourn. APPROVED: LM Leslie Hill, Chairman ATTEST: Deborah Grace, Staff Assistant ZBA Minutes November 6, 2001 Page 5 of 5