The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/18/2026 - Regular Agenda Packet - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsCollege Station, TX Meeting Agenda Zoning Board of Adjustment 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, TX 77840 Internet: www.microsoft.com/microsoft-teams/join-a-meeting Meeting ID: 291 341 787 490 178 | Passcode: x9eT3Rm3 Phone: 833-240-7855 | Phone Conference: 461 277 987# The City Council may or may not attend this meeting. August 18, 2026 6:00 PM Council Chambers College Station, TX Page 1 Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the meeting body will be present in the physical location stated above where citizens may also attend in order to view a member(s) participating by videoconference call as allowed by 551.127, Texas Government Code. The City uses a thirdparty vendor to host the virtual portion of the meeting; if virtual access is unavailable, meeting access and participation will be in-person only. 1.Call meeting to order and consider absence requests. 2.Agenda Items. 2.1. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. Attachments: 1. April 7, 2026 2.2. Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a variance to the maximum size of accessory structures per the Unified Development Ordinance Section 6.5.B.1 ‘Accessory Structures,’ for the property located at Westminster Ph 1, Block 1, Lot 1, Acres 3.534, generally located at 3650 Barron Cut-Off Rd. The property is zoned R Rural. Case #AWV2026- 000006 Sponsors: Gabriel Schrum Attachments: 1. Staff Report 2.Aerial and SAM 3.Applicant's Structure Location and Floor Plan 4.Survey of Property 5.Applicant's Supporting Information 3.Adjourn. Adjournment into Executive Session may occur in order to consider any item listed on the agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion. I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the website and at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on August 10, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. City Secretary Page 1 of 18 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 August 18, 2026 This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters, readers, or large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD at 1-800-735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification at least two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to provide the necessary accommodations. Page 2 of 18 April 7, 2026 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 1 of 4 Minutes Zoning Board of Adjustments Regular Meeting April 7, 2026 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Justin Collins, Brian Yung, Brittany Mendizabal, Valen Cepak and Alison Drouilhet MEMBERS ABSENT: Andrew Arizpe CITY STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services Molly Hitchcock, Senior Planner Jeff Howell, Staff Planner Gabriel Schrum, Assistant City Attorney David Purnell, Technology Service Specialist Trey Brandson, Technology Service Specialist Adam Rene, Administrative Support Specialist Kristen Hejny, and Staff Assistant Jocelyne Mora. 1. Call meeting to order. Chairperson Collins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Agenda Items 2.1. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes: • March 3, 2026 Board Mendizabal moved to approve the meeting minutes from March 3, 2026, Board Member Yung seconded the motion, the motion passed 5-0. 2.2. Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a height variance to the Airport Zoning Ordinance for the properties located at Culpepper at TAMU Subdivision Phase 2, Block 1, Lot 2, generally located at 725 University Drive (referred to as 801 Legacy Point Drive). The subject property is zoned NG-2 Transitional Northgate. Case #AWV2026-000002. Senior Planner Howell presented the item to the Board and stated that the applicant is requesting a height variance to the Easterwood Airport Zoning Ordinance for a temporary helper (mobile) crane and a tower crane for the construction of a 25-story mixed-use building. The requested height variance of 217.4-feet for the helper (mobile) crane is above the maximum height limitation of 738’ above mean sea level (AMSL). The requested height variance of 189.4-feet for the tower crane is above the maximum height limitation of 710’ above mean sea level of the Easterwood Airport Zoning Ordinance. Staff recommended approval of the request due to the fact that it does meet the specified criteria. Specifically: Page 3 of 18 April 7, 2026 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 2 of 4 1. A literal application or enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. 2. The granting of the relief would result in substantial justice being done. 3. The granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest. 4. The granting of the relief would be in accordance with the spirit of the regulation. Chairperson Collins opened staff questions. Chairperson Collins inquired whether the applicant, Preston Jacks, wished to provide a statement. Mr. Jacks denied and did not appear before the Board. Chairperson Collins opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Chairperson Collins closed the public hearing. Board Mendizabal motioned to approve both the variance as it does meet the necessary four criteria, Board Member Yung seconded the motion, the motion passes 5-0. 2.3. Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a height variance to the Airport Zoning Ordinance for the properties located at Normandy Square Condos, All Bldgs & Associated BPP, being 2.01 acres generally located at 501 Nagle Street. The subject property is zoned NG-3 Residential Northgate. Case #AWV2026-000003. Staff Planner Schrum presented the item to the Board and stated that the applicant is requesting a height variance to the Easterwood Airport Zoning Ordinance for a temporary construction crane. The requested height variance of 74.4-feet for the building is above the maximum height limitation of 470.6 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) of the Easterwood Airport Zoning Ordinance. Staff recommended approval of the request due to the fact that it does meet the specified criteria. Specifically: 1. A literal application or enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. 2. The granting of the relief would result in substantial justice being done. 3. The granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest. 4. The granting of the relief would be in accordance with the spirit of the regulation. Chairperson Collins opened staff questions. Page 4 of 18 April 7, 2026 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 3 of 4 Board Member Cepak requested clarity on the height requirement of the Easterwood Airport Zoning Ordinance. Staff Planner Schrum stated that the maximum height limitation at this site is 470.6 feet above sea level and explained that the applicant request of 74.4 -feet goes above that limitation. Chairperson Collins asked if there was a helper (mobile) crane that would be needed for the temporary crane which would result in another variance request. Staff Planner Schrum deferred the question to the applicant. Preston Jacks, Kimley Horn, Applicant, explained that his understanding and assumption was that a helper (mobile) crane will not be used but cannot speak on exactly how the mobile crane will be erected. Board Member Cepak asked if the City of Bryan will have to approve the height variance. Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services Molly Hitchcock clarified that the board serves as the Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment for the whole community, including the county and both cities. Assistant City Attorney David Purnell reiterated that there is a previous interlocal agreement. Chairperson Collins opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Chairperson Collins closed the public hearing. Board Member Cepak motioned to approve the variance as it does meet the necessary four criteria, Board Member Mendizabal seconded the motion, the motion passes 5- 0. 3. Adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 6:11 p.m. Approved: Attest: Page 5 of 18 April 7, 2026 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 4 of 4 ______________________________ ________________________________ Justin Collins, Chairperson Jocelyne Mora, Board Secretary Page 6 of 18 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 1 of 5 August 4, 2026 VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 3650 BARRON CUT-OFF RD AWV2026-000006 REQUEST: An increase to the maximum size of an accessory structure as set forth in the Unified Development Ordinance Section 6.5.B.1 ‘Accessory Structures’ LOCATION: 3650 Barron Cut-Off Rd WESTMINSTER PH 1, BLOCK 1, LOT 1, ACRES 3.534 ZONING: R Rural PROPERTY OWNER: MERRITT CLINTON ROSS & AMY LYNN APPLICANT: Ian Brumlow PROJECT MANAGER: Gabriel Schrum, Staff Planner gschrum@cstx.gov BACKGROUND: The subject property is the location of an approximately 2,269 sq.ft. single family home accessed by a driveway onto Barron Cut-off rd. The home was built around 2000 with no major additions, and additional improvements to the property such as a pool being built in 2015. According to UDO Section 6.5.B.1 “all accessory uses shall contain no more square footage than twenty-five (25) percent of the habitable floor area of the principal structure or four hundred (400) square feet, whichever is greater.” With the primary structure size of 2,269 sq.ft., the combined area of all accessory uses is not to exceed 567.25 sq.ft. (25% of the area of the principal structure). The applicant is proposing to add a detached 1,000 sq.ft. accessory structure or workshop (with an additional 400sqft of open covered porches) to the eastern side of the existing home and alongside Barron Cut off rd . At 1,000 sq.ft., the proposed accessory structure would be approximately 44% of the principal structure on site. This necessitates the request for the variance to Unified Development Ordinance Section 6.5.B ‘Accessory Structures’ to allow the total accessory structures on the lot to exceed the 25% maximum (567.25 square feet) by allowing an additional 432.75 sq.ft. of accessory structures, which is 44% of the size of the home. Page 7 of 18 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 of 5 August 4, 2026 APPLICABLE ORDINANCE SECTION: Section 6.5.B.1 ‘Accessory Structures’ ORDINANCE INTENT: UDO Section 6.5.B.4.A ‘Accessory Structures’ sets maximum square footage requirements for Accessory Structures that limit their size to scale in relation to the primary home in single family zoning districts. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the variance request. NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Board Hearing Date: August 4, 2026 Property owner notices mailed: 9 Contacts in support: None at the time of this report Contacts in opposition: None at the time of this report Inquiry contacts: None at the time of this report ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES Direction Zoning Land Use Subject Property R Rural Single-Family Home North R Rural Single-Family Home South R Rural Single-Family Home East (across Barron Cut-off rd) R Rural Single-Family Home West (across Wellborn rd) R Rural Single-Family Home PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS 1. Frontage: The subject property has approximately 786 feet of frontage on Barron Cut-off Rd and 582 feet of frontage along FM 2154. 2. Access: The subject property is currently taking access from Barron Cut-off rd via an existing driveway. 3. Topography and vegetation: The subject property is a large corner lot, with existing vegetation and canopy trees screening the majority of the lot from the public ROW along FM 2154. According to City estimates, the impervious cover for the entire lot does not exceed 30%. When a landowner applies for a building permit, a more detailed calculation is required to show that the maximum impervious cover limit will not be exceeded. 4. Floodplain: The subject property is not located within FEMA regulated floodplain. Page 8 of 18 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 of 5 August 4, 2026 REVIEW CRITERIA According to Unified Development Ordinance Section 3.19.E ‘Criteria for Approval of Variance’, no variance shall be granted unless the Board makes affirmative findings in regard to all nine of the following criteria: 1. Extraordinary conditions: That there are extraordinary or special conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of the UDO will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land. Extraordinary or special conditions do exist for this property. The property is a deep corner lot (over 500 ft. in depth) and is vegetated with an abundance located near FM 2154. The rural lot consists of a 1 story brick home, with a pool and pole barn that is open-air, without conditioning, used for equestrian care on the property. Overall, all lots within the R Rural zoning district have an average minimum lot size of 3 acres, keeping the general character of the area consistent with the intent of the land use. While special conditions exist on the lot, there are options to further increase the accessory structure space on site without necessitating a variance. The special conditions do not prohibit conformance with the ordinance. The applicant has stated that, “The unique physical characteristic is the substantial lot size, which is atypical for the zoning district and makes the 25% rule disproportionately restrictive. The proposed structure is a single-story metal building with an open covered porch on the north wall. A 567 SF structure is insufficient for the intended residential accessory use.” 2. Enjoyment of a substantial property right: That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property right of the applicant. If the proposed variance is not granted, the applicant can still build an accessory structure within the 25% threshold and follow Section 6.5.B.1 ‘Accessory Structures’ of the UDO. If the variance is not granted, the applicant is not being denied a substantial property right of a single-family lot. 3. Substantial detriment: That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this UDO. Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering the UDO. 4. Subdivision: That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this UDO. The granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area in accordance with the provisions of the UDO. The surrounding properties are platted lots within the Woodland Acres Subdivision. 5. Flood hazard protection: That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing flood hazard protection in accordance with Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements. The granting of this variance will not have the effect of preventing flood hazard protection in accordance with Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements as the site is already developed and due to no portion of this property being located within floodplain. 6. Other property: That these conditions do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity. Page 9 of 18 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 of 5 August 4, 2026 Other lots in the area are significant in depth and size that are consistent with the character of the area and the Rural zoning district. The other lots in this area have large accessory structures, but these structures have been permitted as detached garages and not Accessory Structures. There are also other Accessory Structures in the area that have been able to meet size standards put forth in Section 6.5.B ‘Accessory Structures’. 7. Hardships: That the hardship is not the result of the applicant’s own actions. A hardship has occurred based upon the applicant’s own actions and does not occur due to an extraordinary condition of the land. The applicant is seeking to build to 44% of the total principal structure compared to 25% permitted by Section 6.5.B.1 ‘Accessory Structures’. The addition could be redesigned to meet standards without a variance. The applicant has provided the following, “Restricting development to 567 SF on a 3.534-acre rural lot results in a loss of reasonable use of more than 25% of the area on which development may physically occur. The hardship is not the result of the applicant's own actions; it results from the application of a size ratio designed for smaller residential lots being applied to a substantially larger rural tract”. 8. Comprehensive Plan: That the granting of the variance would not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this UDO. The granting of this variance would not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 9. Utilization: That because of these conditions, the application of the UDO to the particular piece of property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. The application of the UDO standards to this particular property does not restrict the applicant in the utilization of their property. The rural zoning on the lot and the associated lot size is intended to accommodate for agricultural purposes. The applicant would still be able to utilize their property as a single- family lot, with possible agricultural endeavors and build an accessory structure within the maximum allotted accessory structure size. ALTERNATIVES The applicant is proposing to add approximately 1,000 sq.ft. detached accessory structure to the property. The applicant could reduce the square footage of the accessory structure to fall within the 25% requirement (567.25 sq.ft.) or could increase the size of the principal structure. The applicant has stated, “The only compliant alternative would be to reduce the accessory structure to 567 SF, which is insufficient to serve the intended residential accessory use.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION The applicant is seeking a variance to the maximum accessory structure size of 25% of the principal structure as set forth in Section 6.5.B.1 ‘Accessory Structures’. Due to the lack of meeting all of the required criteria provided above, including lack of a special condition on the property that necessitates a variance to allow for a larger accessory structure and the fact that there is no denial of a substantial property right, Staff recommends denial of the variance request. Page 10 of 18 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 5 of 5 August 4, 2026 ATTACHMENTS 1. Aerial and Small Area Map 2. Applicant's Structure Location and Floor Plan 3. Survey of Property 4. Applicant’s Supporting Information Page 11 of 18 Page 12 of 18 Page 13 of 18 Page 14 of 18 WORKSHOP Detached Accessory Structure 3650 Barron Cut Off Rd, College Station, TX PROJECT Detached accessory workshop ADDRESS 3650 Barron Cut Off Rd College Station, TX 77845 ZONING Rural LOT AREA 3.534 acres (153,941 SF) BUILDING 1,000 SF (25' x 40') EAVE / RIDGE 10'-0" / ~13'-6" ROOF 4:12 gable, standing seam metal WALLS Vertical metal panel ISSUE Variance submittal DATE 2026.06.01 FLOOR PLAN Scale: 1/2" = 1'-0" A1.0 Schematic design - not for construction FLOOR PLAN Scale: 1/2" = 1'-0" | North up HALF BATH 6'-0" x 6'-0" COLD ROOM 12'-0" x 10'-0" WORK AREA WC LAV COMMERCIAL SINK (10', single bay + drainboard) W1 W1 W2W2W3W4 (high)AC SLEEVED1 D2 FRENCH DOORS D4 D3 40'-0"25'-0"N LEGEND W1-W3 Display window (sill 2'-0", head 6'-8") W4 High awning window (head height, over sink) D1-D4 Doors (see door schedule, sheet A1.0) AC Cold room AC sleeve (CoolBot, owner-supplied) Commercial sink: owner-supplied equipment GENERAL NOTES 1. Detached accessory structure, single-story. 2. 25' x 40' = 1,000 SF. Pre-engineered metal building. 3. 10'-0" eave, 4:12 gable, ~13'-6" ridge. 4. Slab on grade, sealed concrete finish floor. 5. Two interior rooms: half bath (NW), cold room (NE). 6. All dimensions verify in field; not for construction. Page 15 of 18 Page 16 of 18 Name of Project: 1400 SQ FT PEMB ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WORKSHOP (AWV2026-000006) Address: 3650 BARRON CUT-OFF RD Legal Description: WESTMINSTER PH 1, BLOCK 1, LOT 1, ACRES 3.534 Applicant: IAN BRUMLOW Property Owner: MERRITT CLINTON ROSS & AMY LYN Applicable ordinance section being appealed/seeking waiver from: Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), Section 6.4 — Accessory Structures, 25% accessory structure size limitation relative to primary structure The following specific variation to the ordinance is requested: Request to allow a 1,400 SF detached accessory structure (1,000 SF enclosed building + 400 SF open covered porch, no walls) where the applicable 25% size limitation allows a maximum of 567 SF based on the 2,269 SF primary structure. The unnecessary hardship(s) involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance other than financial hardship is/are: Ground 2 applies directly to this property. The subject property is 3.534 acres (153,941 SF). Compliance with the 25% accessory structure limitation would restrict the accessory structure to 567 SF. The lot contains substantially more developable area than the 25% rule accounts for — the combined footprint of both structures at the requested size represents less than 2.4% of the total lot area. Restricting development to 567 SF on a 3.534-acre rural lot results in a loss of reasonable use of more than 25% of the area on which development may physically occur. The hardship is not the result of the applicant's own actions; it results from the application of a size ratio designed for smaller residential lots being applied to a substantially larger rural tract. The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: The only compliant alternative would be to reduce the accessory structure to 567 SF, which is insufficient to serve the intended residential accessory use. A lot split creating a separate parcel for the workshop was considered but would require a separate platting process and is disproportionate to the scope of the request. APPEAL/WAIVER APPLICATION SUPPORTING INFORMATION The variance will not be contrary to public interest due to: Granting this variance will not be contrary to the public interest. The proposed structure is a single-story metal building on a 3.534-acre rural lot with substantial separation from adjacent properties and the public right-of- The following special condition exists: The subject property is 3.534 acres (153,941 SF). The strict application of the 25% accessory structure size limitation produces an unreasonable result on a lot of this size. The combined footprint of the existing primary structure (2,269 SF) and the proposed accessory structure including open porch (1,400 SF) totals 3,669 SF, which represents less than 2.4% of the total lot area. The unique physical characteristic is the substantial lot size, which is atypical for the zoning district and makes the 25% rule disproportionately restrictive. The proposed structure is a single-story metal building with an open covered porch on the north wall. A 567 SF structure is insufficient for the intended residential accessory use. Page 1 of 2 Page 17 of 18 way. The structure's footprint combined with the existing home represents less than 2.4% of the total lot area. No adjacent property owners will experience adverse impacts to use, enjoyment, or value of their properties. The variance is consistent with the rural character of the zoning district and the physical scale of the lot. Page 2 of 2 Page 18 of 18