Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/02/1990 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• MINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustment October 2, 1990 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Baker, Members Yarbrough, Lane, Cronan, and Alternate Member Kennady. (Council Liaison Gardner was in the audience). MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Henry, Alternate Members Gaston, Phinney, Webb, and DeOtte. STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner Kee, Planning Assistant Kuenzel, Assistant City Attorney Cotes, Planning Technician Rosier, and Development Review Coord. Volk who was in the audience. S ~ AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to Order - explanation of functions and limitations of the Board. Acting Chairman Baker called the meeting to order and explained the functions and limitations of the Board. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Approval of minutes - meeting of September 18, 1990. Mr. Cronan made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Ms. Yarbrough seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a request for a variance to the location of required islands in a proposed parking lot on Lot 1 Kapchinski Hill subdivision. Application is in the name of William H. Triplett for H. E. Butt Grocery Company. Ms. Kuenzel presented the staff report. She presented slides of the subject site. She said that the request for a variance is to exclude 1/3 of the required parking islands. The basis for the ordinance which requires the islands, she pointed out, is from a safety standpoint. Kuenzel clarified • that if the Board grants this variance, the required . landscaping points must still be met on this site. Kuenzel proceeded to show slides of some parking lots in town which do not contain the required parking islands. (Some were exempt because they were built prior to adoption of the • ordinance.) She also showed slides to demonstrate sites in town which do comply. In conclusion, she reminded the Board to review the case using the same criteria as always, and to make notes on the consideration form provided. Mr. Lane asked if the Post Office was exempt from islands because it is a Federal Government building. Ms. Kuenzel said he was correct. Mr. William Triplett representing H.E.B. came forward and was sworn in. He said that he is the architect and project manager for this H.E.B. development. He said that the request for a variance is based on a concern for safety. He said that H.E.B. owns well over 100 stores; lots which they must maintain. He pointed out that this request is not in effort to avoid landscaping the parking lot. As he understood the ordinance, those islands could be concrete as long as the landscape points were met elsewhere. Ms. Kee said that if the islands are not landscaped, they must be grassed. Mr. Triplett said that people tend to run over barriers. He believed that the requirement for an island every 15 spaces, interrupts the flow of traffic instead of facilitating it. He did not believe that the interest of safety is served by our ordinance. He said that at other stores, people had pulled up onto the island to change their vehicle's oil. He also stated that landscaping grown in these islands could exceed the height of a small child thus, posing a threat to safety. Triplett then showed the Board a site plan which illustrated the proposed parking configuration. He said that too many landscaped islands could conceal the store by a forest effect. He did not think that the proposed length of the rows were too long (33 parking spaces). He assured the Board that the site would be attractive. He mentioned that the cost of installation and maintenance of islands is a contributing factor to H.E.B.'s complaint but he realized that financial hardship cannot be the sole grounds for a variance. Triplett pointed out that the slides of the shopping centers with required islands seemed to be vacant. He assured the Board that H.E.B. will always have cars. Triplett also remarked that people trample the landscaping in islands. He said that concrete curbs are difficult to see at night. Finally, he wanted to point out that H.E.B.'s .. proposal will exceed the minimum parking requirements. Mr. Cronan asked if the store has experienced safety liability in Austin. • Mr. Triplett said that the problems mentioned have occurred in several towns. Mr. Cronan asked if Mr. Triplett had a statement from H.E.B.'s insurance company pertaining to the liability claims. Mr. Triplett said that these damages were paid through individual store funds. Mr. Cronan asked if Mr. Triplett could present the Board with any paperwork at all. Mr. Triplett suggested that he could bring store managers to testify before the Board. Mr. Kennady said that the Board was requesting more tangible data. He agreed with Mr. Cronan's statements. Mr. Triplett said that the Board cannot deny that a problem with traffic circulation and parking islands exists. Mr. Cronan asked what makes the lot unique. • Mr. Triplett said that in this situation, it would simply provide something for the cars to run in to. Acting Chairman Baker informed Mr. Triplett that the Board is simply requesting some paperwork. She wondered if the islands have also prevented a child from being hit. There was some discussion regarding drainage requirements. Mr. Triplett mentioned that he needed an answer from the ZBA because he would then be able to direct his contractor to proceed with the drainage plan. Mr. Kennady said that the Board's response is and should be, that they need tangible evidence. Kennady said that while he dislikes parking islands, he believes that they slow down traffic. He asked if drainage is a real concern. Mr. Triplett said that the Board's ruling on the islands will affect the drainage study which is being prepared. Mr. Kennady repeated the Board's request for proof. Mr. Triplett said that the Board should believe him when he says that this is a safety issue. He said that H.E.B. will be stalled on their final site plan design until the Board • makes a decision. Frankly, he did not know if the project could withstand such delays. • Mr. Cronan said that it is perfectly acceptable for a Board of this nature to require data supporting the applicant's claim. Mr. Triplett said that the issue could end up as a debate between two traffic engineers (his and the City's). Mr. Kennady said that the Board is not taking an adversarial role. If the applicant conducts a traffic study, the City will not create one to refute it. However, he commented that testimony from store managers would not be sufficient. Mr. Triplett said that the task of obtaining the necessary store records seems insurmountable. Mr. Cronan suggested that police reports should exist. Mr. Triplett assured him that none would exist since the accidents occurred on private property. Mr. Kennady said that he did not want to deny the request at this time. He said that perhaps the Board could meet sooner than their next regularly scheduled meeting if the applicant had tight time constraints. Acting Chairman Baker suggested that the Board could table the item. Ms. Kee said that the Board previously ruled that an item can be tabled for 90 days at the end of which they can deny the request without consideration. Mr. Kennady made a motion to table this item. Mr. Cronan seconded the motion. Mr. Gardner asked to say a few words. Mr. Kennady and Mr. Cronan removed the motion and the second so that discussion could continue. Councilman Gardner remembered when the ordinance was written. He said that he has heard the safety argument before. He also believed that the city should have learned their lesson from Skaggs. Gardner said that he is in favor of landscaped islands. He said that he has yet to see someone in College Station changing their oil at the grocery store. He wondered why the Project Review Committee had not reviewed the proposed site plan prior to sending the • applicant before the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Ms. Kee said that the P.R.C. ensures that technical specifications of the Zoning Ordinance are provided on the site plan. • Mr. Gardner believed that if these aspects are not provided for, then allow the applicant to apply for a variance. Then, he said that this request lacks uniqueness. Finally, he said that if the item is tabled, he would like to attend the meeting. Roy Hammons came forward and was sworn in. He said that the City's "every 15 spaces" is not an end all position. He said that he did not know why "every 15 spaces" was preferable to "every 18", "every 20", or "every 30 spaces." He said that on this lot people would not take "cross- country" short cuts (there is no place to dart to). He said that Staff's slides present a bleak appearance. He reminded the Board that the applicant is proposing some islands. He also assured the Board that H.E.B.'s are maintained very well. Acting Chairman Baker said that the Board is just addressing the applicant's issues as submitted on the application. Mr. Triplett came forward again. He cited the store in Alamo Heights in San Antonio which has an island requirement, as having one of the worst records for island related accidents. • r. Kennad su ested that Mr. Tri Lett brin the M Y gg P g documentation demonstrating his claims. Ms. Yarbrough agreed. She said that the records should exist. Mr. Triplett said that the Board could not prove that the islands prevent accidents. Ms. Kee said that this request may be significant enough to warrant consideration of amending the Zoning Ordinance. In the past 13 years, no one else has ever brought forth a safety complaint. Mr. Triplett said that he was not suggesting the ramifications of his request on the entire city. He said that the request pertains solely to this user. Ms. Kee and Ms. Yarbrough said that we have other grocery stores in town which have not requested variances. Kee asked if H.E.B.'s clientele become somewhat familiar with their parking configuration. • Mr. Triplett said that the new influx of students each year prevents that kind of familiarity. Ms. Kee said that the other grocery stores have had new students for the past 13 years as well. • Mr. Kennady said that the Board is looking for the following information: - Store expenditures for vehicle damage. - Suits filed for personal and property damages. - Long term real cost for repair and maintenance of islands. Ms. Yarbrough asked if Staff could check the area for problems of this kind. Mr. Cronan said that he would like to see information of instances where islands prevented diagonal crossing. Ms. Kee asked if the applicant said that he was opposed to parking lot medians as well. Mr. Triplett said that those cause more damage than the islands. Mr. Kennady cautioned Mr. Triplett that the Board wants to see more than just a dozen instances of damage caused by the islands. • Mr. Triplett said that he represents H.E.B. which has had experience dealing with these situations. He said that the Board members are laymen. Ms. Yarbrough said that the Board must justify their actions also. Mr. Kennady said that Mr. Triplett most certainly has a bias as well. Mr. Lane said that while his personal biases favor development in general, as a Board member he has become very supportive of the City and its goals. He believed that the citizens of College Station have a strong sense of community pride. They would rather pay 20 cents more per pound for chicken and have a safe, landscaped parking lot in front of the store at which they are shopping. Mr. Kennady made a motion to table the item. Mr. Lane asked if a denial would serve to expedite development. Mr. Triplett said that the project would be delayed whether the item is tabled or denied. He applied for the request as soon as he found out the City's parking lot requirements. Mr. Cronan said that zoning ordinances are not new to someone in Mr. Triplett's position. • Mr. Triplett said that he had never before encountered the "every 15 spaces" requirement. Mr. Kennady believed that a franchise should have alternative plans available. Mr. Cronan said that it seemed incredulous that zoning ordinances would not be researched during a market study. Mr. Cronan seconded the motion to table this item. The motion carried unanimously in a vote of t5-0). Ms. Kee informed the applicant that re-notification would not be necessary. The next meeting date is October 16, 1990. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Other Business. None. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Adjourn. Mr. Cronan made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Yarbrough seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned. • ATTEST: City Secretary, Connie Hooks APPROVED: Chairman, Bret Henry • • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMTNT FORMAT FOR NBaATIVB MOTION Variance to Sign Regulations: From Section 12, Ordinance 1638 I move 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 conditions not generally found within the City: ~~~ ~~ a ~rre_(~ hdSe~ -- Ore ~ C~ Q iti ~ h ~- ! o~~l~ O _ ~1LgLL_~~/L --~~----1 G~~"y C s'S1 ~__~~- ~va~~r'v7~ ~--- the applicant served. 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 .- Motion made by• ~ ~~r.j" ~~ ~,' ,f." ~ r ~/ /_- Motion seconded by: __4~1~ ~%-H"~~" ~______________ Voting results: r --- ------------------------------------ ~ / ------------------- ------------- Chair signature ----------------------- Date ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GUEST REGISTER DATE October 2, 1gg0 NAME 1 ADDRESS . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. lo. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.