Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/16/1996 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS April 16, 1996 7:00 P.M. • MEM>lt'L~tS PRESENT: Chairman Birdwell, Members Poston, Rife and Hollas and Alternate Member Ochoa. MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Sawtelle and Alternate Members Blackwelder and Alexander. STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Engineer Morgan, Planning Technician Thomas, and Assistant City Attorney Reynolds. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Birdwell called the meeting to order and explained the functions of the Board. AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Approval of minutes from the meeting of March 5, 1996. Mr. Hollas moved to approve the minutes from the meeting of March 5, 1996 as written. Ms. Poston seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration of a variance request to the Drainage Ordinance to not acquire off-site drainage easements for the development of lot 8B of the Lakeview Acres Subdivision. The applicant has offered to pay fees toward the future acquisition of these easements. Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report and explained that the purpose of this request is to allow the developer to proceed with development of this tract of land without providing an easement along the stormwater drainage channel through adjacent property. The staffs interpretation of the intent of this section is to provide adequate access to drainage channels in areas where the city is growing. Without such easements, development will crowd the drainage channel while at the same time producing more and more stormwater runoff into it. These easements provide a designated water way that can be widened or improved, as well as access for maintenance equipment when necessary. The variance is being requested because the applicant and owner have been unable to secure an easement from the downstream property owners. They indicate they have been attempting to negotiate with the downstream property owners for over a year, but to no avail. The applicant is proposing to pay the city an equivalent amount of money as the cost of the easement, and allow the city to acquire the easement through its right of eminent domain. The section of the drainage ordinance requiring an easement between the subject property and the primary drainage system produces a hardship for small developments such as this one. If downstream property owners are unwilling to negotiate for the easement or if their demands are unreasonable, the development is effectively prohibited. The staff has considered various options and has concluded that this is a reasonable solution to the dilemma. It allows the developers to proceed without eliminating their responsibility to provide access to the drainage channel for future maintenance. The downstream property owners are paid a fair price for the land taken in by the easement. Assistant City Engineer Morgan explained that there are four alternatives to the variance request: (l) Require the applicant and property owner to continue negotiations with downstream • property owners until an agreement for the easement is reached. (2) Allow the stormwater discharge to flow downstream with no requirement for an easement or payment in lieu of the easement. (3) Delay development of the site until the city can acquire the easement through condemnation. (4) The property owner can raise the level of the property and slope it such that it changes the direction of the runoff. This would allow the water to flow into a different drainage basin. Assi~ant City Engineer Morgan stated that the applicant does not believe the first alternative to be practice since negotiations have been ongoing for almost a year. The second does not provide the city with the necessary easement for future maintenance. The third causes the developer to miss a critical business opportunity at the end of the spring semester and may jeopardize funding for the project. The last one meets the intent of the ordinance, but the applicant has found it to be uneconomical for the site. Staff recommended approval of the variance request. Approximately seven surrounding property owners were notified of the request with two inquiries. Mr. Hollas questioned how staff negotiated a fee in lieu of dedication. Assistant City Engineer Morgan stated that no appraisals were done on the subject property, staff used the reasonable land values provided by the Brazos County Appraisal District. Applicant Greg Taggart with Municipal Development Group approached the Board and was sworn in by • Chairman Birdwell. He stated that U-Haul has elected to go the variance route on the project because all other reasonable alternatives have been exhausted. Mr. Taggart explained that he discussed the possibility of adding fill to the site to change the natural drainage pattern; however, that alternative would not have been a good design for the overall area. Due to the Texas Avenue widening project and the changes to the Texas Avenue and University Drive intersection, the existing U-Haul facility will be eliminated. The closing of the existing facility places a very important time schedule for the new facility. Mr. Taggart explained that the existing drainage from the property will not be increased. A detention pond will be constructed to release the water at the same rate as it is prior to development. The adjacent property owners will see no practical change to the drainage area. Representative of the U-Haul Corporation, Monoj Modi approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Birdwell. He informed the Board that a feasibility study began on the subject property in June of 1994 and the first geotechnical survey was completed in August of 1994. The Municipal Development Group was hired in September of 1994 and U-Haul purchased the property in December of 1994. Since that time, an architect was hired and building plans were reviewed and conditionally approved by the Building Department. Mr. Modi stated that he has talked with various landowners and generated a letter to the surrounding property owners. One owner agreed to work with him because he has immediate needs to develop his property. Mr. Modi stated that he and Greg Taggart met with staff recently and discussed the alternatives available. They agreed to take stafl~ s advice and pursue the variance process. Mr. Modi explained that U-Haul is willing to pay a reasonable price for the easements or pay the city the value of the easements so that they can use their power of eminent domain to acquire the necessary easements. James Bond of 9218 Brookwater approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Birdwell. He explained that he is the representative for Dan Williams, the owner of tract 7-A located immediately behind the subject property. He stated that his client is not in direct opposition of the variance and wants • the subject property to develop. ZBA Minutes April 16, 1996 Page 2 of 3 Paula Budig and her son Thomas Clarity of 2823 Texas Avenue South approached the Board and were sworn in by Chairman Birdwell. Ms. Budig stated that she owns lot 9-A immediately south of the subject property. The required easement will run at an angle through the middle of the property which will make • it ext~ emely difficult for future development of the property. She explained that the drainage from her property runs towards Texas Avenue. Mr. Clarity stated that they have never refused to negotiate with the U-Haul Corporation and they have met with Mr. Taggart on several occasions. Chairman Birdwell closed the public hearing. Mr. Ochoa stated that he thinks the Board can grant the variance request as long as the applicant works with city staff on the appropriate amount that should be paid toward the purchase of the necessary easements. Mr. Rife explained that he is struggling with the issue of cost. He understands the problem of slowing down the development of the property; however, the city should not incur any additional costs associated with this development. Mr. Rife stated that in the future when this area is fully developed, additional problems could be created since now the area is mainly open space and then develops into parking lots. Chairman Birdwell explained that the Board is only granting the right to develop without an off-site easement. The city does not have to go in immediately and acquire the easements. The city can require the dedication of the easements as properties in this area develop and may never have to use their eminent do~nwin power to obtain the easements. The same problem exists for the remaining properties from the subject property to the creek. It is very seldom that an area like this one can develop without city participation. Mr. Hollas stated that he feels this is an issue that should be addressed by the City Council who could possibly establish a fee to assess each development in instances such as this one. Mr. Ochoa moved to authorize a variance from the terms of Chapter 13, Ordinance Number 1728, the • Drainage Ordinance: because undue hardship on the owner will result from strict compliance with those requirements, to wit: the applicant and owner have been unable to secure an easement from the downstream property owners after reasonable negotiation; and because special circumstances or conditions affect the land involved such that strict compliance with the provisions and requirements of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land to with: the ability to develop the land in a reasonable amount of time. The following condition must also be met: the applicant agrees to pay the City of College Station an amount of money toward the cost of the easement to be negotiated with the City. Mr. Hollas seconded the motion which passed (4 - 1); Mr. Rife voted in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Other business. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Adjourn. Mr. Ochoa moved to adjourn the meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Rife seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). U /~ A an n echnician, Natalie Thomas APP O jEDK ~~,, • airman, Hi~~l~it s+•P1~.. N.1~K ZBA Minutes April 16, 1996 Page 3 of 3 ~~-~ ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variance from Chapter 13, Ordinance Number 1728, Drainage Ordinance. I move to authorize a variance from the terms of this ordinance because undue hardship on the owner will result from strict compliance with those requirements, to wit: ~'1t ~ ~~cF„~~ `6.,..~ rJ/nt/' h.crc D~c..~ t/'is.c-b/t+ L~ JC6v~-- li'/~ GU~tm.~n,i' ~y~o... Thy l7./s..+nJ~'~w...,+ ~ri~et~~~. Pwnu.! d ~~ ~+^ /` t A 1 n.n sil Gr /1 C cc s~~'1 and because either of the following criteria are met: 1) Special circumstances or conditions affect the land involved such that strict compliance with the provisions and requirements of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land, to wit: • i.~. a. rr~, e ^ ~ ~~ ter,,, o.. ,. }~ ,., f ~i„~ ~ or The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, to wit: _ ~r ~`i u, ~~ri / /f _,_,~ / I7 t ~ ,, n ~i C-~.. 1 ' 2Gr~C t~J T4 /) of ~ T~ G ~r' rii A "' L..o /~-~i .., 1 .3 ~ r~'n .. ae n A ~ a..... ~ v r~on ~i ~e ~ ,~,,_d( ~n c co, j' f - o ~ i~~c. ~.c ~ e rr.c.,~_ ~P .jJ'-G r1tOO L{p.''~`c~ b/'N a"~ ~~-c. l ~i~~f . Motion made b//y ~ ar-/ ~~~o~ Date ~/~ !6 -y 6 -,- Seconded by {, ~... Voting Results ~i~~..,, Chair Signature ~ ~ `~`~~~~ DOPI728.DOC Zoning Board of Adjustment i• • Guest Register Date Name Address 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.