HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/04/2014 - Regular Agenda Packet - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsZoning Board of Adjustment
College Station, TX
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Hall
1101 Texas Ave
College Station, TX 77840
The City Council may or may not attend this meeting.
City Hall Administrative Conference Room6:00 PMTuesday, November 4, 2014
1. Call meeting to order.
Consideration, possible action and discussion to approve meeting
minutes.
14-7672.
October 7, 2014.pdfAttachments:
Consideration of Absence Requests.
- David Ohendalski - October 7, 2014
14-7683.
Oct 7 ZBA.pdfAttachments:
Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to
consider a building setback variance for the property located at
West Park Addition, Block 1, Lot 13, generally located ar 114 Park
Place which is zoned GS General Suburban. Case # 14-00900263
(J. Cuarón)
14-8114.
Staff Report
Application
New Survey
Photos
Attachments:
Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to
consider a variance for an accessory living quarters for the property
A-901 Thomas Carruthers, Tract 25.5, 36.829 acres and adjoining
52 acres, generally located at 1199 Haywood Drive which is zoned
R Rural. Case #14-00900261 (M. Bombek)
14-1905.
Staff Report
Application
Attachments:
6. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A member may inquire
about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual
information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be
limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting.
7. Adjourn.
The Board or Commission may adjourn into Executive Session to consider any item
Page 1 College Station, TX Printed on 10/31/2014
November 4, 2014Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Agenda - Final
listed on this agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session
discussion. An announcement will be made of the basis for the Executive Session
discussion.
APPROVED
_____________________
City Manager
I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted at College Station City Hall, 1101
Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on ___________, 20xx at 5:00 p.m.
_____________________
City Secretary
This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made 48
hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764 3517 or (TDD) 1 800 735 2989 . Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.gov.
Council meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channel 19.
Page 2 College Station, TX Printed on 10/31/2014
City Hall
1101 Texas Ave
College Station, TX 77840
College Station, TX
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:114-767 Name:Minutes
Status:Type:Minutes Agenda Ready
File created:In control:10/22/2014 Zoning Board of Adjustment
On agenda:Final action:11/4/2014
Title:Consideration, possible action and discussion to approve meeting minutes.
Sponsors:
Indexes:
Code sections:
Attachments:October 7, 2014.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Consideration, possible action and discussion to approve meeting minutes.
College Station, TX Printed on 10/31/2014Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
M I N U T E S
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Regular Meeting
October 7, 2014
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
6:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Hunter Goodwin, Johnny Burns, Jim Davis, Patrick Forgarty
MEMBERS ABSENT: David Ohendalski
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace-Rosier, Staff Planner Jerry Cuarón,
Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services Molly Hitchcock,
Assistant City Attorney John Haislet, Action Center Representative Amy
Esco
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order – Explanation of functions of the Board.
Chairman Goodwin called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Discussion of requested Administrative Adjustments.
14-00900210 thru 14-00900231 – 400 - 421 Hayes Ln; Increase 25-foot wide driveways to 27
feet
14-00900246 - 2609 Goodrich Ct; Reduce 20-foot rear setback by 17 inches
There was no discussion.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration, possible action and discussion to approve meeting
minutes.
September 2, 2014
Board Member Burns motioned to approve the meeting minutes. Board Member Davis seconded the
motion which passed unopposed (4-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Presentation, possible action, and discussion to authorize a rehearing
of a building setback variance for the property located at West Park Addition, Block 1, Lot 13,
generally located at 114 Park Place which is zoned GS General Suburban. Case # 14-00900190 (J.
Cuarón)
Staff Planner Cuarón stated that the applicant has requested a rehearing and has supplied the Board with
additional information.
There was a general discussion amongst the Board.
Board Member Burns motioned to approve the rehearing. Board Member Fogarty seconded the motion.
There was a general discussion amongst the Board concerning the new information provided by the
applicant. Chairman Goodwin called for the motion to approve the rehearing. Board voted (4-0). Motion
passed.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration and possible action on future agenda items – A Zoning
Board Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of
specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall
be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting.
There were no items discussed.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Adjourn.
Board Member Burns motioned to adjourn. Board Member Davis seconded the motion, which passed
(4-0). The meeting was adjourned at 6:06.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________________ _________________________________
Staff Assistant, Deborah Grace-Rosier Chairman, Hunter Goodwin
City Hall
1101 Texas Ave
College Station, TX 77840
College Station, TX
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:314-768 Name:Absence Request
Status:Type:Absence Request Agenda Ready
File created:In control:10/22/2014 Zoning Board of Adjustment
On agenda:Final action:11/4/2014
Title:Consideration of Absence Requests.
- David Ohendalski - October 7, 2014
Sponsors:
Indexes:
Code sections:
Attachments:Oct 7 ZBA.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Consideration of Absence Requests.
- David Ohendalski - October 7, 2014
College Station, TX Printed on 10/31/2014Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
Absence Request Form
For Elected and Appointed Officers
Name David Ohendalski
Request Submitted on October 7, 2014
I will not be in attendance at the meeting of October 7, 2014
for the reason(s) specified: (Date)
Welcoming new born son.
Via e-mail DGR
City Hall
1101 Texas Ave
College Station, TX 77840
College Station, TX
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:114-811 Name:114 Park Place
Status:Type:Variance Agenda Ready
File created:In control:10/28/2014 Zoning Board of Adjustment
On agenda:Final action:11/4/2014
Title:Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a building setback variance
for the property located at West Park Addition, Block 1, Lot 13, generally located ar 114 Park Place
which is zoned GS General Suburban. Case # 14-00900263 (J. Cuarón)
Sponsors:
Indexes:
Code sections:
Attachments:Staff Report
Application
New Survey
Photos
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a building setback variance
for the property located at West Park Addition, Block 1, Lot 13, generally located ar 114 Park Place
which is zoned GS General Suburban. Case # 14-00900263 (J. Cuarón)
College Station, TX Printed on 10/31/2014Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 1 of 7
November 4, 2014
VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR
114 Park Place
14-00900263
REQUEST: A variance to Unified Development Ordinance Section 12-5.2
‘Residential Dimensional Standards’, to allow for an 8-foot
variance to the required rear setback of 20-feet.
LOCATION: 114 Park Place
West Park Addition, Block 1, Lot 13
APPLICANT: Tim & Amber Krivdo, property owners
PROJECT MANAGER: Jerry Cuarón, Staff Planner
gcuaron@cstx.gov
BACKGROUND: The subject property is located in the West Park Addition
Subdivision and is zoned GS General Suburban, which allows for
single-family residential uses. The property was originally platted
in 1946 and is designated Urban and Redevelopment on the
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map. A
concrete foundation currently encroaches into the 20-foot rear
setback eight feet and this location is grandfathered. The
applicant is proposing to construct a garage on the existing
foundation. The variance was denied by the Zoning Board of
Adjustment on September 2, 2014. The applicant submitted a new
survey and photographs of the property and requested a
rehearing of the building setback variance which was granted at
the October 7, 2014 Board meeting. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) Section 12-5.2, ‘Residential Dimensional Standards’ to
allow for a reduction of 8 feet to the 20-foot rear setback.
APPLICABLE
ORDINANCE SECTION: UDO Section 12-5.2 ‘Residential Dimensional Standards’
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 of 7
November 4, 2014
ORDINANCE INTENT: UDO Section 12-5.2, ‘Residential Dimensional Standards’ sets
design standard requirements that usually allow for some degree
of control over population density, access to light and air, and fire
protection. These standards are typically justified on the basis of
the protection of property values.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the variance request as all nine
criteria for approval have not been met.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 of 7
November 4, 2014
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 of 7
November 4, 2014
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 5 of 7
November 4, 2014
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Board Hearing Date: November 4, 2014
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s
Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
None
Property owner notices mailed: 22
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.
ZONING AND LAND USES
Direction Zoning Land Use
Subject Property GS General Suburban Single-Family Residence
North (Across Park
Place) GS General Suburban Single-Family Residence
South GS General Suburban Single-Family Residence
East (Across
Maryem Street) GS General Suburban Single-Family Residence
West GS General Suburban Single-Family Residence
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
1. Frontage: The subject property has approximately 70.5 feet of frontage on Park Place.
2. Access: The subject property is accessed from Park Place.
3. Topography and vegetation: The subject property is relatively flat with some mature
vegetation.
4. Floodplain: The subject property is not located within FEMA regulated floodplain.
REVIEW CRITERIA
According to Unified Development Ordinance Section 12-3.19.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.
The applicant states that due to the subject property being located on a corner lot, they will
not be able to comply with the current rear building setback of 20 feet for the construction of
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 6 of 7
November 4, 2014
a new garage. Staff does not believe that an extraordinary or special condition exists in this
case as the surrounding properties are subject to the same rear setback. A strict application
of the UDO would not deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the property.
This property is located in the West Park Neighborhood and as designated on the
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map as Urban and Redevelopment.
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 garage will have
to be built to meet the 20-foot rear setback in compliance with the UDO. The current use of
the property as a single-family residence in an older subdivision is grandfathered to its
current setback encroachment. If the proposed variance request is not granted, the
applicant will still be allowed to use the property as a non-conforming structure; therefore,
they are not being denied a substantial property right.
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 as detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this UDO as the rear of
this property is adjacent to a 5-foot reserve which helps separate it from the adjacent
property.
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 because the subject and
surrounding properties cannot be further subdivided unless they comply with the subdivision
regulations.
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 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.
For new construction, the same setback requirements apply to all properties zoned GS
General Suburban and are not unique to this property.
7. Hardships: That the hardship is not the result of the applicant’s own actions.
A hardship does not exist on the subject property. The applicant has proposed locating the
new garage on an existing foundation. The request to encroach eight feet into the 20-foot
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 7 of 7
November 4, 2014
rear setback is a result of the applicant’s own actions and is not the result of a special
condition of the property.
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 does not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan
but does conflict with the provisions of this UDO in that it does not comply with current
building setback requirements that are applicable to all new structures on single-family
properties.
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 prohibit the
applicant in the utilization of their property. The setback does not restrict the applicant from
utilizing a large portion of the property. New structures can be built within required building
setbacks.
ALTERNATIVES
The applicant has not provided any alternative solutions to the location of their garage outside
of the rear building setback.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the variance request as all nine criteria for approval have not been
met.
City Hall
1101 Texas Ave
College Station, TX 77840
College Station, TX
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:114-190 Name:1199 Haywood Dr
Status:Type:Variance Agenda Ready
File created:In control:10/22/2014 Zoning Board of Adjustment
On agenda:Final action:11/4/2014
Title:Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a variance for an accessory
living quarters for the property A-901 Thomas Carruthers, Tract 25.5, 36.829 acres and adjoining 52
acres, generally located at 1199 Haywood Drive which is zoned R Rural. Case #14-00900261 (M.
Bombek)
Sponsors:
Indexes:
Code sections:
Attachments:Staff Report
Application
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a variance for an accessory
living quarters for the property A-901 Thomas Carruthers, Tract 25.5, 36.829 acres and adjoining 52
acres, generally located at 1199 Haywood Drive which is zoned R Rural. Case #14-00900261 (M.
Bombek)
College Station, TX Printed on 10/31/2014Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 1 of 7
November 4, 2014
VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR
1199 Haywood Drive
14-00900261
REQUEST: A variance to Unified Development Ordinance Section 12-6.5.B.5
‘Accessory Uses-Living Quarters’, to allow for a 25% variation
from the accessory use provision.
LOCATION: 1199 Haywood Drive
A-901, Thomas Carruthers, Tract 25.5,36.829 acres, and
adjoining 52 acres
APPLICANT: M.B. Flippen, property owner
PROJECT MANAGER: Mark Bombek, Staff Planner
mbombek@cstx.gov
BACKGROUND: The subject property is located to the east of the Foxfire
subdivision. The property is zoned R Rural, which allows for
limited activity related to large lot residential development. It is
intended to preserve the open space and agricultural character of
the property. The property is currently not platted and is
designated as Estate on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land
Use and Character Map.
In October 2013, the applicant submitted building plans for a
separate accessory carriage house to be built on the property. As
the carriage house exceeded the maximum allowed square
footage for an accessory living quarters, the building plans were
denied. The City later approved building plans that would allow the
applicant to construct a heated hallway to connect the primary
residence to the carriage house. Attaching the two structures in
this manner no longer defined the carriage house but as an
addition to the primary residence that would not be limited in size.
The applicant would like to proceed with construction without
having to construct this hallway. Eliminating the hallway between
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 of 7
November 4, 2014
the two structures requires the accessory carriage house to meet
the accessory living quarters size limitations. At its proposed
finished state the carriage house will contain 3,188 square feet;
this is equal to 50% of the principal structure. Section 12-6.5.B.5
of the UDO states that “In combination all accessory uses shall
contain no more square footage that 25% of the habitable floor
area of the principal structure (with exception of garage or carport
areas devoted to the storage of vehicles, which shall not be
included in the calculation and may exceed the 25% restriction).”
The area of the proposed accessory dwelling unit is 25%
(1,293.25 square feet) larger than what is allowed by ordinance
(1894.75 square feet). Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
Section 12-6.5.B.5 ‘Accessory Uses-Living Quarters’ to allow
for a 25% increase from the current provision, for a total of
50% of the living area of the principal structure.
Principal Structure Accessory Structure
Total Livable Area 6,353 square
feet
Proposed Livable Area 3,188 square
feet
25% of Principal
Structure
1,588.25
square feet
Area Greater than 25%
(3,188 s.f.- 1894.75 s.f.)
1599.75 square
feet or 25%
APPLICABLE
ORDINANCE SECTION: UDO Section 12-6.5.B.5’ Accessory Uses-Living Quarters’
ORDINANCE INTENT: To allow for the construction of accessory structures that are
subordinate to and serve the primary use or principal structure while protecting the character
and integrity of the surrounding residential area.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 of 7
November 4, 2014
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 of 7
November 4, 2014
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 5 of 7
November 4, 2014
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Board Hearing Date: November 4, 2014
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s
Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
None
Property owner notices mailed: 23
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
ZONING AND LAND USES
Direction Zoning Land Use
Subject Property R Rural Single-Family Residence
North R Rural Single-Family Residence
South R Rural Single-Family Residence
East R Rural Single-Family Residence
West E Estate Single-Family Residence
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
1. Frontage: Faulkner Drive and Haywood Drive both stub to the edge of the subject property
line.
2. Access: The subject property is accessed from Haywood Drive.
3. Topography and vegetation: The subject property is fairly dense in mature vegetation.
4. Floodplain: The subject property is not located within FEMA regulated floodplain.
REVIEW CRITERIA
According to Unified Development Ordinance Section 12-3.19.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.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 6 of 7
November 4, 2014
The applicant states that due to the water drainage pattern on the property, rural nature of
the property, and the placement of mature trees on the property constitute special
conditions justifying a variance. Additionally, installing a hallway between the residential
structure and carriage house will result in disruption of the natural water drainage patterns
on the property and damage to large mature oak trees, both of which the applicant
considers to be a hardship. The applicant would also like to note that installing the hallway
between the residence and carriage house is a possible, but a highly impractical,
alternative.
It is staff’s opinion that a special condition does not exist on the property that creates a
hardship limiting the applicant in a way that restricts their ability to meet the 25% floor area
requirement for the accessory living quarters.
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 granting of the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. If the proposed variance is denied, the applicant
is not prohibited from utilizing the property for residential use or having an accessory living
quarters.
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.
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the city public health, safety, or
welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this UDO as
the property owner is allowed to build an accessory structure on their lot regardless of
Zoning Board of Adjustment’s decision. Denying the applicants request does not prohibit
them from constructing an accessory living quarter; it will only restrict the size of the livable
area.
However, granting the variance would be detrimental to the City in administering this UDO
as it would essentially allow two primary structures on the property. The intent of an
accessory living quarter is to be subordinate to the primary living structure. Granting the
proposed variance allows the accessory structure an area that is half the size of the primary
structure.
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 approval of this variance will not limit the future subdivision of land on or surrounding
this property.
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.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 7 of 7
November 4, 2014
The granting of this variance will not have the effect of preventing flood hazard protection in
accordance with Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements 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.
The special conditions provided by the applicant are not unique to this property. The
standards of Section 12-6.5.B.5 apply to any property owner proposing to construct an
accessory dwelling unit on their property.
7. Hardships: That the hardship is not the result of the applicant’s own actions.
A hardship does not exist on the subject property. The applicant is proposing to construct
the carriage house with a resulting square footage that totals to 50% of the total square
footage of the primary residence. The request to relief from the 25% requirement is a result
of the applicant’s own actions and is not the result of a special condition of the property.
8. Comprehensive Plan: That the granting of the variance would not substantially conflict with
the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of this UDO.
The granting of this variance would conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, and provisions of
this UDO because it essentially allows two primary structures on a single-family lot.
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 prohibit the
applicant in the utilization of their property.
ALTERNATIVES
The applicant currently has the approval to alternatively construct a heated hallway connecting
the two structures so both can be considered a primary residence.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the request for a variance for an accessory living quarter that has a
livable area 25% larger than what is allowed by the UDO. The applicant has not provided
evidence that there is a physical condition that will deprive them of the reasonable use of their
property. The applicant has an active building permit to construct an addition to their single-
family dwelling on the property therefore; the outcome of this variance request will not prohibit
or restrict the applicant from continuing to utilize their property.
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
1. Application