The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07/19/1983 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUT~$ • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustment July t9, 1983 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cook, Members Wendt, Wagner, MacGilvray ~ Upham MEMBERS ABSENT: Alternates McGuirk ~ Meyer STAFF PRESENT: Zoning Official Kee, Asst Zoning Official Dupies ~ Planning Technician Volk Chairman Cook opened the public hearing and stated the duties and obligations of this Board. AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: A rovat of Minutes - meetin of June 21, 1 Agenda Item #7 of the meeting of Mav 17, 19 3. S and of the Minutes of Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 21st meeting with Mr. Upham seconding. Motion carried unanimously (5-O). Mr. Upham then made a motion to approve the modified minutes of agenda item #7 of the meeting of May 17th with Mr. MacGilvray seconding. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Consideration of a request for renewal of a conditional parking variance at 411 University Drive. Application is in the name of Lone Star Yogurt Company and is for the business operating under the name of The Yogurt Pump at the above address. Chairman Cook asked to be excused from the Board, but Mr. Upham explained that it would not be necessary to be excused because this particular request cannot be considered at this time due to the moratorium which the City Council set down last fall concerning variances in Northgate, and he further explained that the Board has been instructed to keep the status quo in that area until the moratorium is lifted, therefore, it is his opinion that the variance which was granted last July will stay in effect until after the moratorium is lifted. Mr. Upham then made a motion to table this agenda item until the moratorium is lifted to 6e brought off the table at the regular meeting in September, 1983. Mr. MacGilvray seconded the motion. Chair asked the applicant if he wanted to speak, but he did not. Mr. Wagger asked for a review of what happened at the September meeting in 1982 with the City Council and Mr. Upham explained that he believed that the Northgate Committee was directed to study the problems in the area and at the end of the o year period City Council would give direction to staff and the Board after a thorough review of the Committee's findings, Motion to table this item until the September meeting was carried unanimously (5-O). AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: Consideration of a request for variance to the minimum lot width as re wired b Ordinance 850 Table A. Ap lication is in the name of Joseph L. Mashburn and is for the property at O1 Highland. Mrs, Kee presented the request and read Section 6-D of the Ordinance to the Board. She then referred to the site plan included in the packets which shows that the lot is more than large enough to be divided into two lots, but due to the location of the older, existing structure, another structure cannot be built and have the necessary 50 ft. lot • width, but would lack approximately, 1..25 ft. of meeting requirements. Mr. Upham spoke of the word "unique", referred to the width of many lots in older sections of the City as being less than 50 ft. in width and referred to the existing adjacent alley, which is ZBA Minutes 7-1g-83 page 2 rare in College Station. Chairman Cook swore in Joseph L. Mashburn of 401 Highland who identified himself as the applicant, who then pointed out that although his street address • is on Highland and the house faces Nighiand, the 25 ft, required front setback in R-1 zoning is taken off Grove Street. He further pointed out that the public alley adjacent to his property has no curb cut, and he maintains that it has been virtually abandoned by the City and he, alone, maintains it. Mr. Upham asked if his proposed driveway through the alley would cover any utilities, and Mr. Mashburn said that although it has not been determined if there are any utilities in the alley, he and the City Engineer have agreed that if the City were to have to tear up the alley to do any maintenance work on utilities, it would be his responsibility to repair any damage done to the drive- way. Discussion followed. Mr. MacGilvray informed the Board and the public that he and Mr. Mashburn are colleagues, but that they have not discussed this variance request. The Chair asked if the Board could accept Mr. MacGilvray's statement and agree that he could take part in this request. The Board agreed that it could. Mr. Wendt asked why there are special or unique conditions in this instance. Mr. MacGilvray said in his opinion that if this is not a replat of the lot, he could see no problem, but Mrs. Kee pointed out the section of the Ordinance which allows 2 primary structures on one lot only if each structure meets all setback requirements as if each were on a lot alone. Mr. Upham again referred to the informality of this City's beginnings, stating that where a structure was placed on a tot was not controlled many years ago. Mr. Mac- Gilvray said that the critical dimension is the width of the existing house, and if it was just a lltt1e smaller, there would be no problem at all. R-lA Single Family zoning was discussed and the Chair asked the applicant if he would consider going to the Planning and Zoning Commission to request rezoning, but the applicant said he would prefer to get this variance, but would .consider rezoning if necessary. Mr, Wendt referred to a variance which was refused recently in a very old and unique section of the City and also to the uniqueness of the Northgate area. The Chair pointed out that Northgate • is being handled. The word "unique" was again discussed, and the Chair pointed out that not only is uniqueness of the land to be considered, but also land uses in the area could be considered, and further, that "unique" means different things to different people. More discussion followed concerning this word as applied to both commercial and residential uses. How changes in traffic patterns could make certain land "unique" was brought up. Mr. Wagner began to make a positive motion concerning this request, but then withdrew the motion before completing it. Mr. Upham then made a motion to authorize a variance to the lot width (Table A and Section 6-p) from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in like districts: This area is among the lst platted areas of the City and is unique in that lot sizes, positions of houses and buildings and alleys and things not generally done now in the City create problems not of the making of the property owner, and because a strict enforcement of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. This motion was seconded by Mr. MacGil- vray and carried with a vote of 4-1 with. Mr. Wendt voting against the motion. AGENDA ITEM N0. 4: Other business Mr. Upham asked for an update from the Northgate Committee and Mr. MacGilvray spoke of recommendations in 5 areas: (1) parking changes, (2) zoning changes, (3) traffic adjust- ments, (4) maintenance problems and (5) capital improvements. Mrs. Kee pointed out a chart and graph of results of requests for variances, use permits • and appeals to the Board since the Board was formed in 1975, which had been included in their packets. ZBA Minutes 7-19-83 page 3 General discussion of Board problems followed after which Mr. Wagner made a motion to adjourn with Mr. MacGilvray seconding the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). APPROVED: Vi Cook, Chairman • • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variances: From Section 11-B.5 I move to authorize a variance to the yard (6-G) lot width ~~ (T~ble A),~( G ,-~`' lot depth (Table A) sign regulations (Section 8) minimum setback (Table A) parking requirements (Section 7) ~ ~~ l~``~ ~~ and because a str~Yct enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done, subject to the following limitations: 1. 2. 3. 4. This motion was made b ~~~Y~J ~ ~ ~ C/ Seconded by ~/l ~ to The variance was granted b the foll wing vote: ~ Chair Signature from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in like districts: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT July 19, 1983 u 7:00 P.M. ~ ~~~ 4. ~e~a~o 6. 7. 8. 9. t0. ~ aS ~ ~~