Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/30/1984 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS • Zoning Board of Adjustment October 30, 1884 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Upham, Members Wendt, Wagner, McGuirk, and Alternate Member Meyer (Alternate Member Fry in audience) MEMBERS-ABSENT: Chairman Cook STAFF PRESENT: Zoning Official Kee and Planning Technician Volk In the absence of Chairman Cook, the Board chose Member Upham to serve as Acting Chairman. Mr. Upham explained the functions and limitations of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Approval of Minutes - meeting of September 18, 1884. Mr, McGuirk made a motion to approve the minutes with Mr. Wagner seconding. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Bear Visitors No one spoke. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: Consideration of a variance re uest to front, side and rear setback lines Table A for an existing single family structure built in 1971 at 1433 Magnolia. Request is in the name of Patrick ~ Carol Patterson. • Mr. Upham explained that although several dates are referred to as the date this house was built, the correct date is 1971. Zoning Official Kee explained the request, referred to the site plan, explained area zoning and gave the history of this house which had met setbacks under the Zoning Ordinance at the time it was built, but is now a lawful non-conforming structure under the current Zoning Ordinance. She further explained that apparently the owners or the purchasers of this house cannot now get financing on this structure without some kind of guarantee from the City that it will not take action or prosecute because of the structure's non-conforming nature. She advised the Board that the Legal Department had indicated the Board could either (1)approve this request or (2)deny this request. Mrs. Meyer asked why a variance instead of grant(ng a "special condition" or "exception" is being requested since this structure represents a non-conforming use. Mrs. Kee ex- plained that under Section 11-6.3. of the Zoning Ordinance regarding Use Permits, either subsection (a), (b), or (c) must be applied, and in this particular case, none of those subsections could apply. Mrs. Meyer pointed out that a hardship must be found for a variance, but no hardship would have to be found fora "special exception" as explained by Section 11-6,3. of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Upham stated that the City Council could issue a statement of "non-prosecution", and that he believes this has been done in the past. The public hearing was opened. Michael ~ Vita Roth, 1433 Magnolia were sworn in, and stated that they are the renters and prospective buyers of this house, and the applicant and owners (Pattersons) are not in attendance at this meeting, but the variance request is being made so that they (the Roths) can buy the home. The Board agreed to hear this • request wifih Roths representing the applicants in the absence of same. ZBA Minutes 10-30-84 page 2 • The Roths explained that they are applying fora loan from Texas State Bond Money, and must supply some kind of variance to the current ordinances in order to get a clear title and qualify for this type of loan. They further explained that these encroachments were discovered through a recent survey. Mr. McGuirk stated that he does not understand why these people are here tonight, as he was under the Impression that structures of this nature had been "grandfathered" in with the signing of the new ordinance. Mrs. Kee explained that is so, but in the event that anything comes up which would require a permit, or in this case, a guarantee, the Board must consider the request,. and has 2 choices: To deny or fio grant the variance, and should the Board decide to deny the request, the City Attorney would likely go to the City Council and request, perhaps, a letter of non-enforcement. Mr. McGuirk then asked if every structure in the City must either conform or the City could cause it to be fiorn down, Mrs. Kee stated that this is a non-conforming structure, and the Board must act on what it thinks it can justify. Mr. Wendt asked if the Board is to consider only what's being asked for on this request, and Mrs,. Kee replied that is so, unless the Board desires to grant a blanket variance on this lot, Mrs. Meyer stated she believes a hardship must be established. Mr. Upham said that would not apply in this ease, Mr, Wagner said he believes these people have bought these problems, and the City has previously given staff the authority to write these lender's letters under certain circumstances, but if that does not apply in a particular case, then the request must come before this Board. Mr. Upham stated that he had looked up applicable State Statutes which are very broad • and would normally cover this problem, but explained that our Zoning Ordinance has tight- ened up the requirements, and because this structure does not meet current ordinances, some kind of a letter will be required for this couple to get a loan on this structure, and the Board can either (1)grant the variance, (2)deny the variance, or (3)advise the Council, which can issue a letter of non-prosecution, which would 6e adequate. Mr, McGuirk then made a motion to authorize a variance to the front, side and rear mini- mum setback (Table A) 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 nor- ma91y found in like districts: This property is a non-conforming use on land controlled by ordinance predating the construction of the property, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the. ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this appli- cant being that the applicant must abide by a zoning code which postdated the construction of the structure fn question, This motion was seconded 6y Mrs. Meyer, and carried unani- mously (5-0), Mr. Wagner said there will probably be more and more of these cases, and he would like to see each case as it comes up,-but pointed out that this motion could have been amended to cover future cases. Mr. Wendt agreed, stating that this area is some of the oldest developed land in the City, and there will undoubtedly be more of these cases, and he, too,. would 11ke to see each case. AGENDA ITEM N0, 4: Consideration of a variance request to ermanentl renew a arkin variance for 10 spaces to allow continued operation of a restaurant at 11 University Drive. Request 1s in the name of Michael Mignone and Joan Seta. • The applicant was called forward. Joan Sota came forward and stated her name and was sworn in, after which Mr. Upham pointed out that a mistake had been made on the spelling of her name, and for the record, the correcfi spelling is "Sota". She stated that this business had opened in May, and at that time they were not aware that a variance to the ZBA 10-30-84 Page 3 location had been granted, nor that one would have to be renewed, Now that they are aware of the problem, she and Mr. Mignone would like to have a permanent variance for • 10 parking spaces granted. Mrs. Kee recapped the history of this location and its variance through the minutes of meetings in 1982 and 1983. P1rs. Meyer asked what the reason for a permanent variance is and Mrs. Kee explained that the current variance expires this month, and had it been a permanent variance to that location, this appli- cant would not have to be before this Board. Mr, Wagner asked what progress is being made on a new Northgate Zoning Ordinance and Mrs. Kee referred to a memo from the Director of Planning, adding that the ordinance had been progressing nicely, but upon advice from the Legal Department, rezoning will have to be handled on a lot-by-lot basis, culminating with the development of perhaps two zoning districts, and this will take considerable more time than originally planned. Mr. Wendt stated that if the new ordinance will Board could grant a one-year variance as it has covered until something new takes effect. Mrs. granted to this owner or this tenant only. Mr. variance at this time would be .premature since ing th'IS area of the City, be done shortly after the new year, this in the past, and this business would be Meyer Bald that a variance could even be Upham agreed that perhaps a permanent there may soon be a new ordinance govern- Mr. Wendt then made a motion to authorize a variance to the parking requirements 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: No like districts in the City, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions 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, subject to the follow- ing limitations: (1)Granted to Michael Mignone and Joan Sota for the operation of Mig- • none~s Italian ice for the duration of this business enterprise only. Motion was seconded by Mr. Wagner, and carried 4-0-1 (Upham abstained), AGENDA ITEM N0. 5~ Other business Acting Chairman Upham made a motion that due to the probable change in the Zoning situation in the Northgate area, the ZBA be apprised of the ordinance prior to taking it to the City Council for approval. Mr, Wendt seconded the motion which failed by a vote of 3-0-2 (McGuirk ~ Meyer abstained). Mr. McGuirk then explained that he does not believe that the City does has anything to do with how this Board functions, as it will follow ordinance regulations, and that he is not sure that he wants anything to do with creating the ordinance. Dates of future. meetings were discussed with Mr. Wagner indicating that he has a problem with the meeting scheduled on December 18, 1984. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: Adjourn Mr. Wagner made a motion to adjourn with Mr. Wendt seconding. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) , APPROVED: A t ng Chairma Jack Upham ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variances: From Section 11-6.5 I move to authorize a variance to the ~ i`7TTc2~%.~-~~ yard (6-G) lot width (Table A) lot depth (Table A) sign regulations (Section 8) yonfi r~' f' minimum setback (Table A) parking requirements (Section 7) from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following unique and special co 'ons of the land h0 not normally found in like districts: Go77}re /P~ ~ 01'~ 1 . .r a .- ~ ~. o _ far.~-~ i, us rP ~;~ _ ~,F-~~` os-1 .~"~~ t~P ca-,r~'ruc~~ a, of tl~P ~Oro~P~/ 3. 4. 5. 6. and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this app ica~ beirng: / .~, caq' ~~.,.f- ~~P a /,ca,,~' r~vrfi aS,u~P ~ a~ w~~~ C dr,r bvC ~ d~~. •of f r rf rric~Um in ~s'~~'~'- e obs~rved and substantial 1. 2. 3. 4. Th i s motion was made by C~UI Seconded by D. /"JGe1/ The variance was granted by the following vote: S' O D ~~ D to air Sign ure"'~ an such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall b justice done, subject to the following limitations: 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 (Table A) lot depth (Table A) sign regulations (Section 8) minimum setback (Table A) V parking requirements (Section 7) 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 fou/nd /i/n l ike districts: L .,~i z. 3• 4. 5• 6. and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant,l( 1. 2. 3• 4. This motion was made by ~ ~~~ Seconded by The variance was gr ted by the following vote: ~~r"~2' and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done, subject to the following limitations: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GUEST REGISTER ?? DATE CSC ' ~.:J~, .~~~~ NAME ADDRESS 2. ~~~~`El ~ ~~:~ /~,~~~r4i~~~n Y i':"/ ~-' ~ ~ 7 C~ / Lk `i,• y 1 ~l C. _i~. ~4 'F 3. ~ ~... 4. 5. 6. .3y. 7. 8. 9. 10. it. 12. 13. 14. _. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 2t. 22: 23. 24. 25.