Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/18/1985 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsMINUTgS • CITY OF COLLBGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustment June 18, 1985 ?:00 P.M. MBBTING HBLD IN COLL13Gg STATION CITY HALL MSMBBRS PRBSBNT: Chairman Upham, Members Wendt, Wagner, McGuirk, Fry and Alternate Member Swoboda MSMBBRS ABSENT: Alternate Member Meyer STAFF PRBSBNT: Zoning Official Kee, City Attorney Locke, Assistant Zoning Official Johnson and Planning Technician Yolk AaBNDA ITBM N0. 1: Call to order - explanation of functions and liaitations of Board. Chairman Upham called the meeting to order and explained the functions and limitations of the Board. AtiBNDA ITEM NO. 2: Hear visitors. No one spoke. • A(iBNDA ITBM F0. 3: Approval of Minutes - seating of May 20, 1985. Mr. McGuirk made a motion to approve the minutes as presented; Mr. Wagner seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0). AtiBNDA ITBM N0. 4: Consideration of a variance to rear setback requiresents for as accessory structure located at 2728 Noraand Circle. Application for variance in the naae of 8ichard B. Honzen. Zoning Official Kee explained the request, located the lot on an aerial photo and referred to the new ordinance amendment (Ordinance No. 1590) to Ordinance No. 850 which changes the required rear setback for accessory structures such as this from 25 feet to 15 feet. She pointed out that this existing structure is located 11'9" from the rear property line rather than the required 15 feet, thus it represents a violation to the zoning ordinance. She then described the structure which had been started without a building permit, adding that construction had halted upon notification by the City of the various requirements which had not been met. She stated that two of the neighbors who had received notification of this meeting had contacted her to voice their opposition to this variance. Richard Konzen approached the chair, was sworn in and identified himself as the applicant. He explained that this building was virtually complete prior to • notification by the City of the various violations. He circulated photos of the structure taken from various locations in the back yard and stated that there are no particular qualities which would suggest a variance, and his request is 1 ZBA Minutes 6-18-85 • based on the fact that the structure, which is a sound one, is practically complete, and if a portion is removed, he would not be able to handle certain lengths of wood, and he uses this building for a woodworking shop, woodworking being his hobby. Mr. McGuirk asked if there is a fence along the rear property line, if the variance is required prior to his receipt of a building permit, what the square footage of the house is, and if it is over 2000 square feet. Mr. Konzen replied there is a fence along the rear property line, that this variance is required prior to his receipt of a building permit and that he does not know the square footage of the house, but that it has 4 bedrooms, a den, a dining area and a kitchen. Mr. McGuirk stated that according to this new ordinance amendment, if the house is not over 2160 square feet, this building would not be considered a peripheral structure and must be at least 25 feet from the rear property line. Mrs. Kee clarified by explaining that the use of this structure makes it an accessory structure (by definition) which would require a rear setback of 15 feet. Mr. Konzen stated that he does not have the answer to the square footage of his house, and if it is important information, he could get it, and wondered if it is essential for the Board to make a decision on this request at this meeting. Mr. McGuirk stated that if that becomes an issue, this request could be tabled. Mr. Upham explained that this Board is asking various questions because it is trying to help the applicant do what he wants to do, if it is within the realm of the limitations of this Board. He then asked Mr. Konzen if he had hired • someone to construct this structure, and if so, who was it. Mr. Konzen replied that he had hired a man whose name is Les Davis. He explained that Mr. Davis is really not a building contractor, but rather a cabinet builder and more than that, a personal friend. Mr. Upham then stated that all regular building construction people in this area are aware that they must have a building permit prior to constructing a building, and this was the reason for his questions along this line. Mr. Wagner asked if there is a drainage ditch between this property and the adjacent property, and Mrs. Kee replied there is not, but that there is a 10 foot utility easement along the rear of this lot, as well as an additional 10 foot utility easement along the rear of the adjacent lot. Mr. McGuirk then made a motion to deny a variance to the minimum setback (as required by the amendment regarding accessory buildings) from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest, due to the lack of unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in like districts: (1)applicant states no unique and special conditions; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. (Also), at least two neighbors have registered objection. Mr. Wagner seconded this motion which carried 4-0-1 (Wendt, Wagner, McGuirk 8~ Fry for; Upham abstained). Mr. Wendt then spoke to the applicant, explaining how this structure can be altered to accommodate the size of lumber he wants to work with. Mr. • Konzen asked if he could ask how he could get help in planning this and Mr. Upham replied that staff will help in every way it can, if he will but contact the City's Planning Department. 2 ZBA Minutes 6-18-85 • AQBNDA ITBM N0. 5: Consideration of a variance to sign regulations in order to add to an existing non-conforaing sign located at 524 IIniversity Drive Bast. Application for variance is in the naae of David. F. Dean. Mrs. Kee explained the request, stating that the existing sign is 24 feet high and is 15 feet from the pavement edge. She explained the 15 ft. setback would allow a sign 8 feet tall. She added-that the frontage of this lot would allow a sign to have a face of 80 square feet. She then explained that the new sign regulations do not make any provisions for changing a non-conforming sign, but rather a variance is required prior to changing a non-conforming sign. Mr. McGuirk asked for clarification, and Mrs. Kee replied that the square footage of this sign as well as the proposed addition to the sign falls within the allowable size, but the height is non-conforming. She added that this applicant is proposing no additional non-conformity to this sign, but simply proposes to add square footage to an already non-conforming sign and the new ordinance does not provide for this. Mrs. Kee gave the alternatives to this proposal as being to relocate the sign to conform with the current regulations, or to leave it as it is without the proposed additional 12 square feet. David Dean was sworn in and identified himself as the applicant. He passed around pictures of the existing sign and then explained that he simply wants to add the word "groceries" to the bottom of this sign. He explained that the • alternative mentioned, moving the sign further back, would put it in a location which would not be visible from east to west on University Drive. Mrs. Kee explained that the sign must be located at least 50 feet from the pavement edge to the closest part of the sign to become a conforming sign at the current height. Mr. Wagner asked if there is any other way to advertise groceries short of putting up a sign and Mr. Dean answered that there is a face on the building which could be seen from west to east, but not from east to west. Mrs. Kee again explained that the ordinance does not allow any expansion to a non-conforming sign, therefore a variance must be requested, but she wanted to point out that if the Board grants a variance, it should state that the specific approval is for a variance to the height. Mr. Wendt asked about amortization of this sign and Mrs. Kee said the new sign regulations list specific signs which will be amortized, and this type is not included in that list. Mr. Fry left the meeting at this time and Mr. Swoboda took his place on the Board. Mr. Swoboda stated that the appearance of this sign would not change drastically if the word "groceries" were allowed. Mr. Wendt asked staff to again point out what Board's mandate is, and Mrs. Bee explained she had simply wanted to point out the difference between this new sign ordinance and the old sign regulations which it replaced. She then read from Section 3.A of Ordinance 1576. 3 ZBA Minutes 6-18-85 • Mr. Wagner asked if the sign could be made 8 feet tall. Mr. Upham asked how many square feet would be allowed on an 8 foot sign. Mrs. Ree said the sign could be made to be 8 feet tall, and that a sign on this lot could have 80 square feet of sign-face. Mr. Wendt said this sign is less of a public nuisance as it sets right now and this Board is also supposed to address the impact on the City. He added that the trees in the area also hinder visibility of this sign from the east. Mr. Swoboda agreed, adding that lowering the sign to 8 feet in height at this location would create a traffic hazard. Mr. Upham explained how this sign could be cut off and modified to become a conforming sign, and even have more square footage of sign for a message. He went on to say that if the 24 foot height is absolutely necessary, then to change the face of the sign, it must be moved back from the pavement. Mrs. Kee then explained that under the new sign regulations, this lot would be allowed one freestanding sign, or two low profile signs, one at either end of the property. Mr. McGuirk said that this Board might grant a variance which would allow a second sign. Mrs. Kee pointed out that before it does this the Board would have to justify by explaining any unique and special conditions. Mr. Wendt then made a motion to authorize a variance to the sign height regulations 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: {1) The trees east of the property would negate the informational quality of the sign. (2) Bringing the sign into conformity would create a greater public nuisance than exists and because a strict enforcement of • the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being as stated in Condition ~1, and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done, subject to the following limitations: Limit to 12 sq. ft. addition as indicated by the applicant's exhibit, herein entered as "$xhibit A". Mr. McGuirk seconded this motion. City Attorney Locke came forward to clarify that the variance is to height with specific limitation to the area due to the other tracts and the topography of this tract. Mr. Wendt said that is correct. Discussion followed regarding exactly what would be allowed with this motion, afterwhich votes were cast and the motion to authorize the height variance carried by a vote of 4-1 (Wendt, Wagner, McGuirk & Swoboda for; Upham against). AQBNDA I?Bii! K0. 6: 8econsideration of a variance to sign regulations to allow a sign to regain on a tract of land advertising the future use of the property (oif-precise sign). Applicant is Jaaes Alphonse Divin. (?his item tabled at castings on 4-16-85 and 5-20-8$). Mr. Wagner made a motion to take this item from its tabled position. Mr. McGuirk seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Mrs. Kee explained that the applicant has requested that this item be withdrawn. The item was then dropped. • 4 ZBA Minutes • AGBNDA ITEM N0. 7: Other business. 6-18-85 City Attorney came forward stating she wanted to address this Board in closed session as is allowed under the open meeting clause. Session was closed. Session was re-opened. AaBNDA I?BM NO. 8: Ad3ourn. Mr. McGuirk made a motion to adjourn; Mr. Wendt seconded the motion which carried unanimously. ATTEST: --------------------------------- City Secretary, Dian Jones i• APPROVED: -- -- sirma Ja pham~~ -L~•~---- 5 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR NEGATIVE MOTIONS • Variances: From Section 11-6.5 I move to deny a variance to the yard (6-G) lot width (Table A) lot depth (Table A) 1. 2. 3• • 4. sign regulations (Section 8) m i n i mum setback (Tabl e A) ~jyJ~.- Cc-C.CG'-~}--~~-2Z~ parking requirements (Section 7) / from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest, due to the lack of unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in ~:~o a:~,-..e,.,-~. and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. ~ mot- ~~ ~ _ ~, ,~ / ~ ~~ ~ ~: F.- r; ~ r .--, - .- ,~' a'r Signatu a Date Th i s mot ion was made by 1~~~ ~~l"`~ Seconded by Gl/~G` T variance was denied by the following vote: • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variances: From Section 11-6.5 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) parking requirements (Section 7) • =-C7, 2. • 3• 4. 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: 6. and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: ~.,~ This motion was made y ~/ ~ ~, Seconded by ~~ The variance was granted by the following vote: D to air Signature 5. and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done, subject to the followina limitattc~nc• • SGT / ~~G+C. Frpvt~ ~O'ti'R1. SQL tT, S • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GUEST REGISTER • DATE June 18, 1985 NAME ADDRESS r n~ /./~1~ ///~' 2 . ~Gc.~ I y . ~ ~ ~ ~ Lf ~r `'~ / s,-arc . c-a~ ,t r 7'~j ~ ~ ~ ~ - 3. 4. 5. b. 7. 8. 9. 10. • 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23• • 24. 25. ' i