Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/21/1990 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• MINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustment August 21, 1990 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Henry, Vice Chairman Baker, Members Yarbrough, Cronan, and Alternate Member Phinney. MEMBERS ABSENT: Lane STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner Kee, Assistant Planner Kuenzel, and Planning Technician Rosier. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to Order - explanation of functions and limitations of the Board. Chairman Henry called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Approval of Minutes - meeting of August • 7, 1990. Ms. Baker made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Cronan seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5- 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a request for a sign variance at 107 S. College. Application is in the name of Mr. Gattis. Ms. Kuenzel presented the staff report. She explained that two variances were actually being requested. One variance is to allow more than one freestanding sign (which is typical of this shopping center). The other variance is to the maximum height allowed (proposed = 27', maximum allowed in this location = 19'). Kuenzel showed slides of the already congested building plot (crowded with signs and buildings). She explained that the applicant wants to shorten the existing poles on the pizza mat and attach a sign to them. The problem with the site, Kuenzel pointed out, is that each business already has its own sign (5 signs). They are all non-conforming and would require a variance if changed in any way. Ms. Baker asked if the maximum height allowed, 19', would extend above the building. Ms. Kuenzel said that it would "clear" the top of the building by approximately 3 feet. • Mr. Henry suggested that a higher sign could almost be safer in this location because a lower sign amongst the other signs could obstruct the view. Ms. Baker asked the height of the existing poles. The applicant's representative, who was in the audience, said that the poles are 52 feet tall. Mr. Cronan said that the intent of the current sign ordinance is to eventually bring sites into compliance. Mr. Henry asked if the subject property is part of the shopping center in terms of ownership. Ms. Kuenzel said that the entire Skaggs Center is considered one building plot. Chairman Henry pointed out that an alternative to granting a variance would be moving the sign back further from the street. Dean Coffer of 3704 Still Meadow in Bryan, came forward and was sworn in. He explained the history of Mr. Gattis at • this site. He stated the altern marquee sign is located in front ative location is of the building. where the However, the applicant wanted the sign to face parallel to South College instead of perpendicular which would cost more to build in this location. Ms. Baker asked if the applicant intended to remove the sign which is closest to the building. Mr. Coffer said they did. He also said that the Skaggs Center will never fully comply to the sign ordinance because McDonald's and Skaggs will not give up their private signs. Mr. Gardner asked if the proposed location for the sign, the pizza mat, is to be used for any business. Mr. Coffer said that the building used to have pizza ovens. Now it would be used just to hold the sign. Mr. Gardner said that it seemed confusing to have a sign anywhere else except beside the restaurant. Mr. Coffer said that a sign in the vicinity will get people looking for Mr. Gattis. Mr. Phinney asked for clarification as to the alternative • location. Mr. Coffer said it would basically be turning the existing sign and making it higher. ZBA Minutes 8-21-90 page 2 • Mr. Phinney asked if the 35' alternative would be height conforming as the applicant has proposed rotating it. Staff said it would. Mr. Henry wondered if the existing poles are an air hazard. He also said that it would have been easier to bring this site closer to compliance if the City had required removal of the poles before now. Vice Chairman Baker said that she preferred the alternative. She agreed with Mr. Henry that the poles should be removed. Councilman Gardner asked Mr. Henry if he thought the poles were unappealing. Mr. Henry said that they were no more unappealing than a sign would be at that location. Mr. Gardner pointed out that the ordinance intent is based on aesthetics more so than safety. Mr. Phinney agreed, poles are not the issue. Aesthetics, and the perception of the area are more important. Two empty poles which obviously held a sign at one time, may be perceived as a business "gone bust". • Mr. Henr was sensitive to Mr. Gattis' economic situation. Y (He pointed out that the restaurant has not enjoyed great financial success in this location.) Ms. Baker did not believe that the proposed sign will help people find Mr. Gattis. She said she likes the alternative. She made a motion "to deny a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest due to the lack of unique, special conditions not generally found within this city and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would not result in substantial hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit and intent of the ordinance shall be preserved and the general interest of the public and the applicant served." Ms. Baker said that she was not denying the alternative. Mr. Phinney seconded the motion which carried in a vote of 5-0. Ms. Kee directed the Board to state their approval of the alternative in a motion if they desired to approve this request in such a manner. She said that this would preclude • the applicant from having to return to the Board after this meeting. ZBA Minutes 8-21-90 page 3 ~~ Mr. Phinney made a motion to grant a variance for more than one sign on the particular property as long as the height and size is in conformance, not limiting location." Ms. Baker seconded the motion. Ms. Kee asked if they are referring to the entire property including the pizza mat location. Mr. Phinney did not want to limit the applicant to the vicinity of the existing sign. The Board voted on the motion which carried in a vote of 5- 0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a request for a sign variance at 711 University Drive. Application is in the name of Dean Coffer for First American Bank. Ms. Kuenzel presented the staff report. The Bank is replacing their current sign along University Drive and they want to relocate it at the rear entrance of the Bank. She noted that the back of the Bank is bare with no indication that it is even a bank. The only alternative would be to place a small directional sign in back of the Bank. • Mr. Cronan expressed concern that the re-located sign would not obstruct the view of traffic for cars exiting the Bank. Mr. Coffer came forward to explain the design of the. new sign as well as intentions to landscape the old sign. He assured the Board that it would not interfere with traffic. He stated the Bank's intention to prevent cars from entering the second drive which is actually an exit from the Bank's drive-through. Ms. Baker said that the back of the Bank and backs of surrounding buildings are confusing, which may constitute a special condition. Mr. Henry asked if the sign and request meets all ordinance requirements other than maximum number of signs. Ms. Kuenzel said yes. Mr. Henry asked for clarification regarding directional signs. Ms. Kee said that directional signs are limited to 3 square feet, half of which can contain copy or logo. . Mr. Phinney said that the back of First American Bank cannot be determined from Church Street. ZBA Minutes 8-21-90 page 4 i Mr. Henry believed that the configuration and location constitute a special condition. Mr. Phinney made a motion "to authorize a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due to the following unique, special conditions not generally found within this City: that this commercial lot has a double frontage that requires access to both streets, and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in substantial hardship to this applicant being: the loss of identification of his business, and such that the spirit and intent of the ordinance shall be preserved and the general interest of the public and applicant served subject to the following limitations: the signs stay in conformance with the ordinance." Ms. Baker seconded the motion which carried unanimously 5-0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Other Business. Ms. Kee announced that the ZBA Workshop will be held on September 11, 1990 at 5:30 P.M. Dinner will be provided. AGENDA ITEM N0. 6: Adjourn. . Ms. Baker made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Phinney seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned. APPROVE / ,~,~ /~~~ Chairman, Brett enry ATTEST: City Secretary, Connie Hooks • • • • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMBNT FORMAT FOR NB(iATIVB MOTION Variance to Sign Regulations: From Section 12, Ordinance 1638 I move to deny a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest, due to the lack of unique special conditions not generally found within the City: and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would not result in substantial hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit and intent of this ordinance shall be preserved and the general interests of the public and the applicant served. Motion made by: '~ ~ '~ Motion seconded by: __ Voting results: ~~~ ---------------------------------------- ~i~a~ 8/ G~ `~a --------------- ------------------- ------- --------------- Chair signatur Date ------------------------------------ • • • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMfiNT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION Variance to Sign Regulations: From Section 12 Ordinance 1638 I move to authorize a variance to the sign regulations from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest due to the following unique special conditions not generally found within the City: ~.L__ ~_pIv_~VV~e,OG{~C~ ` ~O t'~ ~ ~e ~~ and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in substantial hardship to this applicant being: 1 r tc~s~ O~ 7~G,.~~, ~y~~c~ ~s)~c~SS and such that the spirit and intent of this ordinance shall be preserved and the general interests of the public and applicant served, subject to the following limitations: --------------------/-(--------1----- ------------------------------ Motion made by: __l._it~.~_ ~~_1_%~tna ___ Motion seconded by: 91~,~~t~~~ --- Voting result ____~ ~ _ --------------------- - - -- ------------------- ~ zi ~ --- - -------- ----------- Chair signa ur date ZONING BARD OF ADJUSTMENT GUEST REGISTER • DATE August 21, 1990 NAME 1 ADDRESS . 2. 3• 4. 5. 6. 7• 8. 9• 10. 11. • 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. • 2S• -