Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/13/1991 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• M I N U T E S Zoning Board of Adjustment Special Meeting CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS June 13, 1991 7:00 P.M. • MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Henry, Vice Chairperson Baker, Members Lane and Yarbrough, and Alternate Member Kennady. MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Cronan and Alternate Members Webb, Gaston, Phinney and DeOtte. STAFF PRESENT: City Engineer Pullen, Project Engineer Keating, Assistant to the City Engineer Morgan, Development Coordinator Volk, and Planning Technician Thomas. ArFNnA TTFM Nn. ~~ Call to Order - explanation of functions and limitations of the Board. Chairman Henry called the meeting to order and explained the functions and limitations of the Board. grFNnA TTFM Nn_ 2~ Approval of Minutes - Meeting May 21, 1991. Mr. Kennady moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of May 21, 1991 as presented. Vice Chairperson Baker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). ArFNnA TTFM Nn_ ~~ Consideration of a variance request to the Drainage Policy and Design Standards Ordinance No. 1728 in Emerald Forest Subdivision Phases 8, 9, 10 and 11. Application is in the name of Allen Swoboda. Chairman Henry informed the Board members and guests as to time restraints due to the City Council meeting and outlined the following variance prerequisites required prior to granting a drainage variance request: (1) minimum necessary to provide relief to the applicant; (2) effect not detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property; (3) effect will not increase elevations or velocities, or alter pathways to extent of any threat to public safety, extraordinary public expense, increase in nuisance flooding, or detrimental to other portions of major and minor drainage systems; (4) effect will not prevent orderly subdivision of other properties; • (5) no variance allowed within designated floodways if increased water surface elevations occur; and, (6) variances allowed for new construction, substantial improvements, and other development provided that criteria and procedures outlined for obtaining a variance are met, and the structure is protected by methods that minimize flood damages, and create no additional threats to public safety. Chairman Henry also suggested that the Board hear presentations by staff and the applicant concerning all five variance requests; however, each variance request will be considered and voted on individually. Ms. Yarbrough moved to hear presentations concerning all five variance requests and to consider and vote on each request individually. Vice Chairperson Baker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 - 0). Project Engineer Keating presented the staff report to the Board informing them that the plans for the proposed subdivision have been reviewed and approved by City staff. The plans were approved with no variances. However, the applicant is requesting changes to plans that are not in accordance with City design standards and design policy. The variance request is made up of five components: (1) shortening of the channel; • (2} elimination of concrete rip rap under utility crossings; (3) elimination of concrete rip rap upstream and downstream of the bridge; (4) elimination of the pilot channel; and, (5) elimination of concrete rip rap at each end of the channel. Ms. Keating explained that for the ZBA to grant the variance, the applicant must show that undue hardship on the owner will result from strict compliance of the requirements, and either special circumstances or conditions affect the land such that strict compliance will deprive the applicant of reasonable use of his land, or the variance is necessary for the preservations and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship other than monetary. In addition, the applicant has not demonstrated denial of the variance will deprive him of reasonable use of his property or that the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right. She informed the Board that in addition to the above criteria, drainage variance requests are subject to the prerequisites as outlined in the drainage ordinance. The applicant has not submitted technical information to support statements made in his report submitted to the Board. Technical information concerning the variance requests will be presented once the applicant has completed his presentation. ZBA Workshop Minutes June 13, 1991 Page 2 • Allen Swoboda approached the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Henry. He informed the Board that City Council has been insistent that with the next phase of development in Emerald Forest, Appomattox Street should be extended across Bee Creek. In November 1989, a tentative agreement was reached between the City and the developer, whereby the City would pay for 100$ of the channel improvements and 45$ of the bridge structure, with the developer paying for 55$ of the bridge structure and 100$ of the roadway across the floodplain. In April of 1990, before developing the final design of the channel improvements and the bridge, Municipal Development Group asked the City staff for their input into the concept of the design. The engineering staff didn't want to get involved with the actual design of the bridge and channel improvements structure but did agree on the overall philosophy and engineering concept. Mr. Swoboda added that in September 1990, after the engineers' plans were submitted for approval, the Development Services staff requested major changes to the drainage structure. The developer and his consulting engineers insisted that the changes were not necessary. When the Development Agreement went to the City Council in February 1991, for consideration, the Council decided to limit their participation in the cost of the bridge and channel improvements to the original estimated cost of the structures, because of the high increased cost of the final design. This left the developer with the burden of having to pay $496,567.00 to construct the Appomattox crossing of Bee Creek, which the City Council is insistent that needs to be built. The proposed subdivision becomes uneconomical to develop with the increased cost, which he feels are • unnecessary. Mr. Swoboda outlined three hardships: (1) required to design, build and pay for majority of drainage structure, and bridge crossing to handle water which drains the majority of College Station (5500 acres) in order to develop a 72 acre subdivision; (2) overall flatness of drainage structure which limits slope of drainage structure; and, (3) depth of floodplain which requires the construction of a drainage structure. He also outlined each of the five variance requests stating reasons why each request should be granted: (1) Shortening of the channel. -- Computer program analysis showed that the proposed 2200 foot drainage structure had better drainage characteristics than the extended version; -- the proposed 2200 foot structure presents less potential problems for maintenance; -- the suggested 2800 foot structure would be more expensive, require more maintenance, require more land, and cause the unnecessary loss of more • trees; and, ZBA Workshop Minutes June 13, 1991 Page 3 • -- the quantity of water flowing in the floodplain from major storms that is not the result of the development in question. (2) Elimination of concrete rip rap under utility crossings. -- Piers supporting sewer lines reduce cross- sectional area of drainage structure by less than 2~ and therefore would have little effect on increasing turbulence and thus erosion; -- aireal portions of sewer lines may have effect on increasing velocities around pipes but are high enough above ground surface that grass treatment of ground surface should prevent erosion; -- aireal sewer lines with piers in other parts of the City show no evidence of erosion; and, -- the quantity of water flowing in the floodplain from major storms that is not the result of the development in question and the presence of sewer lines which are not a result of the proposed development. (3) Elimination of concrete rip rap upstream and downstream • of the bridge. -- Calculated flow velocities indicate concrete rip rap is required under the bridge structure and up to 30 feet either side of the structure; -- calculated flow velocities indicate that grass surface treatment is adequate beyond 30 'feet of the bridge structure; and, -- the quantity of water which flows in the floodplain from major storms that is not the result of the development in question. (4) Elimination of the pilot channel. -- Slope of drainage structure is limited by natural grade of floodplain; -- drainage structure design should be effective in draining small runoff volumes; -- much of pilot channel would be under water even during small runoff events due to backwater from Bee Creek (only during small storms during dry periods would the pilot channel be effective); -- runoff as a result of lawn sprinkling overspray was estimated to wet only 5539 sq ft of the drainage channel if no pilot channel was included. Evapotranspiration would be sufficient to utilize • this amount of water. Maintenance should not be a problem; ZBA Workshop Minutes June 13, 1991 Page 4 -- the presence of a small pilot channel is such a • large drainage structure provides the potential for serious erosion along the edges of the concrete structure; -- the presence of small pools of water in the drainage structure for short periods of time will not cause a nuisance to the public and local residences because of the remoteness and location with respect the Bee Creek; and, -- the quantity of water which flows in the floodplain from major storms that is not the result of the development in question and the flatness and grade of the floodplain which does not allow to construct the drainage channel with a steeper grade. (5) Elimination of concrete rip rap at each end of the channel. -- Structure does not enter Bee Creek with abrupt changes in alignment or profile to cause erosive actions; -- flow velocities are very slow where the drainage structure intercepts Bee Creek (flow velocities range from 1.63 ftlsec for a 5 year storm and 2.45 ft/sec for a 100 year storm) and grass surface • treatment is listed as adequate in the drain standards; and, -- the quantity of water flowing in the floodplain from major storm that is not the result of the development in question. Christy Pandey of 1907 Amber Ridge informed the Board that she has problems with drainage and water standing in her back yard. The drainage channel and bridge is an improvement to the overall drainage in Emerald Forest and is needed as soon as possible. Allison Ficht of 8603 Jade Court also expressed concerns with drainage in the area and agrees with Ms. Pandey of the general need for drainage improvements in the Subdivision. Carol Freedlander of 1905 Amber Ridge expressed concern as to maintenance of the facility if all variance requests were granted and to the liability if the proposed structure fails. It appears that if all variances are granted, maintenance will be increased and become a major factor financially. City Engineer Pullen informed the Board that under new drainage policies, the City may or may not maintain the proposed structure. The Emerald Forest Home Owner's Association may be required to maintain the drainage easement. The drainage structure will have to maintained by someone, whether it be the City or the home owners. The issue is whether the variances requested are in the best interests of the general public. ZBA Workshop Minutes June 13, 1991 Page 5 • Vice Chairperson Baker moved to table the item until Wednesday, June 19, 1991 at 5:30 pm meeting to allow time for research and review of the information presented. Ms. Yarbrough seconded the motion which passed (4 - 1). (Mr. Lane voted in opposition to the motion.) ArFNnA TTFM Nn. d~ Other business. There was no other business. A[;FNnA TTRM Nf) . ~, . Adjourn . Ms. Yarbrough moved to adjourn the meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Vice Chairperson Baker seconded the motion which passed (5 - 0). APPROV hairman, Bret Henry ATTEST: ~, • Plannin Technician, Natalie Thomas ZBA Workshop Minutes June 13, 1991 Page 6 ZONING BARD OF ADJUSTMENT GUEST REGISTER I ~-- 1 GATE ~ -/ NAME ADDRESS 1 . ei'~Mn ! ~ Q ~~ 2. ~0 3 :~~_ c~- 3• 4. 5. 8. 9• 10. il. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23• ~4. 25.