The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/17/1982 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• MINUTES City of College Station, Texas Zoning Board of Adjustments August 17, 1982 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Board Chairman Cook, Members MacGilvray, Upham, Wagner, and Alternate Member Lindsay; also Council Liaison Boughton MEMBERS ABSENT: Donahue STAFF PRESENT: Zoning Official Kee and Planning Technician Volk AGENDA ITEM N0. 1: Approval of Minutes from July 20, 1982 Mr. MacGilvray made a motion to approve the minutes; Mr. Upham seconded; motion carried. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2: Consideration of a Request for a Variance to Table A - Ordinance 850 - Minimum Rear Setback Requirements at 106 Southland in College Station in the name of A. G. Searcy. Zoning Official Kee gave the very complicated background which led up to the necessity of Mr. Searcy requesting this variance. Mr. A. G. Searcy was then sworn in and gave more background history, which brought out the fact that the City installed a "temporary" • utility line down the center of his driveway, the entire length of his property many years ago to furnish power to the first street light in his neighborhood. He requested this light because he travelled all the time, and was concerned for the safety of his family in his absence. When Mr. Wagner asked why he had located the storage space where it was located, Mr. Searcy explained that because of this power line, he could not put the building at the end of his driveway, which would have been the normal spot for this building, and where, also,there would have been more than ample space. He said that he had been trying to get the City to relocate that "temporary" line for 7~ years, to no avail. Mr. Upham indicated that he believed that the Board could get this line moved to a more safe location. Mr. MacGilvray asked if there was actually room on the property to accommodate this plan, and Mrs. Kee answered in the negative, further indicating that the site plan was not drawn to scale, but the figures on the site plan showed a 25 ft. setback, which turns out to be actually about 14 feet. Mr. Ronnie Watson was sworn in and said this plan had been drawn by a licensed archi- tect and had been submitted in good faith. He went on to point out that the utility line was there, attempts to get it moved had been futile, and therefore the construction of the new structure had already begun on the location which turns out to be out of compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. MacGilvray asked who had done the plans, to which Mr. Watson answered that Don Hill had drawn them. Mr. Lindsay repeated what he understood to have taken place, and asked if he understood correctly. He also asked if he had conveyed a utility easement to the City at the time the utility line was set and Mr. Searcy answered that he had not. Chairman Cook then made a motion to authorize a variance to the minimum setback (Table A) • from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the unique and unusual circumstances which include the presence of a "temporary" utility line down the length of the property which has been there for 15 years, and the fact that many errors were committed by the City employees when Mr. Searcy lost the first building permit and the copy was issued. These are very unique circumstances, and ZBA Minutes 8-17-82 page 2 because of the errors made by the City, the encroachment was not noticed until the building was partially constructed, and a strict enforcement of the provisions of • the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done if the variance to the rear setback does not exceed 11 feet. Mr. Wagner seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Upham indicated at this public hearing that this was an occasion when the Board was being humane, and the case included one of off-setting errors. The Board then instructed Mrs. Kee to instruct the proper department in the City to take care of the utility line, and then further instructed her to report back to the Board. If action had not begun on this within 6 weeks, Mr. Searcy was instructed to call Mr. Upham. AGENDA ITEM N0. 3: Consideration of a Re uest for Variances to 6-G.1 (front set- back 6-G.3 side setback 8-D.6 ~ 8-D.9 sign re uirements and -C.3 amount of expansion -Ordinance 850, to the existing Shell station located at the northwest corner of Nagle Street and University Drive, in the name of Broach Oil Company. Mrs. Kee explained the request, indicating the canopy over the pumps encroaches the front setback by 6 ft. and the Company wants to raise it higher, and further indicated that giving a sign variance would allow the Company to do something to that sign in the future, but if nothing was done to an already non-conforming sign, it would simply remain a non-conforming sign. Jack Cumpton, architect for Broach Oil Company was sworn in and stated that he under- stands that under today's ordinance, this building could not be built. He further explained that the aim of Broach Oil was to raise the standards and the public image of a Shell service station. The canopy is too low for campers, which have become a • large part of the customers regularly served today, and that due to the current construction of the canopy, they would like to use the existing poles and simply put extensions on them. He was asked why they did not make a firewall on the existing wall which sets too close to the side lot line, and he said the problem would be with the existing roof. He said that the expansion was needed to make space for additional storage, a cooler and for games. Kenneth Broach was sworn in and interjected that it was the Company's intention to have a real convenience store and to primarily handle fast turnover items. Mr. Lind- say asked about the type of alcoholic license and Mr. Broach answered that an on-pre- mises license had been applied for just to protect them in case someone opened a can on the premises. Kelly Broach was sworn in and gave the history of the Broach Oil Company. Mrs. Cook interupted by informing Mr. Broach that the Board appreciated the information, but was only concerned with how it related to this plan and the variances requested. Mr. Upham pointed out that this building, as well as most others in the Northgate area, was non-conforming, but this building has a useful life left, and the use is not changing. Mr. Wagner pointed out that the expansion is to house games, coolers, etc. Mr. Cumpton said the addition of curbs will give better organized entrance/exit systems. Mr. Upham stated that the Board faces the problem of trying not to establish a precedence which will hurt future actions, and at the same time to upgrade the neighborhood. Mr. Upham then made a motion to grant all variances requested, then after discussion, withdrew that motion, and made a new motion to authorize the enlargement of a building devoted to a non-conforming use where such extension is necessary and incidental to • the existing use and does not increase the area of the building devoted to a non con- forming use more than 25i and does not prolong the life of the non-conforming use or ZBA Minutes 8-17-82 page 3 prevent a return of such property to a conforming use; to grant the requested variance • to the front setback concerning the use of the existing canopies which will be simply raised in height and also with the special condition that the existing sign can re- main with the understanding that any future sign requests must meet the current sign regulations spelled out in the Zoning Ordinance, and that no major maintenance or repainting or anything to extend the useful life of this existing sign can be done (when it is gone, it is gone), and that any future construction on this site will require requests for variances for that new construction. Mr. Wagner seconded the motion. Motion carried, with Mr. Lindsay voting against. Mr. Wagner made a motion to adjourn. • ATTEST: Mr. Lindsay seconded. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVED: ~, ~~ ~-~ Vi Cook, Chairman Dian Jones, City Secretary •