Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/01/2004 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of Adjustments• MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment June 1, 2004 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Leslie Hill, John Richards, Rodger Lewis, Graham Sheffy & Ward Wells MEMBERS ABSENT: Alternates Jay Goss & John Fedora (not needed). STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace, Staff Planner's Jennifer Prochazka, Molly Hitchcock, Jennifer Reeves & Sven Griffin, City Attorney Carla Robinson, Action Center Representative Regina Kelly. AGENDA ITEM NO. l: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Hill called the meeting to order. • AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Consider any absence request forms. No requests were submitted. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes from May 4, 2004. Mr. Sheffy made the motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Public hearing, consideration, discussion and possible action to approve variances for block 2, Richards Subdivision (corner of Sterling Street and Crest Street). Applicant is Shabeer Jaffar. (04-77). Staff Planner Molly Hitchcock presented the staff report and told the Board that the applicant is requesting the variances for the construction of a new single-family home. The requested variances are a 3.5-ft side setback and a 9-ft side street setback. Because of the right-of--way acquisition for Crest Street in 1981, the property does not meet the minimum lot width of 50-feet for an R-1 Single Family lot; but is allowed to pursue single family development: Any lot made non-conforming solely by means of area dedicated, condemned, sold, or otherwise conveyed for public right-of--way shall be allowed use as if such area were a part of the remaining lot, except that all applicable setbacks shall be adhered to. As is true for any property in the City, variances based upon a special condition and resulting in a hardship may be requested and considered for the property. • The applicant is requesting a variance of 4-feet to the side setback and 6-feet to the side street setback to allow for the construction of the new single family home. The applicant offers a small lot size as a special condition. The property was platted in Richards Subdivision in 1948. It was replatted in 1977, establishing the southwest property line. In 1981, the northeast property line was pushed back when the new right-of--way line for Crest Street was set; thus reducing the width of the lot. With the reduced buildable area, the applicant has stated that it is too small for a house to be built with current setback requirements. An alternative to the setback variances is to build a house that would be 17.54-19.08-feet wide. Ms. Hitchcock ended by telling the Board that owner of the surrounding properties is in opposition to granting the variances. Chairman Hill opened the public hearing for anyone wanting to speak in favor of the variances. Shabeer Jaffar, the applicant, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Jaffar spoke in favor of the variances. Mr. Jaffar explained that the narrow lot width makes it very difficult to build a reasonable size home. He explained that this property was foreclosed for taxes and that is how he came to purchase it. At the time he purchased the property he did not know what the dimensions of the lot were. If he had known at the time of purchase that the lot was so small he would have reconsidered buying it. He later found out the dimensions when he received the deed. i Greg Taggert, Municipal Development Group, stepped before the Board and was sworn in b Y Chairman Hill. Mr. Taggert spoke in favor of the variance. With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor of the variance requests, Chairman Hill called for anyone wanting to speak in opposition to the requests. Doug Peterson, Owner of Twin City Properties, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Peterson handed the Board a plat showing all the properties he owned around the lot in question. He explained that he bought the neighborhood and he thought that the lot in question came with the purchase. He went on to tell the Board that he served on the Ad Hoc Committee concerning rental registration, unrelated occupants and in fill development. The one thing that the 28 members agreed on was that in-fill was a sensitive subject. Lots like this that were not big enough to build on were being inundated by builders. Mr. Peterson stated that after all the years of him thinking he owned the lot, if he felt it was appropriate to build on he would have built on it. Chairman Hill closed the public hearing. • ZBA Minutes June 1, 2004 Page 2 of S Mr. Sheffy made the motion to deny a variance to the minimum setback from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest due to the lack of any 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. Mr. Lewis seconded the motion. Mr. Lewis stated that he does feel that there may be a little special condition with the city taking some of the lot for Crest Street, but it does not warrant what a variance would do to the neighborhood. Mr. Wells stated that he disagreed. He described the area as being fairly high density. He added that he does believe the lot size is too small, but he also believes it can be designed so it is an attribute to the neighborhood. There is no reason why with a minimal setback you can not get the same 1000 to 1100 sq ft house that would match the rest of the neighborhood. Mr. Wells ended by saying that it does not serve the property owner or the neighborhood any benefit by leaving it vacant. Mr. Sheffy stated that the lot looks like a pretty playable park and to cram a house in that small of an area it is going to look like a crammed in house. Mr. Richards stated that it will create an in-fill problem. This is a problem through out the city. Chairman Hill stated that it is a risk you take when you buy something site unseen. He ended by saying he does not support granting the variances. Chairman Hill called for the vote. The Board voted (4-1). The variances were denied. Mr. Wells voting to grant the variances. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing, consideration, discussion and possible action to approve a variance for 2100 Texas Avenue South, lot 2, Kapchinski Hill Subdivision. Applicant is Wakefield Sign Service for Target Corporation. (04-105) Staff Planner Jennifer Reeves presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting the variance to allow the proposed attached "Target" sign to extend 5-feet away from the building facade, thus the applicant is requesting a 4-foot variance. There is also a 1-foot 8" variance in height for the "Target" letters to exceed more than one foot above the top of the structure. The applicant did not state a special condition. The applicant states as a hardship: due to architectural elements on the building, the "Target" letters project more than 12-inches from the building. As an alternative the applicant states that the sign can be placed on an alternative location on the wall. Chairman Hill asked what the intent of the ordinance is. Ms. Reeves responded for signs not to stick out more than a foot away from the structure above it, to prevent clutter and to project a more uniform look. • ZBA Mrnutes June 1, 2004 Page 3 of S Chairman Hill opened the public hearing for those wanting to speak in favor of the variance. Zachary McFarland, Wakefield Sign Services, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman i Hill. Mr. McFarland spoke in favor of the variance. Chairman Hill asked Mr. McFarland if the variance is not granted what would they do with the sign. Mr. McFarland responded that it would be placed back on to the actual surface or placed on the side of the bull's eye. Mr. Wells made clarification for the Board members that the Target letters are setting on top of the I- beam and the I-beam sets on top of structural members that are coming out from the porch cover, but recess back from the front surface of the edge of the canopy. Mr. Wells asked if the letters were not on top of the I-beam, but were setting actually in front of the canopy, would that meet the ordinance. Ms. Reeves stated that it would come a lot closer to meeting the ordinance. Ms. Reeves went on the explain that right now the I-beam is making the sign stick up 2-feet 8" above that structure which is not allowed. However, if they do put the sign on the front curbed surface they may could take 8" off of it and attach it to the front and it may meet the ordinance. With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or opposition of the variance request, Chairman Hill closed the public hearing. Mr. Lewis made the 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 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. Mr. Sheffy seconded the motion. Chairman Hill stated that he opposed the variance. He explained that basically you have a canopy and they want to put the sign on the canopy. This is what the sign ordinance is trying to prevent. The letters can be moved back against the main building or they can be placed on the front edge of the canopy. Either one of the solutions would work and comply with the ordinance. Mr. Lewis stated that he agreed and there are other workable options. Mr. Wells stated that he agreed as well. Chairman Hill called for the vote. The Board voted (5-0). The variance is denied. AGENDA ITEM N0.6: Discussion of Administrative Adjustments approved by City Staff. No adjustments given. ZBA Minutes June 1, 2005 Page 4 of 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration and possible action on future agenda items - A Zoning Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. There were no items discussed. Mr. Richards wanted to Thank Mr. Lewis for his service to the Board. Chairman Hill thanked Mr. Lewis for his service and stated that his in put will be missed. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned. ATTEST: Deborah Grace, Staff Assistant APP V D: ~ Leslie Hill, Chairman ZBA Minutes June 1, 2003 Page 5 of S • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR NEGATIVE MOTION Variance to Sign Regulations: From Section 12, Ordinance Number 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 ~` " `~ ~° ~ ~ l~-~S , Motion Seconded by ~ ,-~ G~~ ._.-~,~~ Voting Results _S _ (~ _ - -' Chair Signature ~~ Z- ~ 1~~~ Date ,~ ~ ~ - O ~ stuvtssa~oc • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR NEGATIVE MOTION Variance from Section 15, Ordinance Number 1638. I move to deny a variance to the yard (Section 8.7) lot width (Table A) lot depth (Table A) rninunum setback parking requirements (Section 9) from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest due to the lack of any 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. Motion made by ~-~ ~~ ~ l,~-~~ '`j~c ~~'/ -_ _ Date ~ ~- ~ -- Y~~{ Seconded by ~~e ~r ~, ~ w• ~ S Voting Results y - l Chair Signature VliRN1638.DOC ZONING B OARD O~~ ADJUSTMENT GUEST REGISTER MEETING DATE ~ p NAME ADD SS 1. ~ ': ~ ~. 1'J ~,~'~ 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. • 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.