Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/10/2006 - Regular Minutes - Zoning Board of AdjustmentsWORKSHOP MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment January 10, 2006 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 5:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Jay Goss, Donald Braune, John Richards, Alternate Denise Whisenant & Alternate Charles Taylor MEMBERS ABSENT: Graham Sheffy & Josh Benn. Alternate Derek Dictson (not needed) STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace, Planning Administrator Molly Hitchcock, Staff Planners Jennifer Reeves, Crissy Hartl, and Lindsay Boyer, Senior Planner Trey Fletcher, Senior Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, Assistant City Attorney Angela Deluca, Mapping Coordinator, Sven Griffin & GIS Technician Adrian Welsh. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Goss called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Discussion of regular agenda items. Chairman Goss suggested to have the item read "Presentation of regular agenda items" so that the Board can hear a little more before the regular meeting. No action was taken. AGENDA ITEM N0.3: 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 not items discussed. AGENDA ITEM N0.6: Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned. 7 ~- J y G s, Chairman EST: ~~, Deborah Grace, Staff ant MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment January 10, 2006 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Jay Goss, Donald Braune, John Richards, Alternate Denise Whisenant & Alternate Charles Taylor. MEMBERS ABSENT: Graham Sheffy, Josh Benn & Alternate Denise Derek Dictson (not needed) STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace, Planning Administrator Molly Hitchcock, Staff Planners Jennifer Reeves, Crissy Hartl, and Lindsay Boyer, Senior Planner Trey Fletcher, Senior Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, Assistant City Attorney Angela Deluca, Mapping Specialist, Sven Griffin, GIS Technician, Adrian Welsh. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Goss called the meeting to order. • AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration, discussion and possible action of absence requests. Mr. Benn submitted an absence request stating that he could not attend due to work related business. Mr. Braune made the motion to approve the request. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0) Mr. Sheffy submitted an absence request stating that he could not attend due to recuperating from being in the hospital. Mr. Richards made the motion to approve. Mr. Braune seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes from the November 1, 2005 Workshop and Regular Meeting. Mr. Richards made the motion to approve. Ms. Whisenant seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (S-0). AGENDA ITEM N0.4: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion of a landscape variance for 3205 Earl Rudder Freeway South, Lot 1, Block 1, in the C.S.L. of Texas Subdivision. Applicant is Anthony L. Jones. (OS-206) Staff Planner Crissy Hartl presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting the variance to exclude a drainage easement from area calculations for landscape point requirements. • In 1998, the applicant submitted a site plan application for the construction of Legacy Construction office building. The site plan included two phases for construction. The first phase included the western portion of the lot that fronts on Earl Rudder Freeway South, excluding the 60-foot drainage easement. The second phase contained the eastern portion of the lot and the entire 60-foot drainage easement. Landscaping points were calculated for Phase I, and was built accordingly. The applicant has since submitted a site plan to develop Phase II and wishes to remove the entire drainage easement from the landscape and streetscape requirements, thus his is requesting a variance of 1002 landscape points and 3 canopy street trees. The applicant states as his special condition: "Staff in 1998, did not want anything to incur blockage within this area. It is an offsite drainage/collection facility for Sebesta Road and surrounding properties. We maintain, mow and clear trash in all of the drainage easement". The applicant states as his hardship: "This is a large detention collection facility that will handle a lot of offsite property yet to be developed. I'm respectfully requesting that the drainage area not be included with any of the landscape calculations for the new office" Staff is recommending denial for this request. In order to meet landscaping requirements, landscaping does not need to be planted in the easement, but rather compensated throughout the site. Mr. Braune asked if any portion of the drainage detention area was included in the phase I landscape calculations. Ms. Hartl referred to the aerial map and pointed out that there was a small portion included in the first phase. • Chairman Goss stated that Mr. Jones indicated that the detention area services other properties. Ms. Hartl replied that was correct. Chairman Goss opened the public hearing. Anthony Jones, 3205 Earl Rudder Freeway South, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Mr. Jones spoke in favor of the request. Mr. Jones made correction that none of the property was included in the first phase landscape calculations. Staff at that time made recommendations for no landscaping to be included since it was for a detention area. Mr. Jones stated that right now there is over 7000 points of trees that have not been counted. Mr. Jones ended by saying that he is asking for the variance by not using the calculations in the drainage area. Mr. Goss asked Mr. Jones if he had a conversation with staff concerning the landscape points he indicated were not being counted. Mr. Jones replied that he did not think about it until he got his staff report and so he wanted to indicate it at the meeting. Mr. Taylor asked staff if landscaping could be planted in the drainage easement. Ms. Hartl replied that it would be allowed outside the easement along the fringe of it. With no one else stepping forward Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. ZBA Minutes January 10, 2006 Page 2 of 8 Mr. Taylor made the motion to authorize a variance to the landscaping requirements form the terms of this Ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: the property is burdened by an easement which is a drainage collection for adjacent property; and ~ecause a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: it would be difficult to successfully maintain in a flood collection area; and such that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Braurte seconded the motion, which passed (4-1). Denise Whisenant voting against granting the variance. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a parking variance for 1200 University Drive East, Lot 1, Block 1, in the Wheeler Subdivision Phase 2. Applicant is Rabon Metcalf Engineering for Mae Dean Wheeler. (OS-214) Staff Planner Jennifer Reeves stated for clarification that the request is for parking setback variance. Ms. Reeves presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting a front setback, for parking along Lincoln Avenue, of 10-feet from the parking area, instead of 20-feet that is required in Section 5.8.A.1 Setbacks. The property is located in the Corridor Overlay District. For Special Conditions the applicant states that "the subject property is encumbered by multiple items which restrict the developable and buildable area" The items are summarized as follows: .., A secondary drainage way, flowing south to north, bisects approximately through the middle of the property; An unnamed tributary of Burton Creek, located in the secondary drainage system, bisects the northern 1 /3 of the property. This creek drains from west to east and is a studied creek with mapped floodway and floodplain. This floodway is located in a platted variable width drainage easement which is significantly wider than the studied floodway; A 30-foot wide gas easement, running north and south, bisects approximately through the middle of the property; and -~- A 20-foot wide sewer easement, running west and east, bisects the northern 1/3 of the property. As a hardship the applicant states that the "Reasonable development of the land would be significantly decreased and undesirable due to the reduced buildable area and locations for accessory uses on the part of the multiple encumbrances and the required corridor setback increases". Staff supports the applicant's special condition and hardship, of existing floodway, floodplain and drainage way that bisects the subject property and inhibits the developable area. The setback for parking that is not located in an Overlay District is 10-feet from aright-of--way. The subject property is located in the Corridor Overlay District and is required by Ordinance to provide a 20-foot parking setback if parking is located along the right-of--way. Because of the above mentioned special conditions and hardships and the applicant still meeting the spirit of the Ordinance by providing a 10-foot parking setback, staff recommends approval of this variance request. ZBA Minutes January 10, 2006 Page 3 of 8 Chairman Goss asked for Ms. Reeves to give the Board and citizens an overview of what the Overlay District purpose is. Ms. Reeves stated that the is district was established to enhance the image of gateways and key entry points into the city and to provide openness and continuity, as well as more green space between the developments. Chairman Goss opened the public hearing. Rabon Metcalf, the applicant, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Mr. Metcalf spoke in favor of the request. Mr. Metcalf stated the area that they are requesting the variance for is not along the University Drive Overlay District. The Overlay District extends to the area along Lincoln Avenue which is not a gateway into the city. Mr. Metcalf added that all they are asking for is a variance to the position that the cars are parked. He further added that the site plan for the property has not been submitted to the city and it could change from what is being shown now. The use will not change unless they ask for a zoning change. Mr. Richards stated that he has a hard time approving something without an approved site plan. The Board had several questions concerning the site plan. Mr. Metcalf dedicated time explaining what the applicant hoped to accomplish. Mr. Metcalf stated that from the back of the curb on Lincoln to the back of the curb for parking they will have 20-feet of green space. Ron Cowe, 1919 Whitney, Houston, Texas, spoke in favor of the request. Those speaking in opposition were: Cyril Hosley, 911 Grand Oaks Pete Normand, 918 Grand Oaks Chairman Goss asked for clarification if the variance was for both University and Lincoln Drives. Ms. Reeves state that variance request if only for along Lincoln Drive. Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. Mr. Goss made the motion to authorize a variance to the parking requirements from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: various drainage ways and various easements cross the property which limit the ability to develop the area: and such that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: variance relates to the southern border of the overlay district to green space on Lincoln Avenue. The variance is only for Lincoln Avenue. Motion was seconded by Donald Braune. The Board voted (4-1). Mr. Richards voting against granting the variance. AGENDA ITEM N0.6: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a parking variance for 1351 Earl Rudder Freeway South. Lot 2, Block 1, in the High Ridge Subdivision. Applicant is Natalie Ruiz, IPS Group -Planning Solutions. (OS-215) Staff Planner Lindsay Boyer presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting the parking variance to reduce the number of required parking spaces for a proposed furniture store • development located north of the Varsity Ford development. ZBA Minutes January 10, 2006 Page 4 of 8 The applicant is currently pursuing the development of a 50,000 sq. ft. furniture store made up of 35,000 sq. ft. of retail space and 15,000 storage space. The UDO allows storage space in C-1 zoning districts if it is less than 50% of the total square footage of the development, as provided by the Sales •1Vlatrix located in Article 6.3.N. Based on the amount of storage, this type of development is located in a C-1 quadrant, and the associated parking ratio for C-1 retail is 1 space per 250 sq. ft, per Article 7.2.H. Number of Off Street Parking Spaces Required. The applicant is requesting a variance to the retail parking requirement. Their proposal is to increase the ratio for furniture sales to 1 space per 450 square feet. This proposal would result in an effective parking variance of 88 spaces. The total spaces provided would be 112. The entire site, based on a proposed greenway dedication area is approximately 6.5 acres. Subtracting out the space for the building, there is approximately 240,000 remaining to incorporate a 200 sq. ft. parking space, maneuvering room, drive aisles, parking islands, landscaping and parking setbacks. Staff believes that there is enough land to accommodate all ordinance requirements. This variance would apply to any C-1 use that might development on this property. Given the variety of uses that might develop or redevelop instead of a furniture store or that the proposed furniture store might one day use the storage space for retail area, Staff does not support a variance. This parking ratio is being considered by staff for an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard a presentation by the applicant on this parking ratio on Jan. 5. They have indicated the need to address this issue, and we have tentatively scheduled this amendment to be heard on February 2. • Staff has also been working with the applicant since the staff report was written on an alternative parking plan which would allow a reduction in parking based on a study of the parking for that use, but requires land be set aside as open space that would accommodate the required parking. The applicant has indicated that they cannot accommodate the area for the 100 additional spaces that would be required. Staff conducted a survey of 22 cities and found only 6 cities have parking requirements that support such a request. There is a large range of parking requirements with the average ratio around 1 space per 350. The ITE Parking Generation Handbook also indicates a ratio of approximately 1 per 820 sq. ft.; however this study was done in 1960 and only includes 2 studies. The ZBA does not have the authority to set parking ratios, and this ratio should be reviewed for an amendment change by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Special Conditions: The application indicates that the nature of furniture sales necessitates a specific parking ratio separate from conventional retail sales. Due to the nature of large displays, the real occupancy of the building is diminished. The International Building Code does not distinguish between types of retail uses for a building, but does give a concession on warehouse space. However, the sales matrix allows for the reduction of this warehouse space at will, and the parking ratio is set so that should this site ever have 100% retail, • parking would be accommodated without amending a site plan ZBA Minutes January 10, 2006 Page 5 of 8 Chairman Goss opened the pu~c hearing. • Natalie Ruiz, IPS Group, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Ms. Ruiz .spoke in favor of the request. Ms. Ruiz gave a lengthy presentation. Others speaking in favor of the request were: Tom James, 2638 Lombardi, Dallas, Texas, Developer of the property. Brett McCully, 1722 Broadmore, Bryan, Texas, Engineer for the developer. Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. The Board had discussions and decided that they would table the request and let the applicant go before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council for a text amendment to the UDO. Mr. Braune rreade the motion to table. Mr. Taylor seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (S-0). The applicant gained approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission on February 2 and the City Council on February 9.' No further action is required by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a setback variance for 211 Lee Avenue. Lot 20, Block 3, in the Oakwood Addition Subdivision. Applicant is Jefferson Christian Custom Homes, Inc. for Micajah & Nancy Newman. (OS-221) Staff Planner Trey Fletcher presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting the variance to allow for the construction of a carport as an accessory use. The property owner is proposing to construct a 2-car carport and storage building within the required rear setback of 20 feet in addition to a substantial one-story kitchen master bedroom addition to the primary structure, which is a two-story residence. The applicant is requesting to encroach 15 feet, resulting in a 5-foot rear setback. The enlarged primary structure and the proposed carport /storage building would be connected by a covered breezeway. For special conditions the the applicant states: "The long, narrow shape of the lot creates a smaller building area than is seen on surrounding lot and the rear setback restriction eliminates the ability to provide covered off-street parking." There were no hardships offered by the applicant; however, the applicant may reconfigure the home addition or construct a smaller addition that would allow the new carport/storage structure to be moved out of the setback. The carport/storage structure could also be moved closer to the home. As always, the Board may grant a lesser variance. ZBA Minutes January 10, 2006 Page 6 of 8 Staff recommends denial of t~equest. The homeowner is proposing construction of the carport in addition to a substantial addition to the rear of the house significantly reducing the buildable area available for such an accessory use. A porte cohere is proposed along the north side of the house, and meets required setbacks. Two movable sheds exist in the rear of the lot and will be relocated or removed to accommodate the planned improvements. As structures are prohibited from easements, the proposed carport and storage building are planned to be constructed next to a 5-foot public utility easement that runs along the rear of the property. It is the opinion of staff that the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, nor do extraordinary or special conditions affect the subject property such that a strict application of City codes and/or ordinances deprives an applicant reasonable use of his or her property. Chairman Goss opened the public hearing. Those speaking in favor of the request were: Micajah Newman, 211 Lee Avenue. Mr. Newman gave a picture presentation. Nancy Newman, 211 Lee Avenue Gains West, 200 Suffolk Linda Price 306 Lee Avenue Bruce Hoekstra, 210 Lee Avenue Patricia Burks, Hereford Drive Sandra Hoekstra, 210 Lee Avenue Steve Moore, 200 Lee Avenue Speaking in opposition were: Carroll Claycamp, 300 Lee Avenue With no one else stepping forward Chairman Goss closed the public hearing Mr. Goss asked Mr. Fletcher if the alley was abandoned by the city. Mr. Fletcher referred to the survey in the Boards packet. He stated there was a 5-foot utility easement along the backside of the properties including Mr. Newman's, a 10-foot reserve strip that comprises part of the alley, an overhead electrical easement and then another 5-foot reserve strip. It appears the width exceeds 15-feet. Mr. Fletcher stated that he has no evidence that the alley has been abandoned formally. Mr. Richards made the motion to authorize a variance to the minimum setback requirements from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interests, due to the following special conditions: relative shape of the lot in subject neighborhood inhibits building area for full normal home structures; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to the applicant being: the rear setback restriction eliminates the ability to provide covered off-street parking; and such that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed. Ms. Whiserzant seconded the motion, which failed (3-2). Mr. Braune and Mr. Taylor voting to against granting the variance. i ZBA Minutes January 10, 2006 Page 7 of 8 • r~ ZBA Minutes January I0, 2006 Puge 8 of 8 • ~ ~,~ ~ ~~~ Q ~; CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning e5' Development Services ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION VARIANCE FROM SECTION of the Unified Development Ordinance. I move to authorize a variance to the Yard (Article 5) Lot Width (Article 5) Lot Depth (Article 5) Minimum Setback (Article 5) Section 5.2 & 5.4 Dimensional Standards V Parking Requirements (Section 9) Article 7, Section 7.2 Off-Street Parking Standards Landscape Requirements Section 7.5 Landscaping and Tree Protection • from the terms of this Ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: _/ (,vavyS ~ and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the follo}viryg limitapons:, , _ , ~ ~ _ , , ~! NW"~' L /4-~e.. , • Chair Signature Date d D o Voting Results ~ ~ `~ ~ h-~ ~~'`~"~ 3~5 ~~~~~~~?-~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning cr Development Services ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION VARIANCE FROM SECTION of the Unified Development Ordinance. I move to authorize a variance to the Yard (Article 5) Lot Width (Article 5) Lot Depth (Article 5) Minimum Setback (Article 5) Section 5.2 & 5.4 Dimensional Standards Parking Requirements (Section 9) Article 7, Section 7.2 Off-Street Parking Standards ~ Landscape Requirements Section 7.5 Landscaping and Tree Protection • from the terms of this Ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: ~-~. and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: Motion made by • r° Seconded by ~Ofu/~-L-/ ~"'titl~/~c. Voting Results ~ - ~ ~ ~ '~ Chair Signature, Date l ja ~ and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in a. ~ 1.,~~ ~~J~. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning d Development Services ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR POSITIVE MOTION VARIANCE FROM SECTION ~~ ~ of the Unified Development Ordinance. use ~-~ I move to authorize a variance to the Yard (Article 5) Lot Width (Article 5) Lot Depth (Article 5) ~_ Minimum Setback (Article 5) Section 5.2 & 5.4 Dimensional Standards Parking Requirements (Section 9) Article 7, Section 7.2 Off-Street Parking Standards Landscape Requirements Section 7.5 Landscaping and Tree Protection • from the terms of this Ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: '> 1 f 1 II~~ `~~ t ~l~C~'y/~` " ~'r"/~~a~ ~,{~ /,~i ~ f5/.'~~iaf.~u i2(c; ,~i~~~1 ~~r fK1 / ~~rtN'~~ l~'-~ S ~~~°1~~~5' and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in unn~ecess y hardship to this appl'cant being J ~/ `` /~'7c' S~~r~t~- ~'~- d~'~a~:~' ~~~'S ~~~7c: ~G'N ~~~rt~str+Q 1~J' ~~, j-~-~,~~ ~~' J Motion made by Seconded by Voting Results_ • Chair Signature_ and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: ZONING BOARD OFADfUSTM~NT GUST REGISTER MEETING DATE: January 10, 2006 5. 6. NAME ADDRESS 3. ,-a (~~-I~~,~c~~ .E~~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~~ ,`~ ~ ~ ~}V r'% , C. `~~ . 7~ ,-~~~~_>: ~~. , v ~~_~~-eat} ~ ''_: < , ~.._ r- _ ~~ ~ ~ .~, ~, ~ "~ M ~ \ . n `; ~ ; 10. t~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ . _ -~~ i ~ _ ~ •I 1 . / ~ ~.f n'! ~ J/`~~. Lf ~ l J '~ ,L~.~G(~lC. r ~ t_r.. ~~ ' " ~- ~ ~~:; C. . ~ ~' 14. C ~~ ' ! ~ z Z /? ~ ~f' `y/SITU /~`~ / 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. •24. 25.