Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01/10/2006 - Regular Agenda Packet - Zoning Board of Adjustments
Workshop Agenda College Station Zoning Board of Adjustment Administrative Conference Room 1101 Texas Avenue Tuesday, January 10, 2006 5:30 p.m. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning er Development Services 1. Call to order 2. Discussion of regular agenda items. 3. Consideration and possible action on future agenda items - A Zoning Board 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. 4. Adjourn. Consultation with_Attorney_{Gov't Code Section 551.071; possible action. The Zoning Board of Adjustments may seek advice from its attorney regarding a pending and contemplated litigation subject or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. If litigation or attorney-client privileged information issues arise as to the posted subject matter of this Zoning Board of Adjustments meeting, an executive session will be held. Notice is hereby given that a Workshop Meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of College Station, Texas will be held on the 10th day of 7anuary 2006 at 5:30 p.m. at the Administrative Conference Room, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda Posted this the day of January 2006 at p.m. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Connie Hooks, City Secretary I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at City Hali, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City's website, www.cstx.gov. The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said Notice and Agenda were posted on and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and time: by Dated this day of .2006. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of 2006. Notary Public- Brazos County, Texas My commission expires: This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) i-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.4ov. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning er Development Services Agenda College Station Zoning Board of Adjustment City Council Chambers 1101 Texas Avenue Tuesday, January 10, 2006 6:00 p.m. 1. Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. 2. Consideration, discussion and possible action of absence requests. 3. Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes. November 1, 2005 Workshop Meeting November 1, 2005 Regulaz Meeting 4. Public heazing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider 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 CH) 5. Public heazing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a parking vaziance 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 JR) 6. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion to consider a parking vaziance 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 LB) 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. (05-221 TF) 8. Adjourn. Consultation with Attorney{Gov't Code Section 551.071; possible action. The Zoning Board of Adjustments may seek advice from its attorney regarding a pending and contemplated litigation subject or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. If litigation or attorney-client privileged information issues arise as to the posted subject matter of this Zoning Board of Adjustments meeting, an executive session will be held. Notice is hereby given that a Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of College Station, Texas will be held on the 10 day of 7anuary , 2006 at 6:00 p.m. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda Posted this the day of , 2006 at p.m. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Connie Hooks, City Secretary I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that i posted a true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City's website, www.cstx.gov. The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said Notice and Agenda were posted on p.m. and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and time: by Dated this day of , 2006. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of 2006. Notary Public- Brazos County, Texas My commission expires• This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.gov. • WORKSHOP MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment November 1, 2005 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 5:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Jay Goss, John Richards, Donald Braune & Josh Benn & Alternate Charles Taylor. MEMBERS ABSENT: Graham Sheffy, Alternates, Denise Whisenant & Derek Dictson (not needed) STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace, Staff Planners Molly Hitchcock, Jennifer Reeves, Crissy Hartl and Lindsay Boyer, Sr. Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, & Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services Lance Simms. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Goss called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Presentation, discussion and possible action on staff recommendations concerning ZBA cases. Mr. Simms discussed the memo that was in the Boards packet (attached as part of the minutes). Effective November 1, 2005 City Staff will begin making case specific recommendations to the Zoning Board of Adjustment as appropriate. Mr. Simms reiterating the last paragraph: "It is important to remember that the ZBA is a quasi judicial body. As such, the ZBA may ascertain facts, draw conclusion and exercise discretion base on the evidence presented at the public hearing both by city staff and all others testifying or presenting other evidence. Staff recommendations will typically be made well in advance of the public hearing and, therefore, may not be based on all the facts presented to the Board during the public hearing." Mr. Simms ended by saying that City Staff will not be making recommendations on every case. He told the Board that there is one case that may be coming before the Board soon. It is an applicant that is appealing a decision of the Administrator. This particular case, if it does come before the Board, is going to be related to a zoning district. In these cases City Staff s opinion is going to be clear. All the Board Members were agreeable to staff recommendations. Chairman Goss asked that in the future if there are Workshop Meetings that an item be placed on the agenda to discuss the items on the regular agenda. U AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Discussion of Administrative Adjustments approved by City Staff. 05-156 -1100 University Drive • Ms. Hitchcock told the Board this was for the AmeriSuites Hotel and they were given an adjustment of 2-feet to the 20-foot depth requirement for parking stalls. OS-183 -1101 Walton Drive Ms. Boyer told the Boazd that an administrative adjustment of 9.5-inches was given to the rear setback. Chairman Goss asked if the Boazd was going to have a Workshop every time. Mr. Simms stated that is up to the Board if they wanted to have a Workshop. Chairman Goss stated that he is not inclined to have them every time but did feel they were beneficial. The other Board Members were in agreement. AGENDA ITEM N0.4: Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned. APPROVED: • Jay Goss, Chairman ATTEST: Deborah Grace, Staff Assistant • ZBA Workshop Minutes November 1, 2005 Page 2 of 2 • MEMORANDUM DATE: 20 October 2005 TO: College Station Zoning Board of Adjustment FROM: Lance Simms, Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services RE: Staff Recommendations Effective 1 November 2005, City staff will begin making case specific recommendations to the Zoning Board of Adjustments (ZBA), as appropriate. When making a recommendation, staff will carefully consider the nature of the proposed use of the land involved, the existing use of the neighboring property, and the possibility that a nuisance will be created by the approval of a variance. Staff will also consider the following issues: • Extraordinary Conditions Do extraordinary or special conditions affect the subject property such that a strict application of City codes and/or ordinances deprives an applicant of the reasonable use of his or her property? Enjoyment of a Substantial Property Right Is the requested variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant? Substantial Detriment Will the granting of the variance cause detriment to the public health, safety, or welfare, or harm to other property in the area, or to the City in administering the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)? Subdivision Will the granting of the variance have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area? ZBA Memo - Pg. 2 • Flood Hazard Protection Will the granting of the variance have the effect of preventing flood hazard protection in accordance with adopted standards? Other Property Do the conditions associated with the variance request generally apply to other property in the vicinity? Hardship Is any stated or perceived hardship the result of the applicant's own actions? Comprehensive Plan Would the granting of the variance substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or the purposes of the UDO? Utilization • Are special conditions associated with this particular piece of property that would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property? As a final note, it is important to remember that the ZBA is a quasi judicial body. As such, the ZBA may ascertain facts, draw conclusions and exercise discretion based on the evidence presented at the public hearing both by city staff and all others testifying or presenting other evidence. Staff recommendations will typically be made well in advance of the public hearing and, therefore, may not be based on all the facts presented to the Board during the public hearing. I trust this information is useful. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have questions or need additional information. • MINUTES Zoning Board of Adjustment November 1, 2005 • CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 6:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Jay Goss, Josh Benn, Donald Braune, MEMBERS ABSENT: Graham Sheffy, Alternates Derek Dictson & Denise Whisenant (not needed) STAFF PRESENT: Staff Assistant Deborah Grace, Staff Planners Molly Hitchcock, Jennifer Reeves, Crissy Hartl and Lindsay Boyer, Senior Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services Lance Simms. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order -Explanation of functions of the Board. Chairman Goss called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM N0.2: Consideration, discussion and possible action of absence requests. Graham Sheffy submitted an absence request stating that he would be traveling all week checking on • hurricane damage. Donald. Braune made the motion to approve the absence request. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0.3: Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes for: August 2, 2005 Workshop and Regular Meeting September 6, 2005 Workshop and Regular Meeting Mr. Richards had a word correction on the September 6 regular meeting. Mr. Benn made the motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Richards seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM N0.4: Public hearing, presentation, discussion and possible action, to condider a variance for 107 Lee Avenue, portion of Lot 4, Lot 5, and portion of Lot 6, Block 3, in the Oakwood Subdivision. Applicant is Casey Moore. (05-170). Staff Planner Crissy Hartl presented the staff report and stated that the applicant is requesting the variance to allow for the construction of a new home. The applicant has removed an existing structure in order to build a new single-family home. Because of the contextual front setback in this area, the new home can be no closer than 38-feet to the property line, thus the applicant is requesting a 5-foot • variance to the rear setback. The uniqueness of the contextual setbacks for this area provide a buildable area for this lot of 8,049.5 square feet. The applicant states: "In order to comply with the current ordinances in place, the buildable area of the lot is reduced in comparison to neighboring properties". • The applicant has mentioned a 5-foot variance to the contextual setback. The Board my grant lesser variances or divide the variance between the front and rear setback. Staff recommends denial of the variance request. The City of College Station's Zoning Ordinance has traditionally required at least a 25-foot rear setback for Single-Family Residential Districts. With the adoption of the Unified Development Ordinance in 2003, the rear setback for R-1 Single Family Residential was reduced to 20-feet. As a result, buildable area of these lots has increased over time. Additionally, staff applied specific criteria to determine whether this property meets the circumstances for a variance. In the opinion of staff, the subject property is not affected by extraordinary conditions that deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his property, nor is the variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Chairman Gosss opened the public hearing. The following spoke in favor of the variance request and were sworn in by Chairman Goss. Rodney Hill, 119 Lee Avenue Craig Blakely, 701 Hereford Bruce Hoekstra, 210 Lee Avenue Neeley Lewis, 120 Lee Avenue Chairman Goss asked Mr. Neeley to tell the Board what he thinks is the special condition and hardship • is in this case. Mr. Neeley replied that it would be the location of the existing houses on each side. In order to comply, the new house needs to be pushed back further onto the lot. Also, the fact that there is a 20-foot buffer in the back, instead of 20-foot setback there is a 35-foot setback. Mr. Richards questioned if they are putting too big of a house on the lot. Mr. Richards asked why you would purposefully design a home on the lot knowing that it does not conform to City Ordinances. Crissy Hartl made clarification that the 20-feet in the back is not a buffer but rather a 20-foot right-of- way. Casey Moore, property owner, also stepped forward to speak in favor of the variance and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. Mr. Benn asked if he could do an alternate house plan to make it work. Mr. Moore stated that the house was designed for that lot. He has talked to the architect to see if something else could be done. Chairman Goss asked what the size of the house is: Mr. Moore responded that it was 6400 sq. ft. heated. The last to speak in favor of the variance, Mark Sicilio, 126 Lee Avenue, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Goss. • ZBA Minutes November 1, 2005 Page 2 oj4 With no one else stepping forward to speak in favor or in opposition, Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. • Mr. Richards stated he had concerns with the parking. Chairman Goss opened the public hearing for Mr. Lewis to address the parking issue. Mr. Lewis discussed the parking in the neighborhood. Chairman Goss closed the public hearing. Mr. Benn stated that there is no special condition or hardship for this case and he did not feel the Board should grant the variance. Chairman Goss stated that he would be in favor of the variance because they tore the house down not knowing that this would hinder them from rebuilding. The integrity of the neighborhood is being continued with the construction of this home. Mr. Taylor stated that the house could be redesigned to fit within the building setbacks. Mr. Braune made the motion not to authorize 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 strick enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Benn seconded the motion. • Mr. Braune stated that time and effort went into the ordinances, and in a short period of time the ordinances are not being upheld. He ended by saying that he does not see a hardship and the house could be redesigned to fit the lot Chairman Goss called for the vote from Mr. Braune's motion to deny. The Board voted (4-1). Chairman Goss voting against the denial. AGENDA ITEM NO. S: 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. Mr. Braune stated that he would like ZBA to make a recommendation to City Council concerning revisiting the ordinance with the contextual setbacks. Mr. Simms stated that he would like to start at staff level so ZBA knows the intent of the ordinance and then if ZBA feels they need to proceed to City Council that can be done. • ZBA Minutes November 1, 2005 Page 3 oj4 AGENDA ITEM N0.7: Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned. APPROVED: Jay Goss, Chairman ATTEST: Deborah Grace, Staff Assistant • • ZBA Minutes November 1, 2005 Page 4 of 4 STAFF REPORT • Project Manager: Crissy Hartl Email: chart)@cstx.gov Report Date: December 29, 2005 Meeting Date: January 10, 2006 C7 APPLICANT: Anthony Jones REQUEST: Landscape variance LOCATION: 3205 Earl Rudder Freeway PURPOSE: To exclude a drainage easement from area calculations for landscape point requirements. GENERAL INFORMATION Status of Applicant: Property owner Applicable Ordinance Section: Section 7.5 Landscaping and Tree Protection PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Zoning and Land Use • Subject Property: C-1 General Commercial currently vacant • North: C-1 General Commercial used as storage buildings • West: C-1 General Commercial used as storage buildings East: C-1 General Commercial used as Legacy Construction office building South: R-1 Single Family Residential and R&D Research and Development currently vacant • Frontage: This property has frontage on Sebesta Road and Earl Rudder Freeway. Access: The proposed office building will have access via Sebesta Road. Topography & Vegetation: Gradual slope towards concrete drainage channel with little vegetation. Flood Plain: No floodplain on this property. O:~group~deve_ser~stfrpt~zngstfrpt~honda.doc VARIANCE INFORMATION • Background: 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, excluding the 60' drainage easement. The second phase contained the eastern portion of the lot and the entire 60' 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 he is requesting a variance of 1002 landscape points and 3 canopy street trees. ANALYSIS Special Conditions: 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 Rd and surrounding properties. We maintain, mow and clear trash in all of the drainage easement." Hardships: 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." Alternatives: The Board may grant a lesser variance. Recommendation: 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. SPECIAL INFORMATION Ordinance Intent: The purpose and intent of the landscape ordinance is to regulate the manner in which land in the City is used and developed, to minimize adverse effects on surrounding property owners or the general public, and ensure that high quality development is maintained throughout the community. O:\group\deve_ser\stfrpt\zngstfrptWonda.doc • Similar Requests: Number of Property Owners Notified: Responses Received: ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Map 3. Application 4. Site Plan C7 • No similar requests have been made. 6 None as of date of staff report. O:\group\deve_ser\stfipt\wgstfrpt\k-onda.doc ~ ~~y ~ ; a M pax $ ~ N ~ ~ ~$ v ~ ~~p0 ~ ~ r M ~ ~~ O N ~ '- Q N_ t ~Jp ~ o ~ O o `+~ ~9 ~ ~ N ~ r ~ M ~aA 7a _ ~ w- N 0 N pp~0 ,[,J Q ~ ~~ o N O ~ U r r ' ° ~ ~ V ~ "~ Y ~ U O o m STATE HWY 6 - (EARL RUDDER FREEWAY SOUTH) ~ r ~ H u_ J U W ~ N ~'r M J M ~' ~ a ~ ~ ~ W n ~ M . A ir N , ~~r ~ ~ r` ot, ~ N LL ~ ,, "'OQ~ w O ~, ~ 4 ^ ~ ~ Z A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ,~3^,M1 ''M ^ r Q ~ ~ O ~ W ~P~ ~ ~ ~ ^° ~ ' ~ ~ 4 ` ~' `- M ~ 8 M~~ M `° a a M O M 0 `~ O `~ M N - W ~~ N & ~ r o~ r `~ • ~ 5 M SO W 0 ~ i ~~ N N P, ,,'D ~p ` _ `' ~ '~~ ,~ `° r~ ~ ` ~ ~~ Q M ~, m 0.' ~y Q ~ 4, e r ~ ~ O ~ N ! ~ H Q . ~^ ~ M a~ ~ ~ ...~ ,. • ~ CITY OIL COLLEGE STATION Nbinrrina e4~.DeurGrpmrnr 5truira t1 FO/R~OFFICE U'~SE~OyNLY CASE NO.: (/~ _ ol,'~-gyp DATE SUBMITTED: ~ I ' ~ I--OS ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Filing Fee of $150.00. Application completed in full. Additional materials may be required of the applicant such as site plans, elevation drawings, sign details and floor plans. The Zoning Official shall inform the applicant of any extra materials required. Date of Preapplication Conference: APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project): Name Ot~Y ~.-. -~ON~S Street Address 320 5 EARL. PuiAD~. S. City ~~OGGE4E `~DN State ~_ Zip Code 77B~s E-Mail Address _"f cHYe~o l~le ~'t"~ccy beY. c.on'? Phone Number ~ ~~q Fax Number ~~S ~'~~ • PROPERTY O(W~NER'S INFORMATION: Name A b.I~T~-~~iicll./ ~ . Street Addr ss ~Z.f~Jr S . ~(_ k~,~p[,Q City ~'1~LL~lr, ~TJy,~•C~ State ~~_ Zip Code 77~~5 E-Mail Address o h C1o eS acG , ~~ Phone Number _ ~l3 "loro~g Fax Number ~ig~ gllf LOCATION OF PROPERTY: ~-,~,,n ~ Address ~2a5 QV_~j'~ Lot ~_ Block ~ Subdivision G.~...~ (.. ~" ~~~, ~~, Description if there is no Lot, Block and Subdivision Action Requested: (Circle One) Setback Variance Parking Variance Sign Variance Current Zoning of Subject Property: Applicable Ordinance Section: Appeal of Zoning Official's Interpretation Special Exception Othe ~-R-.~pac+46~ ViA~iAiIY~F" • 6/13/03 Page 1 of,Q GENERAL VARIANCE REQUEST • The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested: ~~tec~~e~s-r T6~. o~taas~/lY- ~~..~. ~~ ,~hr-~E ys~ i~~ c~~cvt~av~s ~e r+.., u- ou >u ~ o~ntrE ,Sfii4~ ,piD NoT v~~ 7~iE ~UA4 /~imo~ RSA hFORG~t lu.I~l'~~. necessary due to the following special conditions: Special Condition Definition: To justify a variance, the difficulty must be due to unique circumstances involving the particular property. The unique circumstances must be related to a physical characteristic of the property itself, not to the owner's personal situation. This is because regardless of ownership, the variance will run with the land. Example: A creek bisecting a lot, a smaller buildable area than is seen on surrounding lots, specimen trees. Note: A cul-de-sac is a standard street layout in College Station. The shape of standard cul-de-sac lots are generally not special conditions. S`~1~ IIJ (~B ~1 ~ t,1t3T` c~YAc~3C' AyV ~lNG.~Cb I NGViQ $GoC.KA4E (.J/fF~IN 'T?it S f1~RE.A =T l ~j oFiF3 Atli E ~s~ a v r Li ~ Fd2 cSEBfan4, ~c~ A~up 5u ¢QouNp Wd._ ' b +1~. 1 M,oty bud GL~~2. 'T~1~. t~ /o .D~l~tJrt~ fi1~4/~IC~T~ The unnecessary hardship (s) involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance other than financial hardship is/are: Hardship Definition: The inability to make reasonable use of the property in accord with the literal requirements of the law. The hardship must be a direct result of the special condition. Example: A hardship of a creek bisecting a lot could be the reduction of the buildable area on the lot, when compared to neighboring properties. • ~ 5 t'S Pt C.A~G~. ~LoLL~CJjp/cJ ~C/Yi~'ri Ti~iF'I' Gd~LC. /~iNc~CE A~ LcsT of ~14T~ ~Ai~'G/ yll~T'"Y~ gE D~GIr~~O T''M ~DEG7~t~LG4 1'~$~t~rtnly6. T~i7`- ~ ,QRA-r~~ :E ~ ~cor- rae racc,~nr~ wl~ ~ax.,ot-ra~ L+~.~os~~ c~t~~~r~rx r~~. e following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following facts: S I ~, T!?~',~' ~1,U ©FiFiGE BLf.~ ~D ~, ~~ GY=Fi ~~-.f~,43 c~R uric[. ~i4-I/~ p- L,4e4E .;ds~['A~t~l>.u'T o~ ~d St.A-P~ Awa S7,eF,~TS~p€ gib gF- R~yl!'..~/~ The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true, correct and~coma/ete. nature a ~~c~vs~ ~~.s 6/13103 Date Page 2 of ~0 • C • yr - - N - ~os_ __ - 9 ~~~ __ ~ z+ ~~ - mm =- An - ~ e ~c - (,E ~ v R3 a '3 E W ~ - `. ~~ a ~ -o ~ - ~~ V ~ ~o ~ ~-_ 3 ~ we w ~ E ~~ ~~~~ t ~~~fa ~~.~~~o~ i ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~d ~ ~~ € • ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~y ~~ q ~ ~ i~ ~ ~3 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ° ~ e f s $ ~ • ~ ~~ ~ ~ D 3a q R ~ ~ { ~ S ~3 ~ $ ~ ~ ~~~ f~~ ~~~ ~ ~9~~~ a~g ~ his ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ..~, e~3 ~s. - ~igg: ~~ 1 ~~ ggR F~ ~~ ~m Z d ~® L 0 Z r / ~*` Y d a' ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ SITE PL,4N N ~ i 9 ~~ ,a NEw oFFicE Foie ,4NTHONY L. JONES n5-a~~ lt- tl 05 ~d: ~ Yi ~ STAFF REPORT • Project Manager: Jennifer Reeves, Project Manager Report Date: 12-21-05 Email: jreeves@cstx.gov Meeting Date: January 10, 2006 APPLICANT: Rabon Metcalf, P.E. Metcalf Engineering Property Owner: Mae Dean Wheeler REQUEST: Parking setback variance for property located in the Corridor Overlay District LOCATION: 1200 University Drive East (Lot 1, Block 1 of the Wheeler Subdivision, Phase Two) The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested: A front setback, for parking along Lincoln Avenue, of 10' from the parking area, instead of 20' that is required in Section 5.8.A.1 Setbacks. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicable Ordinance Section: Section 5.8.A.1 Setbacks: All buildings will be set back 40 feet from the right-of-way. Where parking is located in the front of the building, • there shall be a front setback of 20 feet from the right-of--way to the parking area. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Zoning and Land Use: The subject property is zoned C-1 General Commercial. The Land Use Plan shows Retail Regional and Greenways for this site. Subject Property: The subject property is bound on the north by University Drive which is a major arterial on the City's Thoroughfare Plan and The Amerisuites Hotel with the zoning of C-1 General Commercial. To the east and south the property is bound by Lincoln Avenue which is considered a major collector on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. To the west is R-4 Multi-Family as well as R-1 Single Family which is developed as Cedar Creek Condo's and single family homes. Frontage: The subject property has frontage along University Drive and Lincoln Avenue. Access: There are two proposed access points off of Lincoln Avenue and One access off of University Drive. Topography & Vegetation: A drainage way runs through the middle of the property and • currently and has floodway and floodplain per Flood Insurance Map records. O:\group\deve_ser\stfrpt\zngstfrpt\honda. doc Flood Plain: Portions of this site lie within the 100-year floodplain as graphically depicted by FEMA LOMR -Case No. 03-06-102P (dated July 01, 2003). The site • is located on FEMA Firm Community No. 480083, Panel No. 0142. VARIANCE INFORMATION ANALYSIS 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' wide gas easement, running north and south, bisects approximately through the middle of the property; and • A 20' wide sewer easement, running west and east, bisects the northern 1/3 of the property. Hardships: The applicant states as a hardship that "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 Recommendation: Staff supports the applicant's special condition and hardship, of existing flood way, 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 a right-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 SPECIAL INFORMATION Ordinance Intent: This 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 spaces between the developments. Number of Property Owners Notified: 24 • Responses Received: None as of the date of the staff report. O:\group\deve_ser\Stfrpt\zngstfrpt\honda.doc ATTACHMENTS • Location Map Aerial Map Application Site Plan • O:\group\deve serlstfrpt\zngstfrpt\honda.doc L ~ N V c~ '~'^ a ~ ~~ oR ORE P ~ ~ ~~o~~ ~ ~ ~ Q. N 7 ~ U 2 a N~ Q m g, ~s0 ~ ~ ,~~ ~ ~ ^o ~ ^00 ~ d ~ ~ ~ r N oA os 4 ~~ ~ ~ e o oti M ,~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ d' N 0 ' o ~4~ JiJ ~ ~ ~o,~ ~ m ~.- QO ~ ~ M ~°o, N .= 8 ~~ Q ~ N ` fOt fib` O f~o m ~. ~ $~ ,~ o ~ U oG~P ~~ '°'e e~0` `° d. M ~ 4 ~ ~ r ~ N N ~ ~ ~ r ~ r ~~' ~`°~ °' o o~o ~ ~~p rn ~ ~ ° o ° `°~ cv oo U ~• `'~ ti a, ~ m r. Q> si ~bt ~' CO N ~ } , Q ~ ~ ~ ~ Ln el 808 CO ~' ~ ~r0t 00 of f ~ ~ ° ~ A~@~ J - ti Mai J O v V ~ r N ~ ~ ~ ~ CD alO M ,~ ~ y 0~ N A ~ ~ ~ °n, ` e r V' ^' E N N i ~ ~2~! ~ N ~ ~°~ ~ r ,, W ~ ~ ~ ~ ti '~~ ~Z, ~ ~ ~ ere s ~ ~ ` o `-' ~ ~0~ ,ryN ~ b ~ ~ U ° N ~i ~ ryo ~ ~ ` ~ 1 ~ b ~; ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ N ~ 6 ~ ~ o 2e r ~ ~ ~ N a W ,ry ^ ~ ,~+ r ~` o N ~ ° ti O ~ ~ ry ~v , ~ O ~ ~ ^' ~ $ rv ^ O ^ ry mo r ~JV ~ Off O ~~ N - o ~ ~ ' ~ ti k ~ ` Q ~ J ~ N r ~ 2 e tD , ~ `4~, ~' ~ M •- ~ »j0 ~»x iota ~ ~ ' o. ~ ~ ~~ j o ~` ~ $ ~ ~ ~ Y U m ~ ~ N ii 6' '~ ti, Ojw ~e '~ ,y~~ ~ 3 M e N ~ ~ m M ~ ~ ~ rye ° e `~ ^ 1,~ ~J 1 °° °' o~ ~$ ~ rn ~ ° N~ ° ~ ~ ~ j ~~'1^ W pd' N ° ~ ~ _v L.L. ~ ~' M $ r ~ N M i ~ O N W ~ Q ~ c c L a Q ~OOa t~ ~ 'S ~ m O ~ 4- N o pot O ~ Q o(~] 3~ ~~~ s ~ O~ ~~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ W ~$,~~ J~ 8 ° M ( S ~ ,,,,n U ~ Q ~ ~i C)x7 ~~ ti ~ O ~• b ~U ~ s ~ ...I ~ ~ o ~ f Y ~ °°~ Z a dm 0 N~ rn a J m M a~ M ~ ~ ~ d ~ O «N J . ` ~r ~ -. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CASE NO.: ~ ~ ~~, ~ DATE SUBMITTED: Ia-LQ~.oS~ .................................... I'f Y OF COLLEGE STATION Planning d Drvelop~nnu Serviret a ~~ ~~.. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: X Filing Fee of $150.00. X Application completed in full. X Additional materials may be required of the applicant such as site plans, elevation drawings, sign details and floor plans. The Zoning Official shall inform the applicant of any extra materials required. Date of Preapplication Conference: October 17.2005 APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project): Name Rabon Metcalf. P.E. (Rabon Metcalf Enaineerino) Street Address P,O. Box 9253 City Colles~e Station State TX Zip Code 77842 E-Mail Address rmens~ineert8iverizon.net Phone Number (979) 690-0329 Fax Number (879) 690-0329 • PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name Mae Dean Wheeler Street Address 1819 Whitney City Houston State TX Zip Code 77006 E-Mail Address ~arcia~mdwheelercomoanies.com Phone Number (713) 355-5355 Fax Number (713) 355-1082 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Address 1200 Universfir Drive East Lot 1 Block 1 Subdivision Wheeler Subdivision. Phase Two Description if there is no Lot, Block and Subdivision Action Requested: (Circle One) etback Variance Appeal of Offlcial's Interpretation Parking anance Special Exception Sign Variance Other • Current Zoning of Subject Property: C-1 with Corridor Overlay Applicable Ordinance Section: Article 5.8(A)(1) {~ GENERAL VARIANCE REQUEST • The followin s ecific variation from the ordinance is requested: 9 P A front setback, for aarkins alone Lincoln Avenue, of 10' from the uroaerty to the parkins area, instead of 20' This variance is necessary due to the following special conditions: Special Condition Deflnition: To justify a variance, the difficulty must be due to unique circumstances involving the particular property. The unique circumstances must be related to a physical characteristic of the property itself, not to the owner's personal situation. This is because regardless of ownership, the variance will run with the land. Example: A creek bisecting a lot, a smaller buildable area than is seen on sutrounding lots, specimen trees. Note: A cul-de-sac is a standard street layout in College Station. The shape of standard cul- de-sac lots are generally not special conditions. The subiect site is encumbered by muitiale items which restrict the develoaable and buildable area. These items are summarized as follows: 1. A secondary drainasewav. flowins south to north, bisects aaaroximately throush the middle of the aroaertv: • 2. An unnamed tributary of Burton Creek, located in the secondary drainase system, bisects the northern 1/3 of the aroaerty. This creek drains from west to east and is a studied creek with maoaed floodway and floodalain. This floodwav is located in a platted variable width drainase easement which is sisnificantly wider than the studied floodwav; 3. A 30' wide sae easement, tannins north and south, bisects aaaroximately ~hroush the middle of the croperty; 4. A 20' wide sewer easement, tannins west and east, bisects the northern 1/3 of the aroaefir; The unnecessary hardship (s) involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance other than financial hardship is/are: Hardship Definition: The inability to make reasonable use of the property in accord with the literal requirements of the law. The hardship must be a direct result of the special condition. Example: A hardship of a creek bisecting a lot could be the reduction of the buildable area on the lot, when compared to neighboring properties. • Reasonable development of the land would be sis~nificantiv descreased and undesirable • due to the reduced buildable area and locations for accessory uses on the Hart of the multiple encumberances and the required corridor setback increases. The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: A 10 foot setback from the narking area to the right-of way is nroaosed. This is a s~reater setback than the standard 6 foot permited by Article 7.2(C)i71. The 18'X20' landscape island with each T continauou~ parkins soaves naauirement is still provided with this proposed 10 foot setback variance n3auest. This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following facts: It is our belief that the intent of Article 5.8(A)(1) is to urotect the integrity and beautify the entrance "Dates" to the City. such as University Drive. The design of this Site Plan has incoraorated the corridor setback requirements, alone University Drive. Lincoln Avenue is not one of these entrance "sates" and should • not be held to the same standard. Also, the unnamed tributary of Burton Creek, with manned fl av, will be left arestine. This will arovide a natural screening barrier of the aroiect's accessory uses as viewed from University Drive. The prouosed narking setbacks are also consistent with neighboring develoament along Lincoln Avenue. The hotel develoarhent, near this develoament and located at southeast comer of University Drive and Lincoln Avenue. only maintains a 15' building setback along Lincoln Avenue. Qur aroposed paricina area setback would provide continuity and be consistent with this adiacent existing develoament. The applicant has prepared is application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto a-rue, correct and complete. ,~ Z ~ and Title Date • ~1 ~i^ %~.:! D b a ¢~¢++ ~~ ix ~F ~~T-~. 7ktir:.~a i#e'a~'~a YS-'' s '~f ~`~y's, ~' ~~ ~ ~a ~ ~~ ~~ }w ~~ x~ ~ ~~ e~r~ 3~ zY ~:~3 o~ r,.. ~~ ~? o. .~ i F W F y '~ - s• ~'i 1 tai, ~ ~ Q_ - ~. YQ S -_ ~;~~ ~- ~~~ '~ I ~~ ~..._ s ~ -, Uo I I~ 4 ~~ I :a~ ~ - ~L ~~ r ~- - ~~~~ ~ ~'0 R~~ ~ ~ y~_ I i € 8 ryry77 ®W~ ~ „b. a 3j~~ ~~i " ~ sac k zx ~ •1 s '~ -77 Y~ _ II 1 p1 A Yg 4y~' ~ ~S ~": ~ ~~ tik ~s ~~ ~ ?'~ ~'~. S ~ i \ f~'' NV~d 1115 'IIA1~ ~4gp~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~R~~•~~ ~~ ~ ~1 ~~ ~t~ ~~ ~~ 6 ~ R ~ ~~~~~f~~~a t g ~~ b ; b!~ R ~ ~ • ~RIiBg¢~ ~! ~ ~ ids ~~ ~ps~6 4FM~~ 1~ ~ a ~` 3 ~ 3 ~ ~l~1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ #g ~ %~~i ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ 9~~ ~ r '~/ ,~\ e ~ , r '• \ a ~ ~ ~ o ~/ -~~ ~: . :~ X1 `NOIlr1N 3~1N'1'IOJ •~ •aa uls<a~nlNn ooa~ ENO ~SdHd 3a1N~0 'M'a'W A e r a ~4~;~ ~~p s ~~ r ~ ;~ ~~ ~ R~x~ ~i ~ ~'~ ~~ ~b p~~g6 ~i Yg$g i. ~4~~ ~ak' d ~~~ sb e~ ~~ ~~~it~ e ~ ~3R ~~ ~ ~~~ '~ 411 ~~ r~p4~C ~ a ~!'~~ ~~~ ~ ~~; ~~ ~~~ 11 ~716RY ~~- •. < ~ 's ~_~~ . ~. ~t ##~ ~~~s :~ ~_~ ~~ ~.y ~ ,~.. ~t\ ;~ ±~ ~ ~•~~~~ x~W~ i Fp } " <~S ~~~ .~~/~ ~\ e3 \ ~~ ~ !I!i i ~' ilk ~ ,,, . ~ ~~ ~~ r~~1~ ~ - ~ ~'° ' / . r~ ~,- /.. ~ g~ f \ y 8 \ ~~ N/ RA ~~/ / \ 4. ,t / ! y g is ~ \ `~ .! ~ ~~ rr- r ~ ~~~ I I:. ~ I~ II I I I F I~ '` _ £ I ~i5 Y ~~ 66;~~ ~ I ~~ I #y -~ k~ ) I~f Jan 03 06 04:13p Cyril Hosley 291-491-8217 p.l • Cyril and Rick Hosley 911 Grand Oaks Circle College Station, TX TO: City of College Station F'AX: 979-7643496 Planning Department FROM: Cyril Hosley PHONE: 281-491-8215 & 979-696-7370 911 Grand Oaks Circle SUBJECT: Variance to parking setback, corner of'Lincoln and University DATE: January 3, 2006 ATTN: Jennifer Reeves or Debra Grace Thank you for helping me to understand the projects that aze planned for the corner of Lincoln and University. My property is directly impacted by this development and I would request that the ZBA not grant the parking setback variance requested by the: developer. When purchasing our property in 2001, we investigated the regulations for this vacant property and felt comfortable that the parking setbacks and landscape requirements ofthe district would adequatel~u,~'er • us from the noise and disruptions that commercial development can cause residences We felt the district gave us predictability and certainty concerning future development. I feel that I can live with the 20' setback required by the district, but not the 10' requested. A setback of 20' gives some "green space" betwee~l our homes and the commercial pazking lots. Cazs pazked so close to the street and, therefore, our residences will negatively impact the value of our homes. The starting and stopping of cars just that much closer to our bedrooms will also negatively impact the relative quiet of our neighborhood. We knew we were buying near commercial property. We are not asking to stop development of this property, but are asking that the developer be required to live with the rules that were in place when we purchased our property. It is apparent to anyone that this is a difficult piece of property to develop. Just because it cannot be developed as densely as the developer would like does not make it a hardship and does not make the property unusable. It should not be up to the neighbors to help make the property more useable, and therefore valuable, than it was when the developer decided to purchase it. College Station is a wonderful place. The City does not need to grant variances just so a developer can "over develop"apiece of property. It is important that we maintain certain standards that benefit all property owners. It is also important that property owners have predictability when investing in their property and to have confidence that the City will n.ot allow someone to do something to negatively impact our homes. Long after this builder/developer is gone, College Station residents will be left with these buildings, the parking lots, and the impact that is caused by this project. We urge the Zoning Boazd of Adjustment to consider the rights of all the residents and not just of this developer. • Thank you, Cyril and Rick Hosley STAFF REPORT C Project Manager: Lindsay Boyer Report Date: December 29, 2005 Email: Iboyer@cstx.gov Meeting Date: January 10, 2006 APPLICANT: Natalie Ruiz, IPS Group REQUEST: Parking variance LOCATION: 1351 Earl Rudder Freeway South PURPOSE: To reduce the number of required parking spaces for a proposed furniture store development located north of the Varsity Ford development General Information Status of Applicant: Land Planner and agent for the owner Property Owner: Anthony Majors Ordinance Section: UDO Article 7, Section 2.H, Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Required • Physical Characteristics Zoning/Land Use: Subject Property: The subject property is zoned C-1, General Commercial and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan indicates this area as Retail Regional. The property is currently undeveloped. Adjacent Property: North: C-2, Commercial -Industrial, developed as a hotel East: C-2, Commercial -Industrial, undeveloped floodplain South: C-2, Commercial -Industrial, developed as Varsity Ford Auto Dealership Frontage: This property has approximately 725 feet of frontage on Earl Rudder Freeway Access: There is a platted 50 foot private access easement located on the property line between the Varsity Ford property and this tract. Access will be guaranteed from this point. Additional access will have to be in compliance with Texas Department of Transportation and the City of College Station guidelines for driveway separation distances. Topography & Vegetation: This property slopes from an elevation of 280 feet at the southwest corner down to 260 to the northwest and east corner of the property. The elevation reaches 254 at the northeast property boundary. Natural vegetation is dense around the floodplain, and sparse closer to the frontage road. Upon development of the property, the site will be required to meet commercial landscape and streetscape standards. O:\group\deve_ser\stfipt\zngstfipt\t-onda.doc • • Floodplain: A portion of this property lies in the Carter Creek floodplain. Approximately 1.3 acres of a total 8 acres along the east and northern property lines lies in the 100 year floodplain. However, a Development Permit was issued in September to relocate portions of this floodplain. Variance Information Background: The subject property was annexed in 1958 and subsequently zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential. In 1989, the property was rezoned in 1989 to C-2, Commercial -Industrial, in compliance with the Industrial designation on the Comprehensive Plan. The property was platted in 1993, and a portion of it was developed in 1998 as additional parking for an expansion of the service area at Varsity Ford. The property was recently rezoned to C-1, General Commercial in compliance with the Retail Regional designation on the Comprehensive Plan. This rezoning was initiated in preparation of the development of a furniture store on the property. The current parking requirements for the proposed development are 1 space per 250 square feet for retail development. The proposed development includes a 50,000 square foot building for furniture sales with ancillary warehousing to the furniture sales. This mix of uses is permitted in C-1 as long as the storage component is less than 50% of the total square footage. 200 spaces would be required for the proposed development. The applicant is requesting a variance to the retail parking requirement. Their proposal is to increase the ratio for this property 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. Staff conducted a survey of 22 cities and found only six cities have parking requirements that support such a request. All but one city have requirements that would result in fewer parking spaces than College Station, however there is a large range of parking requirements with the average ratio around 1 space per 350. • This property is currently undeveloped, and there appears to be no special condition or hardship why the current standards cannot be met. This variance would be carried with the land regardless of use. Given the variety of uses that might develop or redevelop instead of a furniture store (see C-1, General Commercial, Zoning District Fact Sheet), 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, however due to the lack of overwhelming O:\group\deve ser\stfipt\zngstfipt\honda.doc evidence to support a particular parking ratio, more • research will be required before this option will be brought forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Recommendation: Unless new information is provided during the public hearing to support this request, staff recommends denial of this request. 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, and is based partly upon what the building itself is designed to hold. The legal occupancy of the building would be determined the same as a Wal-mart or a local bookstore. Essentially, any retail business that owned or leased the building would have the same occupancy. Given that the furniture store could move displays to accommodate additional people, or another use might one day occupy the space, Staff does not feel that the use of a furniture store itself is a special condition. • Hardships: A portion of this property lies in the Carter Creek floodplain. The adjacent property also has floodplain and was able to build nearly 40,000 square feet of automobile service space and accommodate 2.5 times the parking with 10 acres. It is Staffs opinion, that even taking the floodplain into consideration, there is ample room to accommodate a 50,000 square foot building and the associated parking and site requirements. Alternatives: This variance could also be accommodated if the Unified Development Ordinance were amended to identify a specific parking ratio for furniture sales. This alternative is preferred by City Staff, and is currently being researched should the variance request be denied. Special Information Ordinance Intent: The purpose of the off-street parking standards is to establish the guidelines for off-street parking spaces consistent with the proposed land use to: 1. Eliminate the occurrence of non-resident on-street • parking in adjoining neighborhoods; 2. Avoid the traffic congestion and public safety hazards caused by a failure to provide such parking spaces; and O:\group\deve se~stfrpt\zngstfipt\honda.doc • 3. Expedite the movement of traffic on public thoroughfares in a safe manner, thus increasing the carrying capacity of the streets and reducing the amount of land required for streets, thereby lowering the cost to both the property owner and the City. Owners Notified: 7 Responses: Staff has received one inquiry. • • Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Map 3. Application 4. C-1, General Commercial, Zoning District Fact Sheet 5. Parking Ratios of cities surveyed by City staff O:\group\deve set~stfrpt\zngstfrpt\honda.doc o ~ ~o ~ ~ ~~'~ '` m o ~~3j,, ~~r~ ~ ~. N ~ .~, '+w ~ o V1p r ~ I ti ~ A ~ A ~ I ~ F ~ ~ R ~ o ° R ~°~ .S ~ ~^w y Q Cb O t ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ NQ~ (~ - 9~ ~ e ~ ` ~' R '~~~ ~~~`' ~ ~ 4 ~ ~~ ~- 1~ C3 ~J ~~' ~ 0 r ~ p ` n N , A' • e • ~~ N ' ~~ U 9 ^ ~ z ~- N ~ a V ~ RSV ~ y'~i ~ ~° ~ X39 V ~~ o ~ N ~ c ifJ4' r ~ V ~ trt~~ ~ Q 1.{. O N ~ ~ ~~ ®a ~ ~ `~ ~_ ~ a ® ~ n~ ~ ~ 4 n' ` ~= ~ J o . ~ O o a ~~ Q `~ N ~ , r ` ~ ~ , r o '~ ` ~ ® ~{ ~ ~ sa ~ 3 r ` ~<~ a ~ ,' n ~ a~ ~ e a iRa oR_ ~ z ~y ~' , n+ ~ R'~ ~e ~~~ ~ i sa ~°R iA ~a ~ ^s s ~ r W g~~~ ~~ eo ~~ a -, s ` ~ ~ ". + i r a 3^ n y ,^ ,n o V e r ~Ir r~^ ~•R ,~' ~ ~^R ~ ~ i s ie it ~~i ~ iR • 0 a ~ 9 ~ ~ -, ,' ~ P' ' _ ,~ 8tj • ,,. ~ i ti ~ ,~ - ,° g -f , ~° s ' s ~ ti W ~ ~ Y u ~~ 2 +, ~ u i~_.~ ~ ~~ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CASE NO.: O J ~ G~ I ~ DATE SUBMITTED: ~ ~ ~+ ~ITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning tf Development Services ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Flung Fee of $150.00. ~, ~ Application completed in full. Additional materials may be required of the applicant such as site plans, elevation drawings, sign details and floor plans. The Zoning Official shall inform the applicant of any extra materials requited. Date of Preapplication Conference: APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project): Name Natalie Ruiz. AICP, IPS Group, Planning Solutions Street Address 511 University Drive East. Suite 211 City College Station State Texas Zip Code 77840 E-Mail Address NatalieCaaipsgroup.us Phone Number 979.846-9259 Fax Number 979.846.9259 ~OPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name Anthony Maiors (%Phil Kirk) Street Address 1351 ~lCity College Station philCcDvarsitvflm.com State Texas Zip Code 77840 E• Phone Number 979.694.2022 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Fax Number 979.693-1744 Address Lot Lot 2 Block 1 Subdivision High Ridge Subdivision Description if there is no Lot, Block and Subdivision 8.14 acre tract located north of the Varsity Ford automobile dealership. Action Requested: (Circle One) Setback Variance Appeal of Zoning Official's Interpretation arking Variance Special Exception Sign Variance Other Current Zoning of Subject Property: C-1 General Commercial ~plicable Ordinance Section: Unified Development Ordinance. Section 7 2 H Number of Off-street Parking Spaces Required ~ ~ ~~ GENERAL VARIANCE REQUEST following specific variation from the ordinance is requested: proposed furniture store, the ZBA could condition the variance upon the use of the retail sales area as a furniture. appliance or carnet store. The proposed store will have approximately 15.000 sa. ft. in warehouse space and 35.000 sg. ft. in retail sales. At the current requirement of 1:250, the facility will need a total of 155 parking spaces. At the proposed requirement of 1:350 sg. ft. the facility will need a total of 115 parkins spaces which is more than adequate for a furniture store. This variance is necessary due to the. following special conditions: Special Condition Definition: To justify a variance, the difficulty must be due to unique circumstances involving the particular property. The unique circumstances must be related to a physical characteristic of the property itself, not to the owner's personal situation. This is because regardless of ownership, the variance will run with the land. Example: A creek bisecting a lot, a smaller buildable area than is seen on surrounding lots, specimen trees. Note: A cul-de-sac is a standard street layout in College Station. The shape of standard cul-de-sac lots are generally not special conditions. The parkins requirements in the City's UDO do not distinguish between types of retail sales and services The parking requirement for a new HEB grocery store Walmart or Target is the same requirement as a new furniture. appliance or carpet store. A single tenant furniture company is interested in purchasing the subject The unnecessary hardship (s) involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance is/are: Hardship Definition: The inability to make reasonable use of the property in accord with the literal requirements of the law. The hardship must be a direct result of the special condition. Example: A hardship of a creek bisecting a lot could be the reduction of the buildable area on the lot, when compared to neighboring properties. The additional paved parking area that is not needed by this development will only add to the run-off near Carter's Creek which is high priority rural greenwav The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: Modifying the parking requirements in the UDO to provide an alternate parking requirement for furniture appliance and/or carpet stores. This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following facts: The proposed parking requirement of 1:350 sg ft is adequate given the demands of a furniture store The applicant is proposing a condition on the parking variance that it be tied to the use of a furniture appliance or carpet store. The ap~nt has prepared this application and cert~es that the facts sfated herein and exhibits attached and Date property and has developed several conceptual plans however the current parking requirement is much more • UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE FACT SHEET C-1 General Commercial This district is designed to provide locations for general commercial purposes, that is, retail sales and service uses that function to serve the entire community and its visitors. Permitted• • Extended Care Facility /Convalescent /Nursing Home • Educational Facility, Indoor Instruction • Educational Facility, Outdoor Instruction • Educational Facility, Primary & Secondary • Educational Facility, Tutoring • Educational Facility, Vocational /Trade • Government Facilities • Health Care, Hospital • Health Care, Medical Clinic • Parks • Places of Worship • Animal Care Facility -Indoor • Art Studio /Gallery • Conference /Convention Center • Country Club Day Care, Commercial • • Drive-in / thru Window • Dry Cleaners and Laundry • Fraternal Lodge • Funeral Homes • Health Club /Sports Facility, Indoor • Health Club /Sports Facility, Outdoor • Hotels • Offices • Parking as a Primary Use • Personal Service Shop • Printing /Copy Shop • Radio / TV station /studios • Restaurants • Retail Sales -Single Tenant over 50,000 SF • Shooting Range, Indoor • Theater • Storage, Self Service • Wireless Telecommunication Facilities -Unregulated Pe • rmitted with Specific Use Standards: Fuel Sales • Golf Course or Driving Range • Car Wash • Commercial Garden/Greenhouse/Landscape Maintenance • Commercial Amusements • Retail Sales and Service • Sexually Oriented Business • Vehicular Sales, Rental, Repair and Service • Wholesales /Services • Utilities • Wireless Telecommunication Facilities -Intermediate Permitted with a Conditional Use Permit: • Night Club, Bar or Tavern • Wireless Telecommunication Facilities -Major • • • Parking Survey City Furniture # of spaces Arlington 1 per 400 sf 125 Austin 1 per 500 sf 100 Baytown 2 + 1 per 300 sf over 1000 sf 165 Bryan 1 per 200 sf 200 Carrollton 1 per 500 sf 100 Cedar Park 1 per 300 sf 167 Flower Mound 1 per 250 sf 148 Frisco 1 per 200 sf 190 Georgetown 1 per 250 up to 20k, 1 per 500 after 116 Cranbury 2 + 1 per 300 sf over 1000 sf 165 Grapevine 1 per 200 sf 190 Killeen 1 per 800 sf 63 Lewisville 2 + 1 per 300 sf over 1000 sf 165 Longview 1 per 200 sf 190 Lubbock 1 per 300 sf 167 McKinney 1 per 400 sf 125 Richardson 1 per 500 sf 100 Southlake 1 per 400 sf 125 Sugar Land 1 per 300 sf 167 Tyler 1 per 500 sf 100 Victoria 1 per 500 sf 100 Waco 1 per 400 sf 125 • STAFF REPORT • Project Manager: Trey Fletcher, Sr. Planner Report Date: 1-3-2006 Email: tfletcher~cstx.gov Meeting Date: 1-10-2006 APPLICANT: Jefferson Christian Homes, Inc. REQUEST: Setback Variance LOCATION: 211 Lee Avenue PURPOSE: To allow for the construction of a carport as an accessory use. GENERAL INFORMATION Status of Applicant: Homebuilder representing the property owner Property Owner: Micajah W. and Nancy P. Newman Applicable • Ordinance Section: UDO Sections 5.2 Residential Dimensional Standards and 6.4 Accessory Structures PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Zoning and Land Use Subject Property: The subject property and surrounding properties are zoned R-1 Single Family Residential and are used for Single Family Residential. Frontage: 75.32 feet on Lee Avenue Access: An unimproved alley (15') exists in the rear. All vehicular access is to the front via Lee Avenue. Topography & Vegetation: Relatively flat suburban landscape with some vegetation and several trees. Floodplain: None. • VARIANCE INFORMATION • Background: 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. ANALYSIS Special Conditions: The applicant states: "The long, narrow shape of the lot creates a smaller building area than is seen on surrounding lots." Hardships: The applicant states: "The rear setback restriction eliminates the ability to provide covered off-street parking." Alternatives: None were 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. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the request. The homeowner is proposing the 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 cochere 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. • SPECIAL INFORMATION Ordinance Intent: Building setback requirements usually allow for some degree of control over population density, access to light and air, and fire protection. These standards are typically justified on the basis of the protection of property values. The Board must determine if the intent of the ordinance is met by the request and should ensure that the request is reasonable based on the special conditions and hardships. Miscellaneous: This structure received a College Station Historical Marker in 1999. According to the applicant of the marker, the home was built in the 1930s. Number of Property Owners Notified: Responses Received: • ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map 2. Application 3. Site Plan 4. Survey 24, including 3 notices to representatives of the Oakwood Subdivision. None as of date of staff report. • e4 (D r ~ ~` "~y ~ b°y J ~^ Pi, ^ \ ~nO VV O O LJ O ~ ~ ~ Invon^' VV ~~n~ ~U ~ O 4 DO J N CO °f, ~/~o~ f~ ~ ~y ~ N ~o,~ a^ti °~f` N In ~Ofi '!~/~ rOe~ Cp ~ ooA sOr, rOr~ N 9°fi O ~ s°Fi ~ ~ fpr °Or, Ln e (V e ~ Ln N 9°e, O (h ~° ~ N • °O~i ¢ Q ~. N ~, N N ~~` °~, e 0 N~ ~ •prN N M r°~! ~ N O 1~ ~' ° N tea, N N N ` , ~^ "° ~ N ~ ~~~ O CO •o r ` N a°y ~~ ~ M ` e°`r ~ ~ ` ~~ M ~,y ~ °~~ ~ pp° ~cY'~ ! f,,~0'-/O~~i- NCO Op e- ti ~ ~ M ~i ~ e~ r a°y eP°' ~ ~°1 ~ ~ O O ~"~ ~ ~, N rp2~ ~ ~y ry N ~O ~ goy ~c4' N O po" O ^o~ oa ~ O ~ ~o^ 1°ti N y to ~ rp~ ~M~ ,goo M ~ Rf ,~' `"' U d. ,~, ~ ~' , ~ v ~1 rn ~ ~ ~ M~y f~ ~'L MMyA^.~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~°9 N~ `~:J O O M ^~ A^ A^o `~ O 1° N y ~ ~ ~~i O ~ ,yo'~ fie, [~' ry O ry°s ory C'7 N N ti°° r ~ ON c Y G ~ ~ry U ° ~ °y" m ~ " ryo ~ ~ ~ ~O z ~-~ ^ry ti C'7 r by r " _~ °~ "`~ 0 r "~ P r ~ '~ ^o ^ry .M r " ``_ C~ .,^y "tio ter' ~ "°' ~ ~ N ., ^ O "°~ "`~ oo G ~N "^ "° ~ " M "° ° ~` ~~/ ~ "ti N o'~ "°o (p M(V "o 'S'S " "o°' et N y ""e /~~ ^oro M ~ "~ " ""° (~1 " "a " ~~~i9 N O """ ""ry O "^ '~ r- r N ° ~ o ~°ry ~ `rpp M ~ ~,~ ,~^ e V y P,~~ ~ M ~^1 °`a ~ l7 rp° 9 ^ry V 7` ` ~ r~ ~Q~ `r"ry O V ~N o o~~~ ~~16.~ 1~1 o ... N ~~ ~ ~`- "yam r ~n ~ N "~~PJ ~ti M~~ ~„~ A ~~` N ry 9 O Q' "o ^ O MM J~~ G`~' ti r r ry°A ry^0' ~ p Q ~ ~' N ~s~ ~ry M ~~ a ~' N ry"y N~ ~.r' ~ .~ ti^ e- ~-- ,~ ti°° ryoo ,ys° O r ~" ~° M N ti ^a O ~ ~ troy ry"ro 00 W N o~ ^° f ~ ~ 201 M1 ~4°° Cfl ~ ~ b4° W rye, ti ~ ~~ ~ O °°^ ~ 202 M ~ ~ N Z N ~ s ~,J ~. ~ n. ch ~ ~ O J ~' °° W M G~ $ O ~ D ~~ ~ y ~ °,. ~° nQn ~~ N ~~ ~--~ l~ ~^ o0 ~~, ~ ch s~ r~ ~ ~O N E'pe ~ M M ~ ~ Dec. 28. 2005 4;19PM~` • CITY OF COT.LEGE $'I`ATIgN I" (an-iir{rdl~ewbpmsnt Srrtirciu .Newman Printing Co .~ !~~ I$~D ~' i No. 8781 P. 2 ~ J FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CASE NO.: O ~ ' ~ I baTE .• ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTIUIENT APP~.ICATION ~~U3~ - / MINIMUM 3UbMITTAI. Rt=QUiR~MENT3: `~ ilin Fee of $150.00, g Appligtion completed in full. Additional materials may be required of the applicant such es site plans, elevation drawings, sign details and floor plans. The_Zoning Official shaN_inform the applicant of any extra materials required. Dato of Prcappllca#ion Conicrcncc: 2xs. o~V ~s'"~ APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S iNF4RMAT10N (Primary Gontact for the Project): Name ~ ~ C ~ 'i. ~) , ~ c i e 1~ ~5, ~.1~np,~,c Street Address ;?~ g:i~1?.~i~~ ~ c}~sT~ 2~%RY - !~~~,E ~ ~~ i ~.Tr d ~ ~ State 1 X Zip Code ~75s'~ S~ _ E-Mail Address Phone Number ~i 7~ ~ 6~ ~ ~ (2 '~ Z. Fax Number ~ ~~ - lz~ ~ ~'~~3 PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORi1AAT10N: • Nema~_IY1i_Chl~l.~ ~, (~s, ~~MA. ~ Il?nAY' P ~5s~~ MbA_ Street Address 21J_ , ~~~ _ f }V ~ ~ ,,,` City ~ u ~~. Se~4, -i ,a ~ti State ~~ Zip Code `7? ~~ 4~ E»Mall Address mro~ma,~ r? A)s~,~N~a.«Pl~ce/v~ Phone Number 97 - 77 - 77 Fax Number ~t75 -77~ -1~~ I.ocATloN OF PROPERTY: Address tot ~(,?,- Block 3 Subdivision b1kkL~.'.~OOT~ /}3ib~Tioa~ Description if there is no Lot, Biock and Subdivision Ply eF ~eT ~ ~~ l~ ~~ 0216 ~at11 i~~~a~6 /~, 2~ TNa .Ajbi7,t 1 ^ ~eF [ 22a.a 1aN i1~,rr, LT zl . QL~r~ 3 ~ aa.~/~~ A,~~rT;o,- ~ Action Requested; (Circle One) Setback Variance ~ Appeol of Zoning Qfficial'a Interpretation Parking Variance SpBClai Exception Sign Variance Other Current Zoning of Subject PropQrty; _ (2.~S~ ~ Fad i c,~,... , _ , Applicable Ordinance Section: r~ ~J 6/13103 Pam 1 of s f0/Z0 39t1d X135 J-N3Wd0~i3/13Q 5J00. 96bEb9L6L6 E5 ~Zi; 9002/~Z/ZL Dec. 28. 2005 4:19PM,~.,. N man Printing Co :'• ` No. 8181 P. 312 vv ~~E RAL .VARIANCE REQST _ , • ~' 5~.~ ~Ac•1t vN~.-~e.E. The following cpocific variation from tho ordinance is requested' ~~ ~f~- ~ -~ • ,~ ' .lr'.~~~~ _ ~or<~ an. i7~,~. C~ ~ ti 70 ~f (a ~ f'nt~. ~ ~. ~~ P~z~t~- This variance is necessary due to th® following special conditions: Spealal Condition Dofinition: To justify a variance, the difficulty muQt be due to uniq„w c~rcx~mstanc~es involving the particular property, The unique circumstances must be related to a physical characteristic of the property itself, not to the owner's personal situation. This is hecause regardless of ownership, the variance wW run with th® land. Example: A creek bisecting a lot, a smaller buildable area than is seen on surrounding lots, specimen trees. Note: A cul-de-sac is a standard street layout In College Stetlon. The shape of atendard oul.de••ooo IotE era generally not special conditions. ~i .~n~ C, .. fL 11SZ~ o ~ ~bIAQ >r _ ~r~ `/_ 7~~~.... ~ t S The unnecessary hardship (s) involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance other than finanelal hardship islare: Hardship Definition: The inability to make reasonable use of the property in accord with the liters) requirements of the law. The hardship must be a direct result of the special condit)on. Example: A hardship of a seek bisecting a lot could be the reduction of the buildable area on the let, when ~pdre~~ igt~~borii~g pro~rties. ~ . ~,~. ~`~ra-r~ f~~siTuc~~~ ~.~iMt i!~-"_s ! _ fa13~1,3~~, o F2.~V~~L • ~ _ -_ The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: nla This variance w111 not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following facts: I~~~ -s la.~ uf~S ~m,'a- 193m'~~ A~ui~ F~oi~l ua1r~GAP,st3~~~~~~ I ASi o ~ ~- 5a-t"/3A~.1c.. /•~.~E.r4 l4s Wocu~ ob fL .fl?~Pds ~, ~. t'bzi The epnliCAnt ha nrapen9d this application and certifl2s that the facts stated herRin and Rxhi(~its attached hereto arer~ , c rrect and complete. Signature rid Title Date _ _ ~ No ~: Ar fits z~ 5i l ~ 1'l~v l'S ~3~ l~ 6 PRA t'!~.?~ o ~ ' r<c.~ i4 ~5 ~~_ • Ef/131D~ wage ~ or e RA/f.A ~~b~ 213S 1N~Jd0~3113Q 5:70 96DEb9L6L6 £9~ZZ 5002/LZ/Z~ r ~ _ • ' I I t~OL I GK' S (,RAM1G 5GA4E RESTRICTED hgvESITES 1 O.R.104/450 o to :o +o ' DLOGK I IN RE' T LOT 3 ~ LOT 4 ~ LOT 5 5' RE5ERVE0 57RIP p ~~ _! ;, S 45•E R lo' RESERVED STRIP ~o t, Iq~,! -fi---rR-1 7 .'}6' ------ -^ 9 UTILITY EhN1Y~ REST r O' R 'i~+~ ~ 50' R ~e 15 ~ R,~ ~ - I 1 {. ~u1v~el.R ~ ~0 S ~ I I 1 1 I ~ ~ ~ M jf,~~~10 ~ ! ~ppp ' , I • • _ _ ,~ i / ~RCRORR 1 I - - 1 OOR! 1 ~ !7'D•4.OICD. __.._-- IOC I -_ _ M19TOR~ 0~1TR 14T 1 i ~ ' BIGGK 3 ~'4 ~ ~ euRleo'wimlrln ~r~ + ~ ~ I~ T . G ARTVI'R 1 GIiT e/ I ' ~ i°oiiteo°ROau°Mie a r ~i 'rio~w. _ D. R I 4/G50 I I p o~ wy~ppyR~ ~ 14Ir~ ~'T~ • ' YET M owldt IYCa- ~-11 MO M ' ~ ~~~ ' I '~ LOT 21 . t OF LOT/ZO ~ we errs wTI~IU la cwllR r+ouA ee I II 'I I I~ ADJOINI T 11 fLOThE N~N ` ~ I ca+-~ctm uoo~sb i ADJOININ •. 15' OO/F1• T 22 !!f ;1 `~ o R I! o/ei4 : N.M 9E rSGH I'. g TM 501~TH za ~ OF LDT 1 a ; I I ' ~: ~ • • : ~ LaT z 3 J- TrE SouTF1 ALL OP LOT 19 440' OP o . F, riO1r~io,l I F ` 39• OF OT 22 LOT 20I AOJ01 N I NG LOT 1 q I 1 •: ,I • Q ~ oe ~ ~ ~ ~ , I nl ~ ~ ~ I S 1' ~;~ ~~ I `~, It.T' ® ~ O 1 Flip . ~ O N ~N TAO ~. N 1 ;~I it 1 In. F ~ _.N 1 ~~ f ~ .:~ ~l ` I ,~ ; '. -1o5uT5eRY g ~, I ~ ~"°"` .; i ~ ,. ~~~ , I'I ~' 's I 1 • ,, ' I.1 ~ j ~ '~ ;.; ,o. ~ I 1 a f ,~ 1 , I. ~ • 1 I 11T",,~~~~ 1 I 'I DRIGC s: ., ~ •; I 1 .1 rA.IC r, ~ , ~ i ~. I I; a I 1 ~ ~. • ~~ i i ~~ i ;'~ j ' ~o• a 40'R _ lo'R ~ I'1 90 K Ig•R ti j5'R -_ --~._! ._~..L.~__._.- ~-- - - - ~..~--~----- ^MO,Iit•' j 75.32'M ~T ~ Pw.I.1RaN -1-E IN GOWG • .•4~ RD711R GONG. ®AtT 211 LEE AVENUE ~o• R.o.r. reR RAT , Z'd 96b£b9Z~01 ~WO~Id 9£~zz S00Z-tiZ-~3a