Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_ZBA_12.19.2006Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes, December 19, 2006 Page 1 of 5 City of Georgetown Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes December 19, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas 78626 Members present: William Moore, Chair; Earl Watson, Secretary Alternates present: Steve Lampinstein, Dale Ross Members absent: Jim Jarvis, Ann Snell, and Richard Vasquez III Staff present: Jennifer Bills, Planner; Melissa McCollum, Planner; Stephanie McNickle, Planning Specialist; David Munk, Development Engineer; Bobby Ray, Planning Director; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary. This is a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Georgetown. The Board, appointed by the Mayor and the City Council, acts on requests for variances, interpretations and special exceptions under the Georgetown Zoning Ordinance. Order of Hearing Process:  Staff makes a presentation of the project to the Board;  The applicant is provided an opportunity to present their project to the Board;  The Board asks questions of both Staff and the applicant;  *The Public Hearing is open, and both proponents and opponents are allowed to speak;  The Public Hearing is closed and the Board deliberates on the merits of the case; and,  The Board generates findings to support their decision, a motion is made and seconded, and a vote is taken on the motion presented.  Variance approvals require an affirmative vote of 4 members of the Board. * Those who speak please identify yourselves for the meeting record. Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m. Chair Moore called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. and asked the two alternates, Ross and Lampenstein, to serve on the dais. (The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the Director or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551.) 1. Action from Executive Session There was not an executive session. 2. Consideration and possible action on the Minutes of the regular Board of Adjustment meeting of the November 21, 2006 meeting. (Chair Moore skipped directly to item number 3.) Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes, December 19, 2006 Page 2 of 5 3. Public Hearing to consider a variance to Section 12.02.020 requiring construction of sidewalks along public right-of-ways for Lots 5 & 6, Fountainwood Plaza, located at 5404 Williams Drive (VAR 2006-016). Bills presented the staff report. This site is the future home for the San Gabriel Presbyterian Church. The property was annexed into the city limits in 2000. It was rezoned to C-3, General Commercial, with restrictions in 2005. A site plan for the church was approved on July 10, 2006. The applicant is requesting a variance from the requirement to construct a sidewalk that runs parallel to the street. The applicant’s basis for the variance is because they believe that future Texas Department of Transportation expansion of Williams Drive will eventually remove the proposed sidewalk and will have to be replaced and the properties to either side of the subject property do not currently have sidewalks. Bills reported that she conferred with a representative from TxDOT and that the representative stated that the right-of-way for the expansion has already been acquired. The sidewalks shown on the site plan will be on private property. As for any disturbance during the construction, TxDOT’s policy is to replace any sidewalk that might get damaged in construction. Additionally, the applicant has the option of placing a bond with the city for the sidewalk construction and building after TxDOT finishes construction. Staff recommends denial of this request based on the lack of findings of fact, time and economical reasons are not applicable reasons for granting a variance. Commissioner Watson asked when the sidewalk plan became effective. Bills replied the sidewalk plan was adopted in 2000 and the site plan, showing the sidewalks, was submitted in 2006. Bobby Ray addressed the Board and explained that the original application for the project was based on a site plan variance. The City Attorney has said this is also a platting issue that should be addressed by P&Z and City Council. Ray discussed the process of issuing a variance versus a plat amendment. William Holland, the applicant, representing the church, introduced himself. He provided arguments for granting the variance that were listed on the application, and adding that it is a safety issue to have pedestrians on Williams Drive. He also does not want to be the first person in the “neighborhood” to build a sidewalk to nowhere. He thinks sidewalks on major thoroughfares is poor planning. He says he will put the sidewalk in later, but wants the flexibility to put it in when he feels it is necessary. Lampenstein asked Mr. Holland how the city could insure that the sidewalk would be built in the future. He asked if a bond could be done. Mr. Holland said he could, but economically that is not what the church wants to do. Watson asked Mr. Holland why he didn’t ask for the variance at the beginning of the project. Holland responded that they were trying to adapt to this area and be logical in the process. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes, December 19, 2006 Page 3 of 5 Watson questioned the difference in the responses of TxDOT reported by applicant and staff. Holland responded that they must have talked to different people at TxDOT because he was told that most of the ROW was on the other side of Williams Drive. Moore asked staff to clarify. David Munk responded that he didn’t know why the answers were different, but that TxDOT’s track record was good in replacing property if they damaged it. Moore also asked if development on either side of this property would have the same requirements. Staff responded yes, they would. Watson attempted a motion that began several other discussions and motions. Please see the attached Transcription Notes for further details. The Variance was denied 4 – 0. Chair Moore opened Item number 2. 2. Consideration and possible action on the Minutes of the regular Board of Adjustment meeting of the November 21, 2006 meeting. Motion by Ross to approve the Minutes as posted. Second by Watson. Approved 4 – 0. 4. Comments from Staff. No comments. 5. Comments from Board Members. No comments. Meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 6:57 p.m. __________________________________ _______________________________ Approved, Will Moore, Chair Attest, Earl Watson, Secretary Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes, December 19, 2006 Page 4 of 5 Board of Adjustment Motion for item #3 on Dec. 19, 2006 Agenda Watson: Mr. Moore if the decision is that we are going to make is that if we approve the variance that they would never be required to have a sidewalk in front of his church, I would not be in favor of that. I make a motion that the variance be denied. Moore: All right, we have a motion that the variance is denied, do we have a second? Lampenstein: I’ll second it. And I have a quick question on that. Is it, and I know he already made it, there’s no way to change it where the variance is just to not build it at this time but to build it at a later time? Moore: No, that’s not within our . . . . . . (purvue?) Lampenstein: OK, that was my question. Moore: So we have a motion, Any other comments? We have a motion to deny the variance we have a second. I’ll call for a vote. all those in favor of denial of the variance request, raise your right hand and say aye. Watson: aye Moore: Two and two. All those in opposed to denying the variance raise your right hand and say I. Opposed to denying the variance. Lampenstein: Uh,eh, yeah it’s. . . . Moore: You have to think about it. OK. Lampenstein: Right. Now if we deny it, the question is if the city, we deny it that means its done you can’t even go back and say if you put up a letter of credit you can build it later on, is that my understanding? Ray: If you deny the variance? Lampenstein: Right, is there any way that if they are willing to put up a letter of credit Moore: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, we have a point here that I want to stop. We’ve taken a vote but if we want to backup on that vote you need to say so. Is that what you want to do? Lampenstein: I would just like to for clarification if there’s any way that a letter . . . . . . is that OK? Moore: (at same time) . . . . We are going to revote so just take that off and let me clarify. Go ahead Lampenstein: You understand what I’m saying, is there any way that the city would consider a letter of a credit to do and you’ll have to and I’m saying you’ll have to work it out with the city when the sidewalk gets put in at that point that they feel it’s a need. How would we have to vote in order to do that, that’s what I’m trying . . Laughs. Because of this, you know is there a way to do this? Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes, December 19, 2006 Page 5 of 5 Ray: Bottom line, if you approve the variance that question is off the table. OK. Lampenstein: OK, But if we . . . . Ray: If you deny the variance then we can work with Mr. Holland on a letter of credit and a time frame that we can both agree to. Lampenstein: Oh, OK, I thought it was . . . OK, I’d like to revote then. Ray: He can do that now, on the other hand he can withdraw the application and we can work with him on a letter of credit and the time frame as well. Holland: (from audience not amplified) Bottom line is if you turn it down, they get to negotiate with me, if you approve it I get the opportunity to negotiate with them,. Moore: That’s right but that’s outside what we are trying to decide. I understand what you are saying. Holland: ___________ Moore: I understand. Well, it could be, if you . . . I don’t want to get into it. That really complicates the issue. We have a motion to deny and we have a second to the motion to deny. I will call for another vote. All those in favor of denying the request for the variance say I and raise your right hand. Watson: aye Lampenstein: to deny? Moore: To deny the variance? Lampenstein: Right, aye Ross: I Moore: We have four. What we’ve done is denied your application for the variance. I don’t know why this got so complicated. It really is ________. Uh. So you’re still obligated to, to comply with the UDC rules and build the sidewalk. The time when you build that sidewalk or uh, any other issues about the sidewalk, the width the length, or anything like that that you want to negotiate with staff, staff is open to do that. What we have said is that sooner or later, someday you are gonna have to build the sidewalk. Is everybody clear on that? Lampenstein: We tried. Moore: Thank you very much.