Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_ZBA_12.04.2018Notice of Meeting for the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Georgetown December 4, 2018 at 5:00 PM at Council and Courts Building, located at 101 E 7th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Legislative Regular Agenda A Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 15, 2018. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary B Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a 10-foot variance from the 15-foot minimum side setback requirement of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 7.02.020 to allow a 5-foot side setback on the property located at: A) 910 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey); and B) 930 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey) (VAR-2018-003). Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Shelley Nowling, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2018, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. ____________________________________ Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Page 1 of 33 City of Georgetown, Texas Zoning Board of Adjustment December 4, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 15, 2018. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: . SUBMITTED BY: Karen Frost, Recording Secretary ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Minutes_ZBA_05.15.2018 Backup Material Page 2 of 33 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 1 of 2 May 15, 2018 City of Georgetown, Texas Zoning Board of Adjustment Tuesday, May 15, 2018, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. Council and Courts Building located at 101 E. 7th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Commissioners present: Josh Schroeder, Chair; Travis Perthuis (serving for Fuller); John Marler; Kaylah McCord; Kevin Pitts and Ed Whitmore. Commissioner(s) Absent: Alex Fuller; Staff Present: Charlie McNabb, City Attorney; Andreina Davila, Current Planning Manager; Nathan Jones, Planner; Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager; Susan Watkins, Housing Coordinator; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary. Regular Session A. (This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.) Chair Schroeder opened the meeting at 5:00 and immediately called an Executive Session with the City Attorney. • Call to Order • Pledge of Allegiance – Pitts led the Pledge. • Comments from the Chair • Welcome and Meeting Procedures • Action from Executive Session B. Consideration and possible approval of the minutes of the April 17, 2018 meeting. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Motion by Pitts, second by McCord to approve the minutes as submitted. Approved 5 – 0. C. Public Hearing and possible action on a 12-inch variance from the 12-inch minimum roof eave requirement of Section 6.02.100 of the Unified Development Code, to allow manufactured homes with no roof eaves projecting from the wall, on the property located at 2001 FM 971 bearing the legal description of Lot 1, Block A, Pecan Branch Phase II Subdivision (VAR-2018- 002). Robyn Miga, Planner Nathan Jones presented the staff report. See the presentation. When making a motion, the Board must make a finding of the criteria. ____ with Sun Communities gave a presentation and asked for homes with different elevations and without the 12” eave. He gave alternate ideas to enhance the manufactured aesthetic. He is hoping to change the impact of those homes on adjacent neighborhoods. They have placed homes on lots already that do not have eaves and states that they cannot find manufactured homes without eaves to purchase. Public health and safety are not impacted by not having eaves or by manufactured homes. Pecan Branch Phase One do not have the eaves. They were installed prior to the code requirements. They are not asking for no eaves, just reduced eaves. Marler asked for the cost prohibition for this additional eave. Applicant states that it will cost approximately $8000 more per home. Dave Bushy with Champion Homes explains that TxDot Page 3 of 33 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 2 of 2 May 15, 2018 will require an additional car for each delivery which will add cost. The drafting and engineering of these, additional material, will add about $812. The plan that will accommodate the eaves will be a high end product which will add additional cost. He says it will make these homes not marketable. Marler asked for prices of these homes. ____ says this will be about $90,000. There were discussion about other possible solutions for the applicant. Jones explained variance options, administrative approvals, PUD rezonings and Council approved UDC revisions. Public Hearing Motion by Pitts to deny the variance being that the application does not comply with all 7 criteria. Marler second. Approved 5 – 0. Adjournment Motion to adjourn by Marler, second by Pitts at 5: 51 p.m. ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Josh Schroeder, Chair Attest, Kaylah McCord, Secretary Page 4 of 33 City of Georgetown, Texas Zoning Board of Adjustment December 4, 2018 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a 10-foot variance from the 15-foot minimum side setback requirement of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 7.02.020 to allow a 5-foot side setback on the property located at: A) 910 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey); and B) 930 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey) (VAR-2018-003). Chelsea Irby, Senior P lanner ITEM SUMMARY: Overview of the Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting a variance to the side setback requirements when adjacent to a residential zoning district of the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district. The subject properties are on either side of 920 W. University, an existing electrical sub-station that is zoned Residential Single-Family (RS). The C-1 zoning district requires a 15’ side setback when adjacent to a RS zoned property. The applicant is requesting a 10’ variance to this requirement, which would reduce the minimum required side setback to 5’. In the applicant’s letter of intent (Exhibit 3) the applicant lists the following reasons for approval of the variance: Due to topography, there is limited area of construction for a retail store of a viable size. A 5’ side setback is present in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) and Public Facilities (PF) zoning district. The variance will not have an adverse impact and would not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or the purpose of the UDC. The reduction in side setback would help to shield the view of the power station from the road and nearby properties. Staff's Analysis: Staff has reviewed the Zoning Variance request in accordance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) and other applicable codes. Staff has determined that the proposed request does not meet 6 of the 7 required findings established in UDC Section 3.15.030.A for a Zoning Variance as outlined below and in the attached Staff Report. Public Comments: As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200 foot radius of the subject property that are located within City limits were notified of the rezoning application (10 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper on Sunday, November 18, 2018 and signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received zero (0) public comments. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The applicant has paid the required application fees. SUBMITTED BY: Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner Page 5 of 33 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type VAR-2018-003 Staff Report Cover Memo Exhibit 1 - Location Map Exhibit Exhibit 2 - Conceptual Plan Exhibit Exhibit 3 - Topography Map Exhibit Exhibit 4 - Letter of Intent Exhibit VAR-2018-003 - ZBA Presentation Presentation Page 6 of 33 Zoning Board of Adjustment Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-003 Wolf Crossing Buildings B & D - Variance Page 1 of 7 Report Date: November 30, 2018 Case No: VAR-2018-003 Project Planner: Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner Item Details Project Name: Wolf Crossing, Buildings B and D Project Address: 910 & 930 W University Ave, within City Council district No. 1. Legal Description: Stubblefield, C. Sur. and STUBBLEFIELD, C. SUR., ACRES 37.21 Applicant: NoackLittle c/o Jennifer Tullis Property Owner: CSW Development c/o Kevin Hunter Request: The applicant is requesting a variance to the setback requirements of the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district. Specifically, a 10-foot setback variance from the 15-foot minimum side setback requirement when adjacent to a residential zoning district, to allow a 5-foot side setback. Case History: This is the first public hearing of this request. Location Map Page 7 of 33 Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-003 Wolf Crossing Buildings B & D - Variance Page 2 of 7 Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant is requesting a variance to the side setback requirements when adjacent to a residential zoning district of the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district. The subject properties are on either side of 920 W. University, an existing electrical sub-station that is zoned Residential Single-Family (RS). The C-1 zoning district requires a 15’ side setback when adjacent to a RS zoned property. The applicant is requesting a 10’ variance to this requirement, which would reduce the minimum required side setback to 5’. In the applicant’s letter of intent (Exhibit 3) the applicant lists the following reasons for approval of the variance:  Due to topography, there is limited area of construction for a retail store of a viable size.  A 5’ side setback is present in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) and Public Facilities (PF) zoning district.  The variance will not have an adverse impact and would not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or the purpose of the UDC.  The reduction in side setback would help to shield the view of the power station from the road and nearby properties. Site Information Location: This property is located at the southeast intersection of IH-35 and W. University Avenue. Both properties are a part of the Wolf Crossing development, which is under construction. This property has an approved Site Development Plan (SDP-2018-010) for an approximate 200,000-square foot commercial development, which include the placement of buildings B & D to the east and west of the electrical sub-station and subject to this variance request. Future Land Use and Zoning Designations: The subject property has a Regional Commercial Future Land Use designation and is currently zoned Local Commercial (C-1), General Commercial (C-3) and Downtown and Highway Gateway overlay districts. The buildings subject to this variance request are located within the C-1 zoning district. Surrounding Properties: The current zoning, Future Land Use designation, and existing uses of the adjacent properties to the north, south, east and west are outlined in the table below: Page 8 of 33 Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-003 Wolf Crossing Buildings B & D - Variance Page 3 of 7 LOCATION ZONING DISTRICTS FUTURE LAND USE EXISTING USE North Local Commercial (C-1) and Residential Single-Family (RS) – across University Ave. Regional Commercial HEB and Residential South General Commercial (C-3) Regional Commercial Wolf Crossing, San Gabriel River East RS Regional Commercial San Gabriel River West C-3 – across IH-35 Regional Commercial Wolf Ranch Aerial Map Approval Criteria The applicant is requesting a 10’ variance to the required 15’ setback from a residential zoning district. The standard side setback for the C-1 zoning district 10’. When the C-1 district is adjacent to a residential district, the side setback increases to 15’. This 10’ variance would reduce the setback to 5’, which is lower that than the standard 10’ side setback. The following are the pertinent sections of the Unified Development Code (UDC) related to this request:  Section 7.02.020 – Non-Residential Lot and Dimensional Standards Staff has reviewed the variance request and the applicant’s stated findings, and has evaluated the Page 9 of 33 Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-003 Wolf Crossing Buildings B & D - Variance Page 4 of 7 request based on the UDC required findings for a variance in accordance with UDC Section 3.15.030, which stated: Required Findings The Zoning Board of Adjustment may authorize a variance from the requirements of the zoning provisions of the UDC if the variance from the terms of the zoning provisions is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the requirements would result in unnecessary hardship, so the spirit of this Code is preserved, and substantial justice done. No variance shall be granted unless the ZBA finds all of the required findings established in UDC Section 3.15.030.A. Staff has reviewed the zoning variance request in accordance with the UDC and other applicable codes. Staff has determined that the proposed request does not meet 6 of the 7 required findings established in UDC Section 3.15.030.A for a zoning variance as outlined below. APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENT Extraordinary Conditions - That there are extraordinary or special conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of this Unified Development Code will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their land. For example, a zoning variance might be justified because of topographic or other special conditions unique to the property and development involved, while it would not be justified due to inconvenience or financial disadvantage. Does not comply The properties subject to this request are located along University Avenue, and are bounded by IH-35 to the north and the South Fork of the San Gabriel River to the south. The subject properties are on the east and west side of an electrical sub-station, which is currently zoned Residential Single- Family (RS). Because of this, new structures on the subject properties must be set back an additional 5’ from the standard side setback requirement; in this case, 15’. A Site Development Plan application was approved for the subject property, which identifies all landscape, hardscape, and placement of all buildings in accordance with the UDC, to be constructed in Phases. Phase 1 includes all landscape and hardscape improvements, including parking, drive aisles, and pad ready “sites” for the new buildings. The subject property is generally flat and is currently undergoing grading work in accordance with the approved Page 10 of 33 Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-003 Wolf Crossing Buildings B & D - Variance Page 5 of 7 APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENT site development plan. While there appears to be some unique topographic characteristics to the eastern portion of the property, it does not appear the application of the UDC’s 15’ (or 10’ had the adjacent property be zoned differently) minimum setback will deprive the applicant from the reasonable use of their land. Other Property - That the conditions that create the need for the zoning variance do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity. Does not comply There is not a condition present that creates a need for the variance. The applicant has cited the topography of the subject property to be a constraint that creates the need for the variance request. However, this characteristic is generally representative of most properties along the San Gabriel river corridor. Applicant's Actions - That the conditions that create the need for the Zoning Variance are not the result of the applicant's own actions. Does not comply The applicant’s actions have created the need for this variance request as there are no existing conditions that result in the need of the requested 10’ side setback variance to allow the placement of buildings 5’ from the side property lines. The buildings subject to this variance request may be placed 15’, or at a minimum 10’ from the side property lines consistent with the minimum side setback required in the C-1 zoning district. Comprehensive Plan - That the granting of the zoning variance would not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this Code. Complies The approval of the variance would not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, as the setbacks would not change the current future land use designation or the intent of the land use. Utilization - That because of the conditions that create the need for the zoning variance, the Does not comply The applicability of the required minimum side setback would not prohibit or unreasonably restrict the Page 11 of 33 Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-003 Wolf Crossing Buildings B & D - Variance Page 6 of 7 APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENT application of this Code to the particular piece of property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. utilization of the subject property. The property has an approved Site Development Plan for a large-scale non-residential development consisting of approximately 200,000 square feet. The requested variance is for two of the proposed buildings, which may be accommodated in compliance with the minimums setback requirements. Insufficient Findings - The following types of possible findings do not constitute sufficient grounds for granting a zoning variance: a. That the property cannot be used for its highest and best use. b. That there is a financial or economic hardship. c. That there is a self-created hardship by the property owner or their agent. d. That the development objectives of the property owner are or will be frustrated. Does not comply The requested variance appears to be a preference and is not necessary for the development of the subject property. The applicant’s request does not meet the all criteria outlined in the UDC required to grant the requested variance. However, the presence of an electrical sub-station on a residential zoned property creates a unique situation. A 5’ reduction in side setback is a reasonable request that would accommodate the unique situation created by the sub-station. This would allow for a 10’ side setback, which is the standard side setback for the C-1 zoning district. Public Comments As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200 foot radius of the subject property that are located within City limits were notified of the rezoning application (10 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper on Sunday, November 18, 2018 and signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received zero (0) public comments. Page 12 of 33 Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-003 Wolf Crossing Buildings B & D - Variance Page 7 of 7 Attachment(s) Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Conceptual Plan Attachment 3 – Topography Map Attachment 4 – Applicant’s Letter of Intent Page 13 of 33 M A P L E S T L E A N D E R R D FM 1460 W UNIVERSITY AVE S MAIN ST S AUSTIN AVE §¨¦35 VAR-2018-003Exhibit #1 Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 0.25 0.5Miles Page 14 of 33 B F E = 7 1 8 ' BF E = 7 1 7 ' B F E = 7 1 6 . 5 APPROXIMATE EDGE OF FILL APPROXIMATE EDGE OF BLUFF BFE=716 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X OE OE OE OE X X X X OE OE OE OE OE OE TP&L ESMT. VOL. 419, PG. 482 OE STATE HIGHWAY 29 (R.O.W. VARIES) 2 0 . 0 0 ' GEORGETOWN UTILITY ESMT. HEREBYDEDICATED L.C.R.A. 100.00' E L E C . E S M T VOL. 337, PG. 563 D . R . W . C . T . CITY OF G E O R G E T O W N 20.00' ELEC. ESMT VOL. 722, PG. 35 D.R.W.C.T. C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N 2 0 ' P . U . E . V O L . 2 4 5 3 , P G . 6 2 2 O . R . W . C . T . 1 5 . 0 0 ' P . U . E . PER PLAT APPROX. 100 YR FLOODZONE AE PER FIRMPANEL 48491C0290E H-5855 H-6696 H-6740 H-6749 H-6787 H-6982 H-6981 H-6799 H-6975 H-6970 H-6971 H-5594 H-5593 OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE H-1710 H-1713 H-1724 H-1731 H-1746 H-1747 H-1753 H-1760 H-1762 H-1761 H-1766 H-1767 H-1776 H-1782 H-1781 H-1780 H- 1 7 1 5 H-1701 H-1718 H- 1 7 1 9 H-1720 H-1723 H-1754 WATER Q U A L I T Y BUFFE R 1 0 . 0 0 ' P . U . E . HEREBYDEDICATED 20.00' INGRESS/EGRESS ESMT. D O C # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ O O X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GAS GAS OE W W O X X X X X X XXXXXX XX X XXX \\ X X X X X X X X X X X OE X X X X X X XOEOT O O O O X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX CL E M E N T S T U B B L E F I E L D S U R V E Y AB S T R A C T N O . 5 5 8 W. UNIVERSITY AVENUE (S.H. 29) JAMES DAVID WOLF APPROXIMATE 36.25 ACRES DOC. NO. 2009089202 FH FH FH FH WW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W. UNIVERSITY AVENUE (S.H. 29) THIS DOCUMENT IS RELEASED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERIM REVIEW UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF ANTONIO A. PRETE, P.E. # 93759 ON 23-Mar-18 IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR PERMITTING, BIDDING, OR CONSTRUCTION. [TEXAS STATE BOARD OF REGISTRATION FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, RULE 131.166(I)] DA T E No . RE V I S I O N S RE C O M ' D SHEET TITLE: SHEET NO.: WSC WSC DRAWN: DESIGNED:AAPAPPROVED: 2/16/2018DATE: Waeltz & Prete, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERS 3000 Joe DiMaggio Blvd. #72 Round Rock, TX. 78665 PH (512) 505-8953 FIRM TX. REG. #F-10308 PROJECT: WOLF CROSSING CLIENT: CSW DEVELOPMENT WP PROJECT NO.: 073-006 COGT PROJECT NO.: SCP-2018-XXX 0 HORIZONTAL SCALE 40 16080 EXISTING CONDITIONS & DEMOLITION PLAN (1 OF 2) 7 of 95 MATCHLINE - REF. SHEET 8 FOR CONTINUATION EXISTING BARN TO BE REMOVED EXISTING PAVEMENT TO BE REMOVED EXISTING CONCRETE TO BE REMOVED SUSPECTED EXISTING SEPTIC TANK TO BE REMOVED EXISTING FENCES TO BE REMOVED EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC TO BE REMOVED. COORDINATE WITH FRANCHISE UTILITY PROVIDERS EXISTING PAVEMENT TO BE REMOVED EXISTING HOUSE & ACCESSORY BLDGS TO BE REMOVED EXISTING FENCE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC TO BE REMOVED. COORDINATE WITH FRANCHISE UTLITY PROVIDERS EXISTING DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED NOTES: 1.BEARING BASIS: NAD-83, TEXAS CENTRAL ZONE (4203), STATE PLANE SYSTEM. 2.COORDINATES FOR THIS FILE ARE SURFACE COORDINATES BASED ON A COMBINED SURFACE ADJUSTMENT FACTOR OF 0.99986979. 3.PROJECT BENCHMARK HELD: BM #1: LCRA CONTROL POINT: MG3A - LCRA BRASS DISC IN CONCRETE AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF LCRA GEORGETOWN SUBSTATION. ELEVATION=736.0346 PER DATA SHEET PRINTED FROM LCRA WEBSITE "LCRA. HARN.ORG" (NAVD88) GEOID 2012A 4.BENCHMARK CHECK: CITY OF GEORGETOWN MONUMENT GT04: CONCRETE MONUMENT SET FLUSH WITH THE GROUND WITH A TXDOT BRASS CAP. PUBLISHED ELEVATION=736.4680' (DSI ELEVATION CHECK:736.72') 5.SURVEY WAS PROVIDED BY DIAMOND SURVEY (WOLF CROSSING) & JONES & CARTER (910 UNIVERSITY). ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF THIS SURVEY REMAINS WITH THE SURVEYOR WHO PREPARED IT. IN USING THIS SURVEY, THE ENGINEER MUST RELY UPON THE ACCURACY OF THE WORK PROVIDED BY THE SURVEYOR. 6.CONTRACTOR'S SURVEYOR SHALL LEVEL AND TRAVERSE THROUGH THE BENCHMARKS AND TRAVERSE POINTS NOTED ON THIS PLAN TO VERIFY VERTICAL/ HORIZONTAL DATUM. 7.THIS DEMOLITION PLAN IS A SCHEMATIC AND INDICATES THE GENERAL SCOPE OF THE DEMOLITION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET THE OWNER AND ENGINEER ON SITE TO VERIFY THE EXTENT OF THE DEMOLITION REQUIRED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE PRECAUTIONS NOT TO DAMAGE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION THAT IS TO REMAIN. FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES WHICH MAY BE OCCASIONED BY THE CONTRACTOR, THOSE ITEMS SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED TO LIKE-NEW CONDITIONS. 8.REFERENCE SHEET 4 FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND MASTER LEGEND. BENCHMARK & HORIZONTAL CONTROL LIST: BM #1: PROJECT BENCHMARK HELD: LCRA CONTROL POINT: MG3A - LCRA BRASS DISC IN CONCRETE AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF LCRA GEORGETOWN SUBSTATION. SOUTH SIDE OF SH 29. ELEVATION=736.0346 PER DATA SHEET PRINTED FROM LCRA WEBSITE "LCRA. HARN.ORG" (NAVD88) GEOID 2012A BM#1 (CONTROL POINT #1000) SURFACE COORDINATES: N:10205177.56 E:3129243.16 ELEV.: 736.03' ______________________ BM#2: PK NAIL SET IN CONCRETE NEAR SOUTH END OF SIDEWALK AT SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF NORTH BOUND FRONTAGE ROAD OF IH-35 AND SH 29 BM#2 (CONTROL POINT #5710) SURFACE COORDINATES: N:10205097.65 E:3128099.15 ELEV.= 774.34' ______________________ BM#3: PK NAIL SET IN CONCRETE CURB INLET ALONG EAST SIDE OF NORTH BOUND FRONTAGE ROAD OF IH-35, APPROXIMATELY 1,200 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BRIDGE OVER SOUTH SAN GABRIEL RIVER. BM# 3 (CONTROL POINT #5507) SURFACE COORDINATES: N:10204255.22 E:3127927.63 ELEV.: 769.89' ________________________ BM#4 PK NAIL SET IN CONCRETE CURB INLET ALONG EAST SIDE OF NORTH BOUND FRONTAGE ROAD OF IH-35, APPROXIMATELY 265' FEET NORTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BRIDGE OVER SOUTH SAN GABRIEL RIVER. BM#4 (CONTROL POINT #5000) SURFACE COORDINATES: N:10203318.92 E:3127996.90 ELEV.= 752.24' BM #1 & CP #1000 BM #2 & CP #5710 BM #3 & CP #5507 CP #6202 PK NAIL SET IN CONCRETE SIDEWALK SURFACE COORDINATES: N: 10205176.12 E: 3128935.08 ELEV: 741.48' APPROX. SOUTH SAN GABRIEL RIVER FLOWLINE K: \ C A D \ 0 7 3 - 0 0 6 W o l f C r o s s i n g \ 3 - C A D \ P L A N S \ 0 7 3 - 0 0 6 E X - C N D . d w g , E X 1 O F 2 , 3 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 8 1 1 : 4 8 : 1 9 A M , 1 : 1 , W - P , I n c . , J L Existing 15' Setback Requested 5' Setback Existing 15' Setback Requested 5' Setback WOLF CROSSING SUBDIVISION LOT 1, BLOCK 'A' (36.24 AC.) AW0558 STUBBLEFIELD, C. SUR., ACRES (6.079 AC) Page 15 of 33 VAR-2018-003 - Topography Map Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, City of Georgetown ETJ Georgetown City Limits-Zoomed In Streets Not Active OPEN Parcels 11/28/2018, 10:23:02 AM 0 0.04 0.090.02 mi 0 0.07 0.150.04 km 1:2,257 Georgetown PlanningCounty of Williamson, Texas Parks & Wildlife, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, USGS, EPA, USDA | City of Georgetown | Page 16 of 33 Date: 11/07/2018 To: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, City of Georgetown Copy: Kevin Hunter, CSW Wolf, LP From: Jennifer Tullis, NoackLittle Architecture and Interiors Project: Wolf Crossing, 910 and 930 West University Ave. Re: Variance Request – Wolf Crossing I am requesting a variance to change the setback between the properties listed above and the intervening property at 920 West University Ave from 15’ to 5’. The intervening property is zoned RS, but its actual use is as an LCRA electrical substation. The portions of the subject properties adjacent to the substation are zoned C-1, which is required to have a 15’ side setback next to a residential district. Building B is located at 910 West University Ave and is being designed as a retail store. Building D is located at 930 West University Ave and is planned as a nationally recognized grocery store. In both cases, the building sites are restricted by the location of Hwy 29 driveways mandated by TxDOT. Due to the topography of 910 West University, all development needs to stay toward the west and be as far from the river as possible; the steep slopes of the river valley are unsuitable for construction and ought to be preserved as undeveloped riparian habitat. Between the driveway/access road and the substation, the space available for a retail store of a viable size is limited. The building needs to be wide enough for the display of merchandise inside the store with a generous pedestrian zone to the east. The design team is planning for deep covered canopy over the sidewalk, which will enhance the building’s appearance and provide a dry and shady area for customers to occupy. Building D, the prospective grocery store, has a required standard footprint that optimizes operating efficiency and constructability. This necessitates that the loading area be between the store and the substation, dictating a minimum width. As with Building B, a generous pedestrian zone in front of the grocery store is a high priority. There is already a precedent for 5’ side setbacks in the zoning code. It is the standard side setback for lots zoned CN and PF. Approval Criteria: 1. This variance will not create any adverse impacts to the City or other properties regarding health and safety. 2. This variance would not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or the purposes of the Code. 3. The unique conditions that create the need for this variance apply only to these two building sites; no other lots are affected. The conditions that create the need for this variance are dictated by natural features of the land combined with preexisting road alignments that are required to be preserved. 4. These conditions unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property for the uses allowed by C-1 zoning. This part of Georgetown, close to downtown and adjacent to the intersection of two major roadways, is a beautiful area, but the LCRA substation detracts from this beauty. Allowing us to minimize the setback will help shield the view of the power station from the road and nearby properties. Page 17 of 33 1 910 & 930 W. University Ave. VAR-2018-003 Zoning Board of Adjustments December 4, 2018 Page 18 of 33 •Variance Request –VAR-2018-003: A request for a 10-foot variance from the 15-foot minimum side setback requirement of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 7.02.020 to allow a 5-foot side setback on the property located at: −A) 910 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey) −B) 930 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey) Item Under Consideration Page 19 of 33 Location Map 3Page 20 of 33 Aerial Page 21 of 33 Existing Conditions LCRA Electrical Substation –Zoned Residential Single-Family (RS) Page 22 of 33 Concept Plan Page 23 of 33 •In accordance with the provisions of the Texas Local Government Code chs. 211 and 231, the Zoning Board of Adjustment (Board) shall have the authority to hear and grant requests for a Variance from the zoning provisions of this Unified Development Code. •A Variance to the development standards of this Code shall be considered an exception to the regulations, rather than a right. Zoning Variance Page 24 of 33 •The Zoning Board of Adjustment may authorize a Zoning Variance from the requirements of the zoning provisions of this Unified Development Code if the Variance from the terms of the zoning provisions is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the requirements would result in unnecessary hardship, so the spirit of this Code is preserved, and substantial justice done. Zoning Variance Page 25 of 33 UDC Section 3.15.010: No Zoning Variance shall be granted unless the ZBA finds all of the following criteria are met: 1.Extraordinary Conditions. That there are extraordinary or special conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of this Unified Development Code will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their land. For example, a Zoning Variance might be justified because of topographic or other special conditions unique to the property and development involved, while it would not be justified due to inconvenience or financial disadvantage. Approval Criteria Page 26 of 33 2. No Substantial Detriment. That there are extraordinary or special conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of this Unified Development Code will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their land. For example, a Zoning Variance might be justified because of topographic or other special conditions unique to the property and development involved, while it would not be justified due to inconvenience or financial disadvantage. Approval Criteria Page 27 of 33 3.Other Property. That the conditions that create the need for the Zoning Variance do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity. 4.Applicant's Actions. That the conditions that create the need for the Zoning Variance are not the result of the applicant's own actions. 5.Comprehensive Plan. That the granting of the Zoning Variance would not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this Code. Approval Criteria Page 28 of 33 6. Utilization. That because of the conditions that create the need for the Zoning Variance, the application of this Code to the particular piece of property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. Approval Criteria Page 29 of 33 7. Insufficient Findings. The following types of possible findings do not constitute sufficient grounds for granting a Zoning Variance: a)That the property cannot be used for its highest and best use. b)That there is a financial or economic hardship. c)That there is a self-created hardship by the property owner or their agent. d)That the development objectives of the property owner are or will be frustrated. Approval Criteria Page 30 of 33 Staff Analysis: Criteria For Variance Complies Does not Comply Partially Complies 1. Extraordinary Conditions X 2. No Substantial Detriment X 3. Other Property X 4. Applicant's Actions X 5. Comprehensive Plan X 6. Utilization X 7. Insufficient Findings X Page 31 of 33 Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a 10-foot variance from the 15-foot minimum side setback requirement of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 7.02.020 to allow a 5-foot side setback on the property located at: −A) 910 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey) −B) 930 W University Avenue (C. Stubblefield survey) A supermajority vote is required to grant variance. When making a motion, the Board must make a finding of the criteria. Summary Page 32 of 33 Public Notifications Page 33 of 33