Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_ZBA_04.17.2018Notice of Meeting for the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Georgetown April 17, 2018 at 5:00 PM at Council Chambers, 101 East 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. Regular Session (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.) A Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Comments from the Chair - Welcome and Meeting Procedures Action from Executive Session Legislative Regular Agenda B Consideration and possible approval of the minutes of the February 20, 2018 meeting. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary C Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a 4-foot variance from the 6-foot minimum side setback requirement of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6.02.050 to allow a 2-foot side setback on the property located at 1411 Hutto Road bearing the legal description of 0.433 acres out of Block 14, Outlot Division B. 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 28 Page 2 of 28 City of Georgetown, Texas Zoning Board of Adjustment April 17, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible approval of the minutes of the February 20, 2018 meeting. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: . SUBMITTED BY: Karen Frost, Recording Secretary ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Minutes_ZBA_02.20.2018 Backup Material Page 3 of 28 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 1 of 2 February 20, 2018 City of Georgetown, Texas Zoning Board of Adjustment Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. Council and Courts Building located at 101 E. 7th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Commissioners present: Josh Schroeder, Chair; Alex Fuller; John Marler; Kaylah McCord; and Kevin Pitts. Commissioner(s) Absent: Travis Perthuis and Aaron Albright Staff Present: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; Andreina Davila, Current Planning Manager; Madison Thomas, Historic and Downtown Planner; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary. A. Public Wishing to Address the Board • As of the deadline for this agenda, no persons were signed up to speak on items other than what was posted on the agenda. Legislative Regular Agenda B. Call to Order • Pledge of Allegiance • Comments from the Chair – Welcome and Meeting Procedures • Action from Executive Session Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with the pledge of allegiance being led by Fuller. Chair Schroeder stated the order of the meeting and that those who speak must turn in a speaker form to the recording secretary before the item that they wish to address begins. Each speaker is permitted to address the Commission once for each item, for a maximum of three (3) minutes, unless otherwise agreed to before the meeting begins. C. Consideration and possible approval of the minutes of the August 15, 2017 meeting. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Motion by Marler, second by Fuller to approve the minutes. Approved 5 – 0. D. Public Hearing and possible action on a Special Exception per Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 14.04.080, Expansion of a Nonconforming Structure, to allow the existing structure to expand by approximately 66% for a total gross floor area of 2,423 square feet on the property located at 1812 Eubank St bearing the legal description of Lot 6, Block 4, Eubank Addition (SE-2017- 002). Madison Thomas, AICP, Downtown and Historic Planner Thomas presented the staff report. The applicant is requesting a Special Exception per Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 14.04.080, Expansion of a Nonconforming Structure, to allow the existing structure to expand by approximately 66% for a total gross floor area of 2,423 square feet on the property located at 1812 Eubank St. The current home, built in 1947, was constructed approximately seven inches from the property line. Current development standards in the RS district require new structures to meet a Page 4 of 28 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 2 of 2 February 20, 2018 six foot setback from the property line. Due to the existing structure’s nonconforming status, the Unified Development Code requires the applicant to seek approval form the Zoning Board of Adjustment to expand the structure more than 50% of its original size. The main structure was listed as 1,340 square feet in Williamson County Appraisal District, but after further information and review, staff has determined that the main structure is approximately 1,456 square feet. The meeting was posted as an expansion of 81% however, ZBA will be evaluating an increase of 66%, or, a total gross floor area is 2,423 square feet. Staff finds that the application is complete, granting the request upholds the spirit of the UDC, provides for substantial justice to be done, and is not contrary to the public interest. Marler asked if this is changing the nature of the building. No, it will meet the UDC zoning standards. HARC will determine the porch location and modification and whether it meets the character of the neighborhood. Chair Schroeder opened the public hearing. Elaine Sebold, 1810 Eubank, stated that the plats in that neighborhood are challenging because the houses are not aligned with the lot lines. She thinks this modification to this house will be an improvement to the neighborhood. With no other speakers coming forth, Chair Schroeder closed the public hearing. Motion by Fuller, second by Marler to approve the Special Exception with the findings that staff outlined, and with the condition that HARC also approves the porch. Approved 5 – 0. E. E POSTPONED. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a 2-foot variance from the 6- foot minimum side setback requirement of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6.02.050 to allow a 4- foot side setback on the property located at 1411 Hutto Road bearing the legal description of 0.433 acres out of Block 14, Outlot Division B (VAR-2018-001). Nathan Jones, Planner. This item has been postponed by request of the applicant and will not be considered on this agenda. Adjournment Motion to adjourn by Marler, second by Fuller at 5:18 p.m. ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Josh Schroeder, Chair Attest, Secretary Page 5 of 28 City of Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-001 1411 Hutto Rd - Variance Page 1 of 6 Report Date: April 13, 2018 Case No: VAR-2018-001 Project Planner: Nathan Jones, Planner Item Details Project Address: 1411 Hutto Rd Legal Description: 0.433 acres out of Block 14, Outlot Division B Zoning: Residential Single-Family (RS) Future Land Use: Moderate Density Residential Applicant: Mary Jo Doggett Property Owner: Mary Jo Doggett Item Description Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a 4-foot variance from the 6-foot minimum side setback requirement of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6.02.050 to allow a 2-foot side setback on the property located at 1411 Hutto Road bearing the legal description of 0.433 acres out of Block 14, Outlot Division B. Location Map Page 6 of 28 City of Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-001 1411 Hutto Rd - Variance Page 2 of 6 Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant is requesting approval for a side setback Variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) to reduce the required 6-foot side setback per Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6.02.050 A – Lot & Dimensional Standards for Residential Single-Family District. The applicant is seeking a reduction of the required 6-foot side setback to allow a 2-foot side setback along the northern property line. The reduction of the setback would allow the applicant to construct a carport in front of the garage that is currently within the required side setback. Site Information The subject property is located within a residential single-family neighborhood. Although it is not within the Old Town Overlay district, many homes in the neighborhood (including the subject property) were built before the establishment of zoning regulations and the adoption of the Unified Development Code. As such, many primary and accessory structures throughout the neighborhood have some type of non-conforming situation. In the case of the subject property, both the existing residence and garage were built in 1955 While the primary residence is located outside of the required setbacks, the garage was built two (2) feet from the north side property line. Since it was constructed before the approval of the zoning regulations it is considered a legal non-conforming structure. Any expansion of the garage within the setback would typically require the approval by the ZBA of a Special Exception, or a variance to eliminate the non-conformity. However, the applicant is proposing to construct a detached additional structure, a covered carport, immediately in front of the garage. A Zoning Variance is therefore required to reduce the minimum required setback and allow the construction of additional structures where proposed. Surrounding Properties: Location Zoning Districts Future Land Use Existing Use North Residential Single-Family (RS) Moderate Density Residential Single-Family Residences South Residential Single-Family (RS) Moderate Density Residential Single-Family Residences East High-Density Multi-family (MF-2) Moderate Density Residential Multi-Family Residence West Residential Single-Family (RS) Moderate Density Residential Single-Family Residences Review Criteria/Staff Analysis The Unified Development Code (UDC) identifies the RS district as being intended for areas of medium density with a minimum lot size of 5,500 square feet. The RS district contains standards Page 7 of 28 City of Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-001 1411 Hutto Rd - Variance Page 3 of 6 for development that maintain single-family neighborhood characteristics. The district may be located within proximity of neighborhood-friendly commercial and public services and protected from incompatible uses. All housing types in the RS district shall use the lot, dimensional and design standards of the district. These development standards include building setbacks. The minimum side setback per the RS district is six (6) feet. The intent of this requirement is to prevent the clustering of residential structures along the property line and allow at least twelve (12) feet of separation between structures. The requirement also has the effect of producing conformity throughout a neighborhood by situating the buildable area near the center of each lot. The following are the pertinent sections of the UDC related to this request: Section 6.02.050.A. Lot & Dimensional Standards for Residential Single-Family District, minimum six (6) feet side setback. Staff has reviewed the Variance request and the applicant’s stated findings, and has evaluated the request based on the UDC required findings for a Variance. The Unified Development Code, in Section 03.15.030, establishes the following criteria for Variance Review: Required Findings The Zoning Board of Adjustment may authorize a 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. No Variance shall be granted unless the ZBA finds all of the following: 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 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. Findings Does Not Comply In this case, there are no extraordinary or special conditions that affect the land such that the property owner will be derived of a reasonable use of their land. The property is currently zoned for residential single-family use. It is currently being used as a single-family residence and is in good repair. The reduction of the side setback will not impair the land’s use as a single-family residence. Denial of the reduced side setback Page 8 of 28 City of Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-001 1411 Hutto Rd - Variance Page 4 of 6 would result in an inconvenience on the part of the property owner who would not be allowed to construct a carport in front of the garage, two (2) feet from the north side property line. 2. No Substantial Detriment That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to other property in the area or to the City in administering this Code. Findings Complies The requested variance will not be injurious or detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or improvements in the vicinity because it is located within similar and other compatible land uses. The requested variance will not substantially injure the appropriate use of the adjacent properties or alter the essential character of the district. The subject property is located in a residential area with single-family residential uses and several properties within this area have detached garages, carports and other accessory structures near or within the side setback. 3. Other Property That the conditions that create the need for the Variance do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity. Findings Does Not Comply The requested variance is being sought due to the existing legal non-conforming situation of the garage that is located within the minimum required setback. This condition applies to other properties in the area as a number of the existing structures within the neighborhood were constructed prior to the adoption of the current zoning standards and thus are considered to be legal non-conforming structures. The two properties that immediately neighbor the subject site are similarly conditioned. In these cases, both properties contain structures that were built within the side setback and are considered legal non-conforming structures. In addition, the minimum required side setback is a provision that applies to all properties with a RS zoning district in order to maintain separation between structures on abutting properties. 4. Applicant’s Actions That the conditions that create the need for the Variance are not the result of the applicant’s own actions. Findings Does Not Comply As previously mentioned, the requested variance is being sought due to the existing legal non-conforming situation of the garage that is located within the minimum required setback. While the applicant did not build the existing garage structure Page 9 of 28 City of Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-001 1411 Hutto Rd - Variance Page 5 of 6 within the side setback, any additional structures, including the proposed carport, would be the result of the applicant’s own actions. The applicant has the option of placing the carport elsewhere on the property in compliance with the minimum setback standards of the zoning district. 5. Comprehensive Plan That the granting of the Variance would not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this Code. Findings Does Not Comply The granting of the Variance would conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. While setback requirements are not directly referenced in the Comprehensive Plan and there is no specific guidance in the Comprehensive Plan related to these specific type of zoning regulations, there are specific goals listed in the Comprehensive Plan that call for the UDC to ensure development that is compatible in character with the surrounding context. In this case, the reduction of the side setback for one single- family residences would not be compatible with the other single-family residences in the area that are still subject to the full regulation. 6. Utilization That because of the conditions that create the need for the Variance, the application of this Code to the particular piece of property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. Findings Does Not Comply The condition that creates the need for the variance does not prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. The property is currently being utilized as a single-family residence and it will continue to be so regardless of the whether the reduction of the side setback is granted. 7. Insufficient Findings The following types of possible findings do not constitute sufficient grounds for granting a Variance: a) That the property cannot be used for its highest and best use. The highest and best use of the property is single-family residential. The Variance would not restrict the use of the property for its highest and best use. b) That there is a financial or economic hardship. There is no economic hardship for the applicant being able to comply with the minimum side setback requirements. Page 10 of 28 City of Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Case No. VAR-2018-001 1411 Hutto Rd - Variance Page 6 of 6 c) That there is a self-created hardship by the property owner or their agent. There is a self-created hardship by the property owner. While inconvenient and unattractive, the carport may be situated elsewhere on the property such that the requirements of the UDC are met. d) That the development objectives of the property owner are or will be frustrated. The development objectives of the property owner will be frustrated if the variance request is not granted. The property owner will not be allowed to construct a carport in front of the garage. In addition, the owner would need to either find another location for the carport on the property such that all UDC requirements are met or not construct the carport at all. Based on the findings listed above, Staff finds that the Variance request satisfies only one (1) of the six (6) referenced criteria above. Per the UDC, 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 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 Zoning Variance shall be granted unless the ZBA finds all six (6) of the preceding criteria apply. 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 (55 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper on February 4, 2018 and April 1, 2018 and signs were posted on-site. The request was originally advertised as a 2-foot reduction to the side setback (rather than a 4-foot reduction) but it was postponed at the request of the applicant. To date, staff has received two phone calls and one email from surrounding property owners. Staff received three (3) written responses against the request (Attachment 4). These opposition responses were received during the original advertisement period. Attachment(s) Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Conceptual Plan Attachment 3 – Applicant’s Letter of Intent Attachment 4 – Public Comments Page 11 of 28 PINE ST M A P L E S T E 1 5T H ST H U T T O R D J A N L N OLIVE ST E 13TH ST A S H B E R R Y T R L H O W R Y D R E 1 9 T H S T E 1 8 T H S T S A N J O S E S T E 1 7 T H S T PERKINSPL VINE ST W A I Z E L W A Y E U N I V E R S I T Y A V E FINCH LN E 1 6 T H S T L O U I S E S T LAUREL ST H A V E N L N M C C O M BSST SOUTH W E S T E R N B L V D V I R G I N I A S T B A R C U S D R U NI V E R SITYPARKDR P I R A T E D R P E C A N S T SOULE DR VIVION LN C A P R O C K P L M C C O O K D R M I M O S A S T C A N D L E R I D G E T R LTA Y L O R R D B O U L D E R R U N P I R A T E C V JAMES ST B E R G I N C T E 1 4 T H S T R O C K L E D G E D R E RUTERSVIL L E D R E 10TH ST M C C O Y P L E 11TH ST W E S L E Y A N D R A N N I E P URLDV H O L L Y S T M C K E N Z I E D R E 2 0 T H S T B R O O K H O L L O W T E R O L I N C V W RUTERSVILLE DR P E A C H T R E E L N E 1 7 T H S T L A U R E L ST E 17TH ST E 16TH ST E 14TH ST E 1 9 T H S T E 1 3 T H S T VI N E S T S O U T H W E S T E R N B L V DE 16TH ST E 1 6 T H S T E 1 9 T H S T E 14TH ST A N N I E P U R L D V VAR-2018-001Exhibit #1 Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 500 1,000Feet Page 12 of 28 Page 13 of 28 Page 14 of 28 Page 15 of 28 Page 16 of 28 Page 17 of 28 Page 18 of 28 Page 19 of 28 Page 20 of 28 Page 21 of 28 Page 22 of 28 Page 23 of 28 Page 24 of 28 Page 25 of 28 Page 26 of 28 April 10, 2018 Nathan Jones-Meyer City of Georgetown Texas Dear Nathan, 1411 Hutto Georgetown, Texas 78626 My intention is to build a carport directly in front of my garage at 1411 Hutto. This will require a four-foot variance. The current code is for a six-foot set-back from the property line. My garage, built in 1950, is set back two foot. The requested variance will allow the necessary use of my property and will not affect my neighbors. At this time my car does not fit in the garage which was built in 1950. My car is frequently covered with a large quantity of bird & pecan droppings. This mess reduces my driving visibility which can be a road hazard. This situation makes it necessary to wash my car daily which is not a prudent use of water. The proposed carport will relieve me of this unique, unnecessary hardship, and burden created by literal enforcement of codes. Sincerely, Mary Jo Doggett 281-658-9007 pmjdogg@gmail.com 1411 Hutto Rd Georgetown, Texas 78626 MARY JO DOGGETT Page 27 of 28 1411 Hutto Road, Georgetown, Texas 78626 My car windshield parked in the driveway. Page 28 of 28