Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Board Of Adjustment - 12/03/2008 Minutes ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETI G CEIVED Wednesday, December 3, 2008 1:30 P.M. APR 2 2 2009 Board Members Present: Taylor Mauck, Chairman C1�SECRE7gRY,S OFFICE Dan Winship, Vice-Chairman William Tinney, Board Member Ben Molina, Board Member R. Bryan Johnson (Alternate) Board Members Absent: Thomas E. McDonald (Alternate) Staff Present: Robert Nix, Assistant City Manager Faryce Goode-Macon, Assistant Director-Planning Jay Reining, First Assistant City Attorney Shelly Shelton, City Planner Gail Perry, Recording Secretary I. CALL TO ORDER A quorum was declared and the meeting was called to order by Chairman Mauck at 1:30 p.m. II. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS It was stated by Shelly Shelton that ZBA Case Nos. 0908-01 has been tabled to January 28, 2008 and 1108-04 has been tabled for presentation at the Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting of December 17, 2008. A. APPEALS 1 Appeal(s) a. Appeal No. ZBA1108-01 Waterfront Communications, L.L.C.: Special Use Exception to allow for the reduction of the off-street parking requirement from thirty(30) parking spaces to nine (9)parking spaces. Bluff Subdivision, Block 34, Lot 10-A at 1024 Leopard Street. The Subject Property is located approximately 460 feet east of South Staples Street. SCANNED *10 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes December 3,2008 Page 2 Shelly Shelton presented a Power Point presentation on Waterfront Communications requesting a Special Use Exception for a reduction of the off-street parking requirement. Ms. Shelton reviewed the subject property and surrounding area stating the subject property is for office use of Waterfront Communications and tenant offices outlining the guidelines of"conforming and"non-conforming use". Bob Nix, Assistant City Manager of Development Services, addressed the Board stating that the non-conforming use pertains to the parking as an accessory use. The primary use of the building, as established by the facts, was at one point reduced to a furniture store and a real estate office with a parking lot requirement of twenty-three spaces. Prior to 1980, this building was used for other retail uses. A furniture store has a parking requirement of one space for every 400 square feet. The code cites other retail uses requiring one parking space for every two hundred fifty square feet which is what the appellant is proposing. The board is charged with determining the non-conforming parking requirement. There are nine parking spaces on the site. This building was built in 1926 and, at some point, the City passed a parking ordinance for a higher parking requirement than what was in place. The retail use that was in place at that time was allowed to remain with the parking deficit. It was replaced in 1980 with a furniture store which had a lower parking deficit 23 required spaces with the furniture store and real estate office. The code says once the deficit is reduced, it has to stay reduced. When you come in with another land use that requires more parking the code allows us to say that they can have 10% greater deficit than they have now i.e., 2.3 more parking spaces. They are proposing seven spaces and we, as staff, do not have authority to approve that. In answer to Board Member Winship, Mr. Nix stated that the code allows the appellant to look within 300 feet of the site to find adjacent sites that have excess parking space, vacant property where parking could be made available or a parking lot where a lease agreement or purchase could be made. Staff has no evidence that this has been done. Staff's recommendation is to grant the Special Exception for twelve months allowing them ample time to economically meet the parking requirement. If this is not possible and the appellant provides to the City documentation showing a good faith effort to accomplish this, the Special Use Exception will stand permanently. Public hearing was opened. Toifie Nicolas, Corpus Christi, Texas stated that his family has had an interest in the four lots from Artesian to Waco on Antelope Street approximately 50-100 feet away from Wolfson Furniture Store. Mr. Nicolas stated that no one has approached him regarding leasing any parking space. Mr. Nicolas further stated that Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 are 50 X 100' lots. Lot 7 is located closest to the appellant and is completely vacant. He stated he would be glad to work out an arrangement with the appellant for a nominal sum. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes December 3,2008 Page 3 When the intensity of the use is reduced, you can't then come back and increase the non- conforming characteristic. Irma Caballero,Director of Economic Development, Corpus Christi, Texas stated that these decisions are difficult as outlined by Mr.Nix. I would like to point out that this portion of Leopard Street is a blighted area. There has been limited to non existent development for many years and we now have an opportunity to support the beginning of a redevelopment effort in this vicinity. I think it's very important to recognize that in this economy we actually have investors who are willing to take the risk going into this blighted area and addressing all kinds of asbestos and lead, bringing the building back up to code, improving the appearance of Leopard Street which hopefully will start a chain reaction to more interest in developing the area. I understand that there are parking areas available which needs to be looked at but I also think that we, as a City, need to be cognizant of the fact that we are trying to find people to invest, to work and stay in our city . My request is that you give consideration to this request and that you make every effort to work with this property owner as best as you can within the guidelines that you must comply with. Darlene Gregory, President and developer of Waterfront Communications, 1024 Leopard Street i.e., Courthouse Square, Corpus Christi, Texas stated that Waterfront Communications formed a internal task force last year to examine development and revitalization options of the Central Business District, specifically Leopard Street, replacing it into a vibrant pedestrian, visitor friendly office, dining and retail district from the current blighted area in the community renewal district. There is minimal to no parking located on the surrounding streets with thirty non-meter parking spaces for public use and a couple of dozen parking spaces on the city block of Leopard Street. We are proposing to establish a central garden district by providing green space in back for the courtyard, flowering fence around the parking lot, trees and plantings in the front area, total rehabilitation of the exterior to include architectural detail, displaying local artist murals on the Waco Street side, and providing updates to attract a retail/office tenant mix. In the future, we would seek to finish renovations to Courthouse Square, seek options on neighboring Grossman Theatre and acquisitions of vacant buildings including Braslaus' Furniture and The Caribbean Connection which would cost in the $1,500,000 to $2,000,000 range. We would also seek a main street rehabilitation grant with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, a grant with U.S. Department of Energy to create green space and solar power, etc. This is our plan for the district and would hope our investment in the district would spark other local developers to also choose to revitalize this area. The central garden district would serve the current occupants of City Hall, the Courthouse, and uptown financial district within walking distance. Ms. Gregory stated that the building was being used by Mr. Wolfson for offices of Block Realty. At no time, did I nor my staff view any retail furniture for sale. Mr. Wolfson ceased operation as a furniture store in March of 2006, a full year prior to our tour of the building and two years prior to our acquisitions. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes December 3,2008 Page 4 Ms. Gregory gave the Board a detailed history of what has occurred since the acquisition of the Wolfson Building stating the lack of ADA compliance, asbestos, and general structural failure put the budget for the project way over $300,000 which doubles the original budget. In closing, Ms. Gregory stated our recommendation is maintenance of the nine existing parking spaces and the City at some point make an evaluation of revising the boundaries of the"B-5"Primary Business District. Greg Perkes, Legal Counsel for Waterfront Communications, 725 Monette Drive, Corpus Christi, Texas stated that this prior use was a retail store establishment with a office building. They had nine parking spaces. We are asking that you as a board to that continual use with the same type of parking i.e., grandfathering of what has been done in the past. We don't vision that type of parking happening on all the buildings but to get the first few buildings going there is going to have to be some incentives and give and take to get the district moving. In addition, the project is significantly over budget well over three times what the original budget was. We have had every single component in that building to get it back to code which was well over $300,000. Our original budget which was quoted by five general contractors was at $110,000 and we are well over $300,000 and we're still not stopped. The economics are so upside down that we'll be absorbing it for years to come. To this date, Irma Caballero is working very hard to get some incentives but to this date we have not received a single incentive from the City of Corpus Christi. We have to explain to our mortgage company as to why this building is so expensive. We have to watch to see if the appraisal will come in at the proper amount and if it is not we will have to sink more money into it. Public hearing was closed. Mr. Nix stated in testimony, it was pointed out that the retail store closed in 2006 and under the code, Section 26-3, this terminates the non-conforming use of the furniture store. So, that presents another issue to us. However, the City is willing to consider that at the time the use of the building was terminated the building was for sale, and the use should be considered to be continued. They are entitled to the 23 parking spaces and that's what the City staff recommends. The second portion of our recommendation is that you grant the Special Exception with a condition that within that twelve month time period they make a good faith effort to obtain offsite parking that meets the economic requirement for their project either by reducing or eliminating the deficiency. This must be shown through written evidence of that good faith effort. If they obtain all the parking, the Special Use Exception would expire or be modified if the partial amount of the parking is met. In answer to Commissioner Winship, Mr. Nix stated the Braslau Building may have the same parking issues as being discussed here today. The City realizes the need to come up with some well reasoned answers to some of those questions. If this area is revitalized and all of those buildings are utilized, there will be about a 500 space parking deficit. 410 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes December 3,2008 Page 5 Motion for approval was made by Vice-Chairman Winship and seconded by Board Member Tinney for a Special Use Exception reducing the parking requirement from thirty spaces to nine parking spaces with the following conditions: 1. The appellant is required to show a good faith effort during a twelve month period to meet the minimum code requirements regarding parking. 2. If a good faith effort is shown and no additional parking can be required or only part of the parking requirement is satisfied, the Special Use Exception will remain in effect. 3. If compliance is fully obtained or the appellant does not provide a good faith effort to comply with the code, the Special Use Exception will expire. Motion passed unanimously with Board Member McDonald being absent. b. Appeal No. ZBA1108-02 Robert Graham: Variance to allow for the placement of an accessory building in the side street yard setback of the subject property. Reflections Unit 2 Subdivision, Block 3, Lot 6 at 7673 Dallas Street, located south of Yorktown Boulevard. Shelly Shelton presented the above case for a reduction of the side yard setback from 25 feet to three feet to compensate for a carport. The appellant did not obtain a permit at the time the carport was constructed. Ms. Shelton stated that the configuration of the house plays a part in this case. There were 23 notices mailed out with four in favor and two received in opposition. Staff recommends disapproval of the variance as a permit was not obtained and does not show undue hardship. Robert Graham, 7673 Yorktown Boulevard, Corpus Christi, Texas stated that his daughter is suffering from cancer and, due to the chemotherapy; the carport is needed for protection from the heat or direct sunlight. I purchased the carport from Morgan Buildings and I had no knowledge that a permit was needed or that I had built within the setback line. Public hearing was closed. Motion for approval was made by Board Member Tinney and seconded by Board Member Johnson due to shallowness of the subject lot. Motion passed unanimously with Board Member McDonald being absent. 411110 *NO Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes December 3,2008 Page 6 c. Appeal No. ZBA1108-03 WPW Enterprises, L.L.C.: Special Use Exception to allow for the installation and operation of a telecommunication tower. South Shore Estates, Block 1, Lot 22 at 5300 South Alameda Street. The subject property is located approximately 3,100 feet east of Airline Drive. Shelly Shelton presented the above case for a cell tower to be located to the south on church property adjacent to a residentially zoned neighborhood. The cell tower design is a monopole disguised as a flagpole approximately eighty-five tall. The tower is approximately eighty feet to the closest building and a overhead power line approximately 156 feet away with a elementary school located to the north. The appellant states that approximately 6,000 calls are dropped each day and this is the only location that is feasible for this area. There were forty-nine notices mailed with seven received in opposition and one received in favor. Staff recommends approval. Public hearing was opened. WPW Enterprises presented a slide presentation of the request outlining the dimensions and style of the cell tower, history of their company and the benefits for the site. David Michelson (Trustee Chairman for St. John's Methodist Church), 247 Aberdeen, Corpus Christi, Texas stated that the church board has voted unanimously for approval for installation of the cell tower. It was our decision to vote for the flag pole design and will benefit the church tremendously. John Alfred, (Senior Pastor) 702 Berkshire, Corpus Christi, Texas stated approval for the Variance due to the problems with the drop calls. Robert Brukhofer, 401 Colony, Corpus Christi, Texas stated opposition for the case and the large diameter and height of the tower. Mr. Brukhofer stated the close proximity to the residential neighborhood and the detriment to their neighborhood. Bill Stark, Brighton Village, Corpus Christi, Texas stated his profession as electrical engineer and stated opposition to this case. Mr. Stark stated that he is present at the meeting due to another cell tower request on Cimarron Blvd. There has been minimal information received from the appellant regarding the impact of the cell tower on these requests. I am also opposed to the cell tower because of future health effects, property values, etc. Iry *4100 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes December 3,2008 Page 7 Public hearing was closed. Motion for denial was made by Board Member Winship and seconded by Board Member Molina. Motion passed unanimously Board Member McDonald being absent. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion for approval of minutes was made by Board Member Molina and seconded by Board Member Johnson. IV. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment was made at 4:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously with Board Member McDonald being absent. Shelly Shelton Gail Perry City Planner Recording Secretary Zoning Board of Adjustment Administrator C:\DOCUME-1\TameraR\LOCALS--1\Temp\12-03-08Minutes.doc