No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Board Of Adjustment - 02/24/2021 MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI VIA WEBEX VIDEO CONFERENCE FEBRUARY 24, 2021 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS: STAFF: Andrew Dimas, ZBA Administrator David Walker, Vice-Chair Buck Brice, Assistant City Attorney Burris McRee Catherine Garza, Recording Secretary Gordon Robinson Nina Nixon-Mendez, Assistant Director of Ricardo D. Barrera, Jr. Development Services I. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL Vice Chairman Walker called the meeting to order and a quorum was established with Chairman Karaca absent. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 27, 2021 A motion was made by Mr. McRee to approve the minutes listed above and Mr. Robinson seconded. The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF ABSENCES: None. V. APPEALS – DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE FOLLOWING: a. Appeal No. ZBA 0221-01 TAMC Enterprises, LLC.: Variance to increase the height of a freestanding sign from 40-feet to 60-feet on a tract of land addressed as 4501 Violet Road and described as Lot 6B, Shell Road Poultry Acres, located along the west side of Violet Road, south of Interstate 37, and north of Leopard Street. Andrew Dimas, Development Services, presented the item above for the record. The proposed project is a fast- food restaurant with a drive-thru (Chicken Express) and will have a freestanding sign to advertise the business. The Unified Development Code (UDC) within Section 7.5.3 provides the standards for single-tenant freestanding signs. The standards are based on the street classification and location of the freestanding sign. If the freestanding sign is placed on the property and observes the street yard setback (20-feet) the freestanding sign is eligible for the provided maximum sign allowances regarding height and sign area. The subject property under the guidelines of the UDC would be allowed to have a freestanding sign at a maximum height of 40-feet. If the sign is placed within the street yard (20-feet) the allowance would be reduced to a maximum height of 20-feet. The applicant is requesting a maximum height of 60-feet. For location purposed, Mr. Dimas presented an aerial overview of the subject property, a map of existing land uses adjacent to the property and a site plan provided by the applicant. The applicant feels that a freestanding sign at the maximum allowances set by the UDC place their business at a competitive disadvantage to surrounding restaurants (i.e. Whataburger, McDonald’s, etc.). McDonald’s constructed in 2000 and Whataburger constructed in 2004 each have a freestanding sign approximately 60-feet in height. However, these signs were constructed prior to the adoption of sign regulations by the City of Corpus Christi in 2006 and the UDC in 2011. The applicant is seeking a variance to increase sign height due to the proximity of Interstate 37 which is located over 800-feet away from the subject property. Mr. Dimas informed the Board that of the 13 public notices mailed, zero were returned in favor or in opposition. After review, City staff has determined that the proposed variance does not meet the required findings described in Section 3.25.3.A of the UDC. The Board of Adjustment may impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of a variance consistent with the purposes stated in this Unified Development Code. After Staff’s presentation, the public hearing was opened. Representing the applicant, Zane Smith with SSC Signs, addressed the Board in support of the variance. He provided renderings of the appearance of the sign and photographs of the location. With no further public comment, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Robinson stated he agrees with Staff’s recommendation and made a motion to deny the variance request I move to deny the variance; it does not meet the required findings listed below: 1. The subject property is not extraordinary, as multiple adjacent properties are located at the same elevation and contend with similar impediments set based on the design of Interstate 37. 2. Granting the variance may cause a detriment to surrounding properties as it would increase the amount of sign/light pollution to adjacent single-family residences. 3. While there is no defined “need” for the requested variance, it is at the request of the fast-food restaurant and strictly serves marketability of their product. 4. The request is a result of a self-created hardship, since a sign conforming to the code can be constructed on the site. 5. The granting of the variance is contrary to Plan CC and the Unified Development Code (UDC). Plan CC specifically states within the goals and strategies of Urban Design, “Encourage the design of commercial centers in a manner that minimizes the impacts of automobile intrusion, noise and visual blight on surrounding areas.” The motion was seconded by Mr. McRee and the motion passed unanimously. VI. DIRECTOR’S REPORT Nina Nixon-Mendez, Assistant Director Development Services, updated the Board on the recent Unified Development Code amendments that were passed by City Council on second reading (February 23, 2021). The amendments will be updated in Encode within a few weeks. VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Vice Chairman Walker adjourned the meeting at 2:05 p.m. ________________________________________ Andrew Dimas Development Services Administrator