Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-09-28CITY OF EULESS ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 28, 2017 MINUTES A regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairman Crites at 6:00 p.m. on September 28, 2017 in the Pre -Council Conference Room of City Hall, 201 North Ector Drive. Those present included Chairman RubyAnne Crites, Vice Chairman Clarence Moore, and Board Members: Curtis Brown, Steve Elliot, and Ron Young. During the Pre -Session Meeting: ➢ Senior Planner Stephen Cook reviewed the regular agenda. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CONSIDERATION OF SCHEDULED ITEMS — PRE -COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM The Euless Zoning Board of Adjustment continued their meeting in the Council Chambers at 6:35 p.m. for consideration of scheduled items. STAFF PRESENT: Mike Collins, Director of Planning and Economic Development Stephen Cook, Senior Planner Tesla Worth, Administrative Secretary VISITORS: None INVOCATION Vice Chairman Moore gave the invocation. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Board Member Young led the pledge of allegiance. ITEM 1. APPROVED ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES Vice Chairman Moore made a motion to approve the minutes for the regular meeting of January 30, 2014. Board Member Brown seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman Crites, Vice Chairman Moore and Board Members: Brown, Elliot, and Young. Nays: None Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 1 of 4 September 28, 2017 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 2 of 4 September 28, 2017 Abstention: None Chairman Crites declared the motion carried. (5-0-0) ITEM 2. ELECTION OF OFFICERS — CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN Board Member Young made a motion to nominate RubyAnne Crites as Chairman and Clarence Moore as Vice Chairman. Board Member Brown seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman Crites, Vice Chairman Moore and Board Members: Brown, Elliot, and Young. Nays: None Abstention: None Chairman Crites declared the motion carried. (5-0-0) ITEM 3. HELD A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 17-01-ZBA Chairman Crites opened the public hearing at 6:40 p.m. Senior Planner Stephen Cook gave a brief description of the case. The applicant was Mr. Lawrence Lubrano, homeowner. Location/Zoning: 200 West Ash Lane -Single Family Detached Dwelling District (R-1) The applicant is requesting the following variance: Variance of front yard setback for a fence thirty-six (36") inches or greater: Section 84- 363(a)(2)(b) - fences 36 inches or more above the finished grade of the lot shall not be more than 25 percent solid, and not less than ten (10') feet from the property line. Mr. Lubrano intends to construct a tubular steel/wrought iron style fence along the front yard of his property at 200 West Ash Lane. He intends to install a remote access gate across his driveway. Because his property is greater than one half acre, the Development Code allows him to construct a fence greater than thirty-six inches, but the setback distance must be at least ten (10') feet from the front property line. Mr. Lubrano is requesting a variance from the ten -foot setback requirement that would enable installation of the fence at a setback of six (6') feet. There is a grove of trees in this front area. Mr. Lubrano explains that allowing a reduced setback would enable these trees to be preserved. He puts forth that the literal enforcement of the setback distance would create a hardship on his property because the placement of the fence at ten (10') feet would require the removal of several trees. Mr. Lubrano's objective is also to install Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 3 of 4 September 28, 2017 the fence in a location that would enable all of the trees in this area to be on the house side of the fence. The fence setback distances are usually placed on a property to allow a vehicle to exit the road completely while waiting on a gate to clear. Additionally, more opaque fencing along the frontage of a site will block site visibility from the drive approach. Staff has reviewed the submitted information regarding the request for the variance and recommends denial of the variance. Staff believes the situation could be characterized as a self-induced hardship. There is no requirement for a fence to be installed at all. The code is only relevant if the property owner has chosen to install a fence. The setback is a minimum distance. The applicant has the opportunity to place his fence at a distance greater than the minimum required ten (10') feet from the property line and still maintain the integrity of his trees on his lot. When West Ash Lane was widened in 2011, a neighboring property relocated their metal fence to the ten -foot setback in compliance with the ordinance. Chairman Crites asked to hear from the applicant if he wished to speak. Lawrence Lubrano stated that it was possible to conform to the guideline and move the fence back without removing trees, but it would put a larger portion of his front yard outside of the fence. He stated that the variance would allow his fence line to match his immediate neighbor. He stated that there are eight (8) properties on W. Ash Ln. with front fences facing the street, and six (6) of them are six (6') feet or less from the property line. Chairman Crites asked why the applicant wanted to place a fence in his front yard. Mr. Lubrano stated that he had two reasons for the fence. The first is security, as he will have a gate that will open and close to his driveway and secure his property. The second reason is that he believes it will improve the look of his property. Vice Chairman Moore commended the applicant's thorough presentation. Board Member Young asked if the applicant was worried about losing trees at his proposed six (6) foot fence line, as there are the same number of trees there as there are at the ten (10') foot line. He also asked why the applicant could not arrange the fence posts in a way that would not be directly in front of the trees at the ten (10') foot line to accommodate them in the same manner that he plans to accommodate the trees at the six (6') foot line. Mr. Lubrano stated that he would position the posts in a way that would not interfere with the trees near the fence line at six (6') feet, and that he would not be able to make the same accommodation at the ten (10') foot line. Board Member Young stated that the gate installed would need to be set back to allow enough room for a car waiting to enter without it blocking the sidewalk or hanging out into the road. Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 4 of 4 September 28, 2017 Mr. Lubrano stated that he understood. Chairman Crites asked which direction the gate would open. Mr. Lubrano stated that there would be two (2) gates since he has a circle drive, and the gates would open inward towards his property. Board Member Young asked staff if they received any feedback from the notification that was sent to property owners. Mr. Cook stated that staff did not receive any feedback. Chairman Crites asked to hear from any proponents/opponents who wished to speak. Seeing none, Chairman Crites closed the public hearing at 6:52 p.m. Vice Chairman Moore stated that with keeping the fence uniform in distance with the neighbors, he did not believe that the variance would be an impediment to the city. Board Member Young stated that he did not believe the variance would make the fences along the street any more uniform since they all vary in distance from the street. There were no further questions or comments presented by the Board. Board Member Moore made a motion to approve Case No. 17-01-ZBA for a Front Yard Setback Variance for Oakland Estates, Block 2, Lot 16, 200 West Ash Lane. Board Brown seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman Crites, Vice Chairman Moore, and Board Members: Brown, Elliot, and Young. Nays: None Abstention: None Chairman Crites declared the motion carried. (5-0-0) ITEM 4. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:54 p.m �- Gam- 3) 291)&" Chairman bate