Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-05-25 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MAY 25, 2000 MINUTES The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustments was called to order by Chairman Victor Blood at 6:30 p.m. for consideration of scheduled items in the Council Chambers in Building "B" of the Municipal Building. MEMBERS AND STAFF PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT Victor Blood John Deithloff Bill Williams Alex Wong Tony May Eddie Price Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development Ron Young, Assistant Director of Public Works/ City Engineer Donna Brown, Administrative Secretary Mark Hayslip, Plans Examiner VISITORS: Janna Collins Langford David & Laura Wade Allan Johnson Bonnie Johnson Jeff Marks Abdelmuez Omani John Getzman Karen Jasper Bob Switalski THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND INVOCATION: The Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation was given by Board Member Tony May. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board Member Bill Williams made the motion to approve the minutes of April 27, 2000. Board Member Eddie Price seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman Victor Blood, Board Members Bill Williams, Eddie Price, Tony May Nays: None The motion carried. Board Member Bill Williams made the motion to approve the minutes of March 23, 2000. Board Member Eddie Price seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman Victor Blood, Board Members Bill Williams, Eddie Price, Tony May Nays: None The motion carried. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 May 25, 2000 REGULAR AGENDA ITEM I CASE #00-02-ZBA — PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION - COVINGTON HILL ADDITION, LOT 18, BLOCK B, 801 DEVON DRIVE Receive public input regarding a request for a Zoning Variance. The applicant is requesting the variance in order to construct a carport in the sideyard setback Chairman Blood opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, gave a brief overview of the request. He stated the side building line was 15 feet and the side fences adjacent to streets required to not be less than 10 feet from property line. He stated the homeowner had constructed a carport structure and the fence in violation of Planned Development #1192 zoning. He stated staff could not find a unique, topographical or environmental condition to warrant none other than a self-created hardship. Mr. Jeff Marks, 801 Devon Drive, stated the house was built by Sovereign Homes in 1994. He stated Sovereign Homes built the slab for the carport in 1994 when he bought the home. He stated the slab was for a boat. He stated the slab was 15 feet from the curb. He stated he had replaced the fence using the same poles and was not sited with a violation. He informed the Board that only a band was visible from the top of the fence, which was the carport cover. He stated the improvements have been done in good taste. Mr. Allan Johnson, 1004 Tennison Drive, stated he was the neighborhood editor of the newsletter. He stated the improvements were an enhancement to the property and the carport could barely be seen from the street. He stated that he was in favor of the variance. Chairman Blood closed the Public Hearing due to no other proponents/opponents. Chairman Blood asked Mr. Bass if a permit was required to replace an existing fence. Mr. Bass stated a permit is not required if replacing panels. Mr. Bass stated that if the fence was there, it was in violation of the code and the final inspection should not have been approved. He stated that he did not see any other fences that close to the sidewalk. Mr. Marks stated there were several fences as close to the sidewalk in this neighborhood. Chairman Blood clarified where the property line is located and it would not be at the curb, and in most subdivisions its 10-11 feet behind the curb. He stated that in this Planned Development it is about 6 feet behind the curb. He stated the 15 feet would be from the property line not the curb line. Mr. Marks stated that a City Staff person came by and saw the slab for the carport, only the fence poles were in the ground, and Mr. Marks asked him at that time if he needed a fence permit and the staff person told him no. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 May 25, 2000 Board Member Tony May asked Mr. Marks if he was aware of the Planned Development requirements. Mr. Marks stated he was not. Chairman Blood stated the concern was the structure. Mr. Bass clarified that the fence violation was discovered after the variance request and the city was more concerned with the carport being in violation. Board Member Bill Williams asked Mr. Marks if the carport had been completed. Mr. Marks said yes and was not noticed until he took the fence panels down. He stated he did not get a building permit because he thought that was only needed when it was attached to the house. Mr. Williams asked if he could go deeper in his yard instead of to the side yard. Mr. Marks stated he only had 15 feet to the west and if he moved it he would not have a yard. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Marks what makes his corner lot different from another corner lot. Mr. Marks stated his lot size and a single story dwelling, which covers more land than a two-story dwelling. Mr. Marks stated he would have to dig into the ground even more if he moved the location of the slab. Mr. Williams stated the topography was not flat. Mr. Williams asked if the boat could be stored in the garage. Mr. Marks explained why it could not, because of the length being 26 feet. Board Member Eddie Price asked if the variance was passed, what are the implications of him moving and the next homeowner putting up walls. Mr. Bass stated variances run with the land. Chairman Blood asked if they could restrict it to this homeowner. Mr. Bass stated that could be stipulated with the motion of approval. Board Member Tony May asked at what point did the city inspect the carport. Mr. Marks stated the carport was erected in February and when the fence came down someone drove by and saw the carport over the building line. Mr. Bass stated he was not surprised that the builder did not come in for a building permit. He stated a concrete slab was not a violation until the building went vertical. Mr. Marks asked the Board if he could keep the structure and when he moves he would take down the carport. Chairman Blood asked if he could cover half of the boat. Mr. Marks stated the boat would be visible then, and he was not in favor of that. Board Member Eddie Price stated he was not in favor of covering half the boat. Chairman Blood stated that question was only to show graphically what would happen for him to be in compliance. Mr. Price stated he thought it was fine the way it is, but he was concerned about the future if Mr. Marks moves. He stated it is a PD neighborhood. Chairman Blood stated they could limit it to a boat and if there was not a boat he would have to take it down. Chairman Blood stated he was not aware of any carports that had been approved encroaching over a side yard. Board Member Williams stated this being a side yard -- would it set a precedence, because most carports are in the front yards, or was it a topography issue with the slope of the side yard, or the lot size. Board Member Williams stated he would recommend approval. Chairman Blood stated Mr. Marks would have to excavate if he relocated the slab. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 May 25, 2000 Chairman Blood called for a motion. Board Member Williams made the motion to approve Case #00-02-ZBA as presented. Board Member Eddie Price seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman Victor Blood, Board Members Bill Williams, Eddie Price, TonyMay Nays: None The motion carried. ITEM 2 CASE #00-03-ZBA — PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION - OAKWOOD TERRACE, BLOCK 3, LOT 1, -400 VIINE STREET Receive public input regarding a request for a Zoning Variance. The applicant is requesting the variance concerning placement of an accessory building in the required front yard setback Chairman Blood opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, gave a brief overview of the request. He stated the applicant was requesting a storage building/workshop to be closer than 80 feet to their front property line and he stated staff could not find a unique, topographical or environmental condition to warrant none other than a self- ^ created hardship. Ms. Janice Langford, 400 Vine Street, stated she was the applicant's wife and was present to answer any questions, and her husband was not present because of work. She informed the Board that they had a two-car garage, and almost half of that had been enclosed for a laundry room, the other portion was being used for woodwork. She also stated they had a dilapidated storage building that needed to be replaced. She stated that the new storage building would be in a different location and large enough to include a workshop. There being no proponents/opponents present, Chairman Blood closed the Public Hearing. Board Member Williams asked if the existing building meets code. Mr. Bass stated it was in violation of the side yard setback as well. Board Member Eddie Price asked if they were the original owners, and Ms. Langford stated her husband was the third owner. Chairman Blood stated the house was built in about 1958. Board Member Bill Williams asked when the portion of the garage was taken in. Ms. Langford stated it was about 12 years ago. Mr. Williams asked if they had considered renovating the existing storage building. Ms. Langford stated her husband had asked the city and he was told the only thing he could do is paint it. Mr. Bass stated he had Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 5 May 25, 2000 — latitude to determine how much renovation could take place on the existing structure. Chairman Blood stated the sketch was not drawn exactly to scale and it is much smaller than it appears on the drawing. Board Member Bill Williams stated this variance request is before them because of the way the house faces. He stated this could be addressed if they change something and they come back with a different variance request, but that is not what they have here. Chairman Blood stated he had a much less objection to it than when it was shown larger. He thought it was far more reasonable as a 20 X 20, given what is normal in that subdivision. Board Member Eddie Price stated that if the street address were on the other street it would be in conformance. Chairman Blood concurred with that and the building is not very visible and the oddity of the lot would be the rectangle lot has the front constructed on the side. Chairman Blood asked if they would be removing the other structure. Ms. Langford stated they would remove the other structure. Board Member Bill Williams stated he had a definite problem with the structure, no unique size, shape, and it being a rectangular lot suggesting the address were on the wrong side is stretching it too much. He stated he felt this was self-created, they had a two-car garage and utilized it for another purpose. He stated they had another structure that was already illegal, and the variance request is more materially in violation. He stated he was not in favor of the variance. Mr. Williams suggested that they get with staff and reconstruct the existing building to meet code. Board Member Tony May asked if the building would be used for storage or park vehicles in. Ms. Langford said it would be used for storage and for woodworking. Chairman Blood asked if the building would be on a temporary foundation. Ms. Langford replied, yes. Mr. Bass stated that staff was informed that the building was needed to park an antique car. Ms. Langford stated that was the original intent when it was the larger size, but not now. Board Member Tony May made the motion to deny, Case #00-03-ZBA, as presented. Board Member Bill Williams seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Board Members Bill Williams, Tony May Nays: Chairman Blood, Board Member Eddie Price _ The motion failed. Board Member Eddie Price made the motion to approve Case #00-03-ZBA, as presented. Chairman Blood seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 6 May 25, 2000 Ayes: Chairman Victor Blood, Eddie Price, Nays: Board Members Bill Williams, Tony May The motion failed. Ms. Langford asked for their choices. Mr. Bass suggested Mr. Langford come to the City offices and talk with Mark Hayslip to renovate the existing structure and bring it into compliance by bringing it away from the fence to the appropriate distance. He stated the structure could not increase in size, and rebuild it with the type of materials that it is made of now. Chairman Blood suggested that he build a second smaller structure behind the house. ITEM 3 CASE #00-04- ZBA — PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION - HIDEAWAY ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 25 -508 HIDEAWAY COURT. Receive public input regarding a request for a zoning variance. The applicant is requesting the variance in order to construct a fence beyond the 20 feet front building line Chairman Blood opened the Public Hearing. Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, gave a brief overview of the variance request. He stated the variance request was to build a fence beyond the 20 feet front building line. He stated the builder installed the fence knowing that it was over the building line. He stated staff is sensitive to the concerns of the land owner/applicant. He stated that if the applicant would have applied for a fence permit this could have been avoided along time ago. He stated staff could not find any unique situations with the site and does not see a hardship. Mr. Robert Switalski, RCS Homes, stated he was the current builder of this property. He stated he would like to apologize to the City for the fence being put up in error by mistake without a permit. He stated the buyer for this property picked out three floor plans for this lot to utilize the size of side yard. He stated the fence at the entrance gate was not behind the building line and the City approved the fence. He stated this lot does not impair traffic visibility. He stated the driveway to the left is not impaired when backing out of the driveway, or the drive to the right of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Switalski stated he did not think it was offensive to anyone. He stated it was the most unique lot in the subdivision. He stated he was representing the owner and if they had to move the fence he would do so. Mr. Switalski stated he had talked with the owner to see if there were any in opposition and the owner said not to his knowledge. Mr. Switalski stated the owner could not be present at this meeting because he was self employed and had to work. -- Board Member Eddie Price asked what he meant by the wrought iron fence. Mr. Switalski said the entrance gate was built over a building line to an adjoining lot. Chairman Blood asked if they had applied for a fence permit. Mr. Switalski stated the fence company they had at the time did not get the permit and they are no longer with Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 7 May 25, 2000 RCS Homes. Mr. Switalski stated he takes the responsibility for that and apologized again. Board Member Williams asked Mr. Switalski if RCS Homes did their job properly by representing the zoning laws of the City of Euless by providing them with very little yard. Mr. Switalski apologized again that this was an oversight on their part. Mr. Williams asked if he had created and shaped the size of this lot. Mr. Switalski said no, and he was not the developer. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Switalski where he thought this was going to go other than being in violation of the City codes. Mr. Switalski stated he builds over 100 homes a year in 5 different cities and that he is not able to be on every job site. Mr. Williams asked whom he delegates that to. Mr. Switalski informed him he had superintendents and to the people he hires. Mr. Williams asked if they were his employees. Mr. Switalski said they are subcontractors. Mr. Switalski stated it was hard to have all subcontractors do everything perfectly. Mr. Williams stated this was a self created unusually shaped lot and makes someone ask where is that guys back yard, well there is not one, he has a side yard. He stated this was not topography, this was created and all along the way the developer, builder, and homeowner have thought this was a very unusual shaped lot. Mr. Switalski stated he was willing to move the fence and he was present to help the homeowner. Mr. Abdelmuez Omari, 507 Hideaway Court, stated this was a gated community and the first thing you see is a big, wooden, ugly fence against their face. He stated it was the first thing you see and it affects all the residents and not just those in the circle. He stated the builder should be obligated to move the fence back because they knowingly made errors. He stated the builder should put some type of beautification in front of the fence because of the view when coming into the subdivision. Ms. Karen Jasper, 502 Hideaway Court, stated she was the Vice President of the Homeowners Association (HOA), and would be speaking on their behalf. She stated that she concurred with Mr. Omari, and that her home and her neighbors' homes were in compliance and felt this property should be in compliance with the code. She stated it was unfortunate that there was not enough room to plant beautification in front of the fence due to lack of space. She stated the HOA would like for the property to come into compliance with the law, and something put in front of the fence because in a few years the fence will become an eyesore and not attractive to the neighborhood. She asked that the fence be moved in a timely manor. Ms. Laura Wade, 406 Hideaway Court, stated she was also on the Board of Directors for the HOA, stated she concurred with everything that had been said. Mr. Switalski reiterated that he would take the fence down, but it would then be on the building line. He stated it was not RSC Homes' responsibility to landscape the subdivision. He stated it was the responsibility of the homeowner to landscape their -- property. He stated RCS Homes had completed that subdivision and he was there to help out the homeowner. He stated maybe a compromise was to make it a 4 feet fence, and that may take away some of the so-called glare. He also added that if the homeowner so desires he could move it to the building line and put up an 8 feet fence. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 8 May 25, 2000 — He stated it did not matter to him and that he would do what ever was asked of him. There being no other proponents/opponents to speak, Chairman Blood closed the Public Hearing. Board Member Bill Williams asked if there was another type of material that could be used, such as wrought iron. Mr. Bass stated wrought iron would be nice as long as what they keep behind the wrought iron looks nice. Mr. Williams asked if it required the same setback. Mr. Bass said yes. Mark Hayslip, Plans Examiner, stated it could be 3 feet tall, 25 % solid at maximum and it would be nothing more than a decorative fence. Mr. Bass stated a fence is not required. Mr. Bass stated he would like to clear up the reference to lot 28 at the entrance. He stated this is a Planned Development (PD) and went to an extreme to meet everyone's satisfaction. He stated the wrought iron fence was for a tie point at the gates, and should not have been looked at then and now as a precedence to put a fence this close to the sidewalk. Chairman Blood stated he concurred with Mr. Bass. He discussed concern with the lot to the north being 510 Hideaway Court severely restricting the view from the south. He �' stated the builder had no problem moving the fence and asked the Board for any compromise by moving it. Board Member Eddie Price suggested moving the fence to the corner of the house, and straight across toward 510 Hideaway, and that would still give him a back yard. He stated that would give the homeowner a little more space to plant shrubs or plants in front of the fence to enhance the entrance to the subdivision. Chairman Blood concurred with that suggestion. Mr. Price asked the distance of the side yard behind the fence. Mr. Switalski informed the Board it was about 20 feet and he thought that would be a reasonable compromise and he would place photenias in front of the fence. Chairman Blood asked the HOA how they would like a compromise such as this. He summarized by saying the fence would be 22 feet at the house, 10 feet in the middle, and 12-13 feet from the property line next to 510 Hideaway, and place photenias in front of the fence. A citizen from the audience asked what the maximum violation would be. Chairman Blood stated that about 50% would be in the center where it's closest to the curb. The citizen stated he was not in favor of this compromise. Mr. Bass suggested that the vote be with conditions. Mr. Omani stated the fence should be moved back further to make the back yard -- smaller than necessary on one end and the other end would be encroaching over the building line, which would balance out. Mr. Switalski stated he was not in favor of this recommendation. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 9 May 25, 2000 Board Member Bill Williams stated he wanted to know the importance of Mr. Omari's recommendation. Mr. Omari stated his recommendation would not be as much of a violation. Mr. Williams asked if the HOA had talked to the owner of this property. Ms. Jasper replied that she had intended to go visit them and had not. Board Member Bill Williams stated he had a problem in voting in favor of a variance, when he hadn't heard from the homeowner, and was looking to deny the variance, and create a new one that is materially different not knowing if the owner would be in favor of. Board Member Eddie Price stated the owner could elect to accept it or go to the building line. Board Member Bill Williams stated it was so wide open as far as the homeowner's decision. Mr. Price stated he did not want to table the case. Mr. Williams stated he had a hard time approving this, the HOA said they were not in favor of this compromise and the homeowner is not even present to make a decision. Chairman Blood stated the builder was here to represent the homeowner. Mr. Price informed Mr. Williams that the builder was present to speak for the homeowner and they were the ones to make the decision for this property not the rest of the HOA property. Mr. Williams stated he was not comfortable with this compromise without the owner's decision. He stated the owner should be present to say he wants this. He said he could not vote in good favor. Board Member Tony May stated if the Homeowner does not like the change in the variance, then he can come back. Chairman Blood asked for a motion. Board Member Tony May made the motion at approve Case #00-04-ZBA with the following conditions: 1) Place the fence at the corner of the house and extended directly across the property; 2) and that the owner will provide a letter May 26, 2000, stating he will install red tip photenias of 3 feet on center; 3) and a 6 feet maximum height of fence. Board Member Eddie Price seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman Victor Blood, Board Members, Eddie Price, Tony May Nays: Board Member Bill Williams The motion failed. Adjournment: There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. actor Blood Date