Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-08-12 MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AUGUST 12, 1996 The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustments was called to order by Chairman Fred Bowen at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Euless Municipal Building. The Pledge of Allegiance and Silent Meditation was given by Bill Williams. MEMBERS AND STAFF PRESENT: Fred Bowen Bill Williams Roger Bates Jack Hill Eddie Price Gene Sloan Rod Tyler, City Planner Kevin Mercer, Development Services Manager Barbara Chambers, Office Supervisor Donna Brown, Staff Secretary VISITORS: Victor Palpan Mr & Mrs. Wallace Williams Jim & Carolyn Griffin Rita Merritt Eldon Kruse Al & Betty Heinemann Mr. & Mrs. Wayne Brockington Dorothy Tidwell Alpha Lea George Jerry Stagner Al & Sue Crain Elvera Stagner Lorraine Miller Nevin Carver David & Winona Holsinger Glenda Robinette Paul Peters Mark Robinette REGULAR AGENDA ITEM I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board member Bill Williams made the motion to approve the minutes of the June 26, 1996, Zoning Board of Adjustments meeting as presented and the motion was seconded by Board member Roger Bates. The vote was as follows: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING - PAGE TWO AUGUST 12, 1996 Ayes: Board members Fred Bowen Jack Hill, Roger Bates, Bill Williams, Eddie Price Nays: None The motion carried. ITEM II. ZBA #96-04 - LOT 5, BLOCK 2, OAKWOOD TERRACE ADDITION EAST Request of Mr. Victor Palpan for a variance to the minimum R-1 zoning district setback requirements as well as required parking for a carport located at 207 Linda Lane Chairman Fred Bowen opened the Public Hearing and asked Rod Tyler, City Planner, to give the presentation. Rod Tyler stated the applicant, Mr. Victor Palpan, was requesting a variance to the minimum 25 foot front yard standard required by Section 84-102(c)(4) of the Unified Development Code at 207 Linda Lane. Mr. Palpan was asking for the variance to construct a carport 15 feet in front of his house. The carport would encroach over the 25 foot building line required in the R-1 zoning district by a little over 8 feet. Chairman Bowen asked the applicant, Mr. Victor Palpan to come forward and address the members and audience. Mr. Palpan stated this would be the best intent for his family of six. He explained, he still had a garage for one car and was willing to make the city happy and did not want to do anything that would make his neighbors unhappy. Mr. Palpan informed the ZBA members that he talked with his neighbor about the driveway going to the back of his property because it would affect the view of the green area and the neighbor had no problem with that choice. Chairman Bowen asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak in favor of the request. Mr. James Griffin, 206 Linda Lane asked why the variance didn't allow 207 Linda Lane to have a single car garage. He stated he had a single car garage and there were several in the neighborhood. He was not in favor of a carport and less in favor of a driveway down the side of Mr. Palpan's property. Mr. Griffin stated his concern of the neighbors being in close proximity and a driveway on the opposite side of property would not be appealing to the eye nor would a carport. Board member Bill Williams asked Mr. Griffin if his home and or the homes on either side was constructed with a single car garage. Mr. Griffin stated yes. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING - PAGE THREE AUGUST 12, 1996 Board member Jack Hill asked if Mr. Griffin had a single or double driveway. Mr. Griffin replied his driveway was not a complete double drive because he, with a permit, had concrete poured, and had a one and a half drive entrance. There being no other opponents or proponents to the request, Chairman Bowen closed the Public Hearing. The item was opened for discussion among the Board members. There was discussion among the board members regarding the size of the carport being considered, single or double. Rod Tyler, City Planner, informed the Board members there are basically four houses on the street with single car garages and the rest were double car garages. Mr. Tyler gave options to the board members such as a variance to the carport being in front of the building line, or to the parking requirements that would be one in the garage and one on the driveway and another option is to grant a variance to the additional paving to get to the backyard for required parking behind the building line. Mr. Palpan commented that his original petition was for a permit to build another garage. Mr. Tyler clarified that Mr. Palpan's request is to park one car in garage and one car on driveway. Board member Eddie Price stated this variance was unique in structure for some of the houses on the street were currently one car garages and no variance was required. Board member Williams commented the uniformity and consistency with houses across the street from this request would be more uniform than a carport sticking out or a driveway on the opposite side of the house going to the back yard. The motion was made by Eddie Price to deny request #96-04-ZBA as presented. The motion was seconded by Bill Williams. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Board Members, Bowen, Hill, Bates, Williams, Price Nays: None The motion was made by Eddie Price to approve the variance to all parking requirements which will allow one vehicle in the garage and one in the driveway. The motion was seconded by Bill Williams. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Board Members, Bowen, Hill, Bates, Williams, Price Nays: None The motion carried. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING - PAGE FOUR AUGUST 12, 1996 III. ZBA-96-05 - LOT 103, KNOB HILL MOBILE HOME PARK ADDITION Chairman Fred Bowen stated that Item III, ZBA #96-05 request of Mr & Mrs. Williams of 77 Kevin Drive, Lot 103, Knob Hill Mobile Home Park Addition asked to withdraw their request. A letter from their attorney, Melinda Smith, had been presented to the Board prior to the meeting he called to order. The request was granted. IV. ZBA #96-06 - LOT 23R, BLOCK D, CHELSEA PARK ESTATES Request of Mr. & Mrs. David Holsinger for a variance to the minimum side yard setback requirements of Planned Development#973,fora carport located at 2699 Scrimshire Court. Chairman Bowen opened the Public Hearing. Rod Tyler gave a brief overview of the request. Mr. David Holsinger is requesting a variance to the accessory building side yard standard required by Section 84-85(b)(2) of the Unified Development Code referenced in PD 973, at 2699 Scrimshire Court. Mr. Holsinger is asking for the variance of the side yard setback requirements to legitimize the carport/accessory building that was constructed two years ago without a building permit. Chairman Bowen asked the applicant to come forward and state his request. Mr. David Holsinger stated he and his wife moved into the home two years ago. The house is unusual and there was a large concrete area around towards the back and their thought was putting in a garage/carport. He stated his petition to the City of Euless was a two page letter and only one page was copied for the packet, and on that particular page it stated why, where and who the contractor was at the time of construction. He mentioned when Jim Moy, the City Inspector, came out to do a swimming pool inspection he noticed there was no permit. He asked that the variance be granted and stated he would be glad to pay for the building permit or any fees that needed to be paid. Board member Jack Hill asked the applicant if the building was skid mounted, and could he turn the building 90 degrees to clear the property line. Mr. Holsinger replied yes, but he would only have a one car carport. Mr. Holsinger mentioned pictures that were submitted with his petition. These pictures were passed out to the members to view while the Board members were in discussion. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING - PAGE FIVE AUGUST 12, 1996 Board member Bill Williams asked the applicant why he considered it a negative to rotate the building. Mr. Holsinger said he felt it to be only cosmetic reasons and he did not want to take a tree out or pour another slab. Chairman Bowen asked for proponents to come forward. Mr. Paul Peters, 2701 Scrimshire Ct., Lot 24R stated he was in favor of Mr. Holsinger's request. Mr. Peters mentioned the buildings that were there before was referred to as the "Holland Tunnel" but the building now looks good and it does not matter to him how close it is to the building line. He stated he was not so sure he was in favor of turning the building and he stated he didn't think it would better the appearance. Mr. Al Crain, 2698 Scrimshire Court, commented that the building that was there before was unsightly. He stated he was not sure about turning the building because he would loose some of the green area. He commented it looks nice the way it is. There being no opponents to the request, Chairman Bowen closed the Public Hearing. This item was opened for discussion among the board members. Board members discussed turning the building 90 degrees. Bill Williams asked Rod Tyler the intent of side yards when there are not utilities on the site. Mr. Tyler stated that typically, its light and air to the adjacent property for building separation. In this particular situation with accessory buildings it is to not set buildings right on the property line and encroach into the adjacent property rights. Mr. Tyler stated the zoning requirement for the subdivision is 5' because it is a Planned Development. Mr. Williams and Mr. Tyler clarified the encroachment to be 4' because of the 12" setback from property line. The applicant stated the height of the carport was 8 1/2 ft. and sloped to 8 ft. in the back. Board member Eddie Price mentioned the lot was odd shaped and may not be violating the space as much as a rectangular lot. Board member Roger Bates stated that Mr. Pierce, the neighbor, did not oppose the request. The board members discussed that these homeowners would not be the owners forever. Ms. Sue Crain, 2698 Scrimshire stated there was no other place for the carport than where it was. Board members discussed turning the building or leaving it as is with approval. The location was unique because of the shape of the lot. Jack Hill suggested moving the building to meet code. Bill Williams stated that the building is a clear violation with no building permit, but a good looking structure. Eddie Price stated the subdivision rules did not give any thought to where the accessory building was to be located. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING - PAGE SIX AUGUST 12, 1996 Rod Tyler commented to the Zoning Board of Adjustment members about City Council appointments to the board and their responsibilities. Bill Williams stated that the code was not to be a "Hodge Podge" situation where one person can decide they want to do something and it be alright. Eddie Price mentioned that all three criteria were met. Jack Hill replied the variance will affect this property for 100 years. Mr. Price and Mr. Hill discussed the selling of the property and how it may be impacted by this decision. The motion was made by Eddie Price to approve request#96-06-ZBA as presented. The motion was seconded by Roger Bates. The vote was as follows: Ayes - Bowen, Bates, Price Nays - Williams, Hill The motion carried. Eddie Price left the meeting at 7:29 pm. Gene Sloan was present as the alternate member. V. ZBA #96-07 - LOT 12, BLOCK C, BEAR CREEK BEND II ADDITION Request of Mr. Leonard Sallack for a variance to the minimum rear yard setback requirements of Planned Development #1122, for a patio cover located at 902 Winston Drive Chairman Bowen opened the Public Hearing. Rod Tyler, City Planner, gave a brief overview of the request. The applicant, Mr. Leonard Sallack, is requesting a variance to the rear yard setback standard required by Planned Development Ordinance #112, at 902 Winston Drive. Mr. Sallack is asking for the variance of the rear yard setback requirements so he may construct a patio cover that would extend 5 feet over the 15 foot required rear yard. Chairman Bowen asked the applicant to come forward and state his request. Mr. Sallack stated that he bought his house with the intentions of a patio cover not encroaching the building line. He stated the builder made a mistake and put the slab 5 feet back due to the curve inward on the street. He stated that he was told by the builder that the patio cover would be no problem. He commented he lost 5 feet from his backyard. He was applying for this variance to the 15 foot setback so he can keep the patio cover. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING - PAGE SEVEN AUGUST 12, 1996 There being no opponents/proponents to the request, Chairman Bowen closed the Public Hearing and the item was opened for discussion among the Board members. Jack Hill asked if the patio was poured with the foundation. The applicant, Mr. Sallack replied, Yes. Mr Williams asked if the posts extend further than the slab. Mr. Sallack replied Yes, and the cover extends 5 feet over the setback and the slab is 4 inches over the setback requirements. Keith Botcher, 311 Branch Bend, asked Mr. Sallack if he enlarged the patio. He only received a 10 x 10 where Mr. Sallack's patio was 10 x 20. Mr. Sallack replied the builder poured the patio upon his request. The motion was made by Fred Bowen to approve the variance request of #96-07-ZBA as presented. The motion was seconded by Jack Hill. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Board members Williams, Bowen, Hill, Bates Nays: None The motion carried. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:02 P.M. (( 61° ? h irman Fred Bowen