Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board of Adjustment-Minutes-6/14/2005 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING - JUNE 14, 2005 REGULAR MEETING: Chairman McNosky called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Rich Munson, Lisa Kenney, Skip Reynolds, Dee McNosky, Ed Moore and Larry Knox Uton Dellosso Absent: Staff: Barry LeBaron, Chris Fuller and Amy Shelley APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ed Moore made motion to approve the May 10, 2005 meeting minutes. Skip Reynolds seconded. Approved by acclamation. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Case A-05-004 - PUBLIC HEARING - A request by Louise Halprin for a variance from the regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code regarding parking space requirements on Lot 4, Block 1, Monterra Place Addition located at 6908 Colleyville Boulevard Staff member, Chris Fuller presented the case and briefed the Board members. Chairman McNosky opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward to speak. Louise Halprin, the applicant, on behalf of Dr. John Vinings, the property owner, presented the request and briefed the Board members. Dr. Vinings, the property owner, also presented the request and briefed the Board members. Ed Moore questioned Dr. Vinings the number of employees he will have? Dr. Vinings replied possibly eight employees. Ed Moore stated the potential need for 18 parking spaces to account for the eight employees and ten stations. Dr. Vinings replied correct. Dee McNosky questioned Dr. Vinings the agreement for shared parking has been signed by Dr. Tye? Dr. Vinings replied correct. Dee McNosky questioned Dr. Vinings if he feels the spaces between Dr. Tye and he will be adequate enough for the patients? Dr. Vinings replied correct. Dee McNosky questioned Dr. Vinings if he feels that he and Dr. Tye would have to encroach upon Ms. Davis' parking? Dr. Vinings responded not seeing the need to encroach upon Ms. Davis' parking happening, but we had hoped she would sign the parking agreement so everyone would be covered. Ed Moore questioned Dr. Vinings about the drawing; on the north side is that a road? Ms. Halprin replied right now there is a big electrical box, stating they may be able to get one or two more parking spots there, but that would involve crossing the fire lane. At this point, we are not sure. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes - June 14,2005 Page 1 of 4 That area may have to be left as part of the green space needed, some trees may have to be planted or landscaped. Dee McNosky questioned Ms. Halprin; any cars that would be in excess would have to go to Dr. Tye's parking, not Ms. Davis'? Ms. Halprin replied correct, Dr. Tye has one extra parking space in his parking calculations and Ms. Davis has 36 parking spaces, but only required to have 26, so she has 10 extra parking spaces. Ms. Halprin stated the properties are not so big that patients would not be able to park in Ms. Davis' parking and walk to Dr. Vinings office. The handicap parking would be up front as well. Lisa Kenney questioned Ms. Halprin Dr. Tye does have the adequate amount of space? Ms. Halprin replied he has one extra space. Lisa Kenney questioned Ms. Halprin Dr. Tye has not applied for any variances in regards to parking? Ms. Halprin replied correct. Lisa Kenney questioned staff what is the theory behind requiring the medical/dental to have 1 parking space for every 150 square feet, but retail to have 1 parking space for every 300 square feet? Barry LeBaron replied the parking standards for Colleyville were adopted many years ago using National parking standards and many times conditions are often different from community to community. The city likes to have full parking lots, however, not over parked. If this facility were a stand alone facility without the opportunity for adjacent parking lots there would be more concern, but these two facilities next to each other are high turn over uses. Meaning the patients are in and out within reasonable amounts of time. The opportunity for shared parking is there. Lisa Kenney questioned Dr. Vinings if three years down the road do you foresee losing patients because there is not adequate parking? Dr. Vinings replied not seeing a problem like that happening. Ed Moore questioned staff if the widening of Highway 26 would impact the parking spaces next to Highway 26 on Dr. Vinings property? Barry LeBaron replied the widening would not have an impact on those spaces. When the property was platted, the widening of Highway 26 was taken into consideration. Rich Munson questioned Ms. Halprin what kind of practice does Dr. Tye have? Ms. Halprin replied an oral surgeon. Dr. Vinings and Dr. Tye usually refer patients to each other. There being no one wishing to speak, Chairman McNosky closed the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. Lisa Kenney made motion to approve case A-05-004. Rich Munson seconded. The motion was approved the vote being: Ayes: Kenney, McNosky, Munson, Moore Nay: Reynolds 2. Case A-05-002 - PUBLIC HEARING - Reconsider a request by Deck Masters for a variance from the regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code regarding the rear building line setbacks for a deck on Lot 32, Block E, Cascades at Timarron Addition located at 7304 Thames Trail Staff member, Barry LeBaron presented the case and briefed the Board members stating the two walls facing the rear yard would be the only ones that would have to be enclosed. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes - June 14,2005 Page 2 of 4 Chairman McNosky opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward to speak. Frank Conkwright, the homeowner, presented the request and briefed the Board members and stated not wanting to enclose the walls of the structure. At this time, Lisa Kenney recuses herself from this case because she lives in the Timarron Addition. Ed Moore questioned staff if the applicant has a building permit? Barry LeBaron replied correct the permit is in compliance with the code. The applicant is requesting a variance to not have to enclose the walls. Rich Munson questioned staff about the code page 46, section 23, the PUD-R section references G, Hand J, K which are defined on page 47, J states no rear yard required where no windows or light of entry face the rear yards, so with that Rich Munson states the applicant could build the structure right on the property line. Barry LeBaron replied correct. Rich Munson states the closed wall structure would be more objectionable than an open structure. There being no one wishing to speak, Chairman McNosky closed the public hearing at 7:45 P.M. Larry Knox made motion to approve case A-05-002. Rich Munson seconded. The motion was denied the vote being: Ayes: Knox, McNosky, Munson Nay: Moore Abstain: Skip Reynolds Rich Munson questioned Mr. Conkwright about the construction of the walls, what materials would be used? Mr. Conkwright replied not exactly sure, mostly stone and cedar. Rich Munson questioned staff if there are requirements for the construction materials? Barry LeBaron replied the code does not have requirements. The Homeowner's Association deed restrictions may have some requirements. Dee McNosky questioned staff if the neighbors need to be informed of the permit application? Barry LeBaron stated the neighbors do not have to be notified of the permit process, they were notified as part of this public hearing for the variance request. Dee McNosky stated having a concern that the neighbors are going to have issues with the wall structure than they would be, had the structure been approved to be open. Rich Munson questioned Ed Moore about his reasoning for the objection to the request? Ed Moore stated he felt the neighbors would not object to the wall if the structure were closed. Chairman McNosky opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward to speak. Mr. Conkwright stated to the Board that the structure is actually going to be on the side yard, not the rear, but at the back of the garage. The walls will be seen from the neighbor's yard by about two feet above the six foot fence. If the structure were open, they would only see a 6 x 6 cedar post. Larry Knox questioned which two rear walls would have to be enclosed? Dee McNosky replied the two walls that would be facing the fence, using the drawings provided. Larry Knox replied the neighbor on Lot 33 on the plat, could still see through the wall that will not be enclosed. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes - June 14,2005rPage 3 of 4 There being no one wishing to speak, Chairman McNosky closed the public hearing at 7:51 P.M. Rich Munson move to resend the first vote. Larry Knox seconded. The motion to resend the first vote was denied, the vote being: Ayes: Knox, Munson Nay: Moore, McNosky Abstain: Reynolds REPORTS AND COMMENTS Barry LeBaron stated to Board members in regards to the language in the rear yard set back requirements. The City Council will consider the amendment in July. Dee McNosky stated she will not be here next month. Lisa Kenney stated she will not be here next month either. ADJOURNMENT Ed Moore made motion to adjourn and Lisa Kenney seconded. Vote was unanimous and the meeting adjourned at approximately 7:56 P.M. Amy Shelley Planning & Zoning Assistant Approved on: July 14, 2005 Note: As a matter of public record, an audio recording of this Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting is available upon request, Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes - June 14,2005 Page 4 of 4