Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board of Adjustment-Minutes-6/11/2002Colleyville Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -June 11, 2002 Page 1 of 6 Approved on Ju/y 9, 2002 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING -JUNE 11, 2002 REGULAR MEETING: Chairman McNosky called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. on June 11, 2002. Roll Call: Present: Rich Munson, Jeff Byerly, Larry Henry, Dee McNosky Staff: Barry LeBaron, Tom Niederauer, Bob Younger Approval of Minutes: March 12, 2002 Larry Henry moved to approve the minutes. Jeff Byerly seconded the motion. The motion was passed by a unanimous "Aye" voice vote. Swearing In: Dee McNosky swore in the following member: Rich Munson, Place 1 Chairman McNosky explained the procedures of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and outlined the meeting format for the audience. She explained that approval of a variance requires four (of five) affirmative votes by members of the Board. Since only four members are present, Chairman McNosky gave the applicants an opportunity to "opt out" for tonight's hearing and to defer their case until a full five-member Board could be present at a future meeting. Robert Hardisty, the applicant on case #A-02-005 stated that he would like to wait until his case is called, and if the fifth member was not present by then, he would "opt out" at that time. PUBLIC HEARING -Request of Frank Herein, Jr. for a variance from the regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code regarding fencing to allow the construction of a fence on the property line instead of the 30' front building line at 4115 Jackson Road, Lot 1, Block 6, Brighton Oaks, Case A-02-003. Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Board and reviewed the staff briefing and told them that staff had not received any correspondence in response to the notice of public hearing. Mrs. Herein was present to represent the case to the Board. She said the variance request results from a safety issue because they have a three year old and their house is very close to the street and they want to keep the child away from the street and prevent cars from entering into their yard. Mr. Herein said the fence will be professionally installed and have an electric gate. Mrs. Herein said they spoke with the other neighbors and they all agreed and were supportive of their request for a variance. Mr. Herein indicated other locations in the area that have fences over the building lines. Colleyville Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes-June 11, 2002 Page 2 of 6 Approved on Ju/y 9, 2002 Mr. Herein explained where the fence would be located in response to questions by the Board. He said the fence would be placed behind the roadway, behind the ditch, and behind the trees. He said the gate would be about 20' off the roadway so that when he pulls in with his truck the gate will open towards the property. There was discussion about what would happen if Jackson Road was ever widened. Bob Younger, Building Inspection Supervisor, told the applicant that if the variance is granted, Mr. Herpin will need to present a survey verifying the property line. He said the gate will need to be placed far enough back so that traffic would not be blocked when a vehicle enters the driveway. Mr. LeBaron restated that a surveyor would have to identify the building line and mark it so that the fence would not encroach into the public right-of-way. He said the engineering department will require that there be one full car length allowed prior to the placement of the gate. The applicant, Mr. Herpin, said they measured twenty feet past the ditch, not from the street asphalt to locate where they intend to place the gate. He said he would be able to place the gate even farther back if it was needed. Chairman McNosky closed the public hearing. Larry Henry stated that the variance is because of a safety issue, however, if they look at the adjacent properties, those fence lines run along a similar set back and he would not be opposed to the variance. He said he had a concern with the measurement from the pavement to the street and he'd be more comfortable if there were a little more space and they moved the gate back another five feet so they would not create an additional safety issue. Chairman McNosky said she is really familiar with the property and because the front door is so close to the street, she would not want to see the fence moved closer to the home, but she would want to see the gate in a location that the vehicles could be moved entirely off the roadway before they come to the gate. The applicant suggested that the Board approve the variance with the stipulation that staff will determine the proper location of the gate to accommodate the gate being far enough off the roadway to not be a problem. Mr. LeBaron said the engineering staff would not allow a gate to be placed too close to the road. The Board further discussed the location of the proposed fence versus the location of the property line and the relationship of the designated area for the placement of the gate. Byerly -Moved approval of the application that the fence be built of the materials and in a fashion stated in the application, and that the fence be placed behind the trees as shown on the illustration during the hearing, and that the gate be subject to the Colleyville Building Code provision regarding setbacks of gates from the property-line and street edge. Munson seconded. Chairman McNosky called for the vote. The vote being: Ayes: Byerly, Munson, Henry, McNosky Noes: none Colleyville Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -June 11, 2002 Page 3 of 6 Approved on Ju/y 9, 2002 2. PUBLIC HEARING - Request of Gregory A. Likness for a variance from the regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code regarding fencing to allow the construction of a fence over the 15' side building line at 3716 Briarhaven Lane, Lot 5, Block 5, Woodbriar Estates, Section Two, Case A-02-004. Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Board and reviewed the staff briefing. He said this is a case similar to the request Mr. Likness asked for last November, but with a slight change in the location. He told the Board that Mr. Likness has worked with his neighbors and others in the neighborhood to make adjustments to the request that they are able to support. Mr. Niederauer told the Board that staff distributed copies of nine letters from the neighbors in support of the variance request. Mr. Gregory Likness was present to represent the case. He told the Board that there was a safety concern because the only place the grandchildren can ride their trikes is on the driveway surface and the driveway slopes quickly into the street. He said there have been changes in the dynamics of how often the grandchildren will be using the paved area because theywill be living at his home and this has prompted him to pursue once again a variance. He said the pictures provided show there is not a visibility problem with the location of the fence and gate. He explained why he is requesting the location for the gate he is, and explained that with the proposed location, mobility will not be compromised. He explained the construction materials he planned on using for the proposed fence. Mr. Likness said there are fences in his neighborhood that are placed closer to the street than what he is asking for and the approval of the variance request would give him the best use of his property. Tom Niederauer said that all of the fence projects the Board is considering tonight would need to be engineered in the field even after a variance is granted because it is difficult to tell from the photographs and drawings the exact location of the fences. He said he consulted with the building official Bob Younger and they are not certain where the fence would be exactly located relative to the curb line of the street. Tom said the gate will need to be placed off the roadway to allow for the stacking of cars and Mr. Likness may have to use a horizontal type gate ratherthan a swinging type gate. Mr. Likness said that whatever would work best is all right with him. The Board entered into discussion with staff about codes and requirements for gates. Jeff Montague, 3717 Briarhaven Lane, said they have lived across the street from the Likness' property for eleven years and they refer to Greenbriar as "the race track" because there are no stop signs in the area and cars drive at excessive speeds. He said that Mr. Likness' grandchildren need to be in a safe environment. He said he has no problem with the type offence the applicant is proposing and he's driven around the neighborhood and many privacy fences are falling down and need to be replaced and the materials Mr. Likness is using are high quality and won't deteriorate. He said the proposed fence would be of better quality. He said the safety of the Colleyville Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -June 11, 2002 Page 4 of 6 Approved on Ju/y 9, 2002 children is the most important element of the request because Greenbriar is a very dangerous street. Mike Permenter, 3717 Rosebriar Lane, said he lives directly behind the Liknesses home and he is probably most impacted by the fence. He said the applicant's property is unusual because of the very small, tight area for the driveway and garage. He said the backyard is supposed to be a place to relax and the applicant wouldn't want to pave the backyard for the grandchildren to ride trikes. Mr. Permenter said he would like to see the vehicles currently parked in the driveway behind a fence. He said the lot has full exposure because of being a corner lot and is impacted by the width of the street and because of the extreme width of the street a gate should not be required to be placed as far off the street as was considered by the previous case. He said there is plenty of width for a car to swing out around a car entering into the driveway. Mr. Permenter said the problem with moving the gate further into the property is that the width of the driveway will need to expand and the length of the gate will be greatly increased. He said the current fence is of good quality and is nice and neat and good fences make for good neighbors. The Board entered into discussion about landscaping for the fence. Henry -Moved approval of the application that the fence be built with the location and position of the gate to be determined by the Engineering Department, and that the street side of the fence be landscaped with shrubs planted no more than four feet (4') apart. Munson seconded. Chairman McNosky called for the vote. The vote being: Ayes: Byerly, Munson, Henry, McNosky Noes: none 3. PUBLIC HEARING - Request of Robert Hardisty for a variance from the regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code regarding fencing to allow the construction of a fence over the 40' building lines at 5000 Montclair Drive, Lot 5R-2, DP Arrington Limited, Case A- 02-005. As noted above, Mr. Hardisty requested that his case be heard at a later hearing since the fifth voting Board member had not yet arrived for the meeting. His request for postponement to the July meeting was granted. 4. PUBLIC HEARING -Request of ICS (Robert Remsik) for a variance from the regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code regarding parking to allow for a reduction in parking requirements or parking within the landscape setbacks at 817 Glade Road, the southwest corner of Glade Road & Glade Creek Drive, Lot 8R, Block 2, Village Park Addition, Case A-02-006. Colleyville Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -June 11, 2002 Page 5 of 6 Approved on Ju/y 9, 2002 Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Board and reviewed the staff briefing. He said the request would not reduce the amount of required landscaped open space, but in fact the business is providing 27% and the requirement is for 20%. Robert Remsik, Innovative Construction Services, 2805 Oakridge Drive, Flower Mound, was present to represent the case. He said the building would be used as a personal training facility and they've worked very hard to achieve a residential feel with a cozy walk-up appeal. He said the proposed plan achieves that; however, it has problems that require a variance. Mr. Remsik said the parking still lines up with the current existing parking that is on both sides, it will not impede any vision and they will be able to provide more landscaping. He said the owners and the architect are in attendance at the meeting and available for any questions. Cindy Gaston, co-owner of the personal training facility, said they wanted to keep the parking they proposed because it is more in keeping with the size of the building. She said they don't need all of the parking spaces, but if they ever sold the building, someone else might need them. Marty Poslick, 4932 Lakewood Drive, had questions about the application and the location of the parking area. Barry LeBaron explained the purpose of the variance and indicated the location of the proposed parking spaces in relationship to the proposed building. Chairman McNosky told Mr. Poslick that he would be facing the landscaping area and building rather than looking at a parking area. The applicant said the building would be a single story building. Barry LeBaron explained the history of the parking requirement that was created in 1996 and how it was to encourage the placement of buildings closer to the street with the parking behind the buildings. Chairman McNosky said she has attended several meetings throughout the county and many cities are trying to encourage building footprints and landscaping be moved closer to the street with parking scattered around the building or behind the building at those meetings. She said this prevents a massive sea of cement especially in larger shopping centers like the Albertson's shopping center. She said the citizens are trying to encourage builders to move the buildings closer to the street with scattered parking to break up that kind of monotony. Larry Henry said that he agreed with the design of the lot. Chairman McNosky said the resale of the property is in the best interest of the City as well as the applicant and they should make sure that the property is set up and can be resold and retooled for another use if necessary. Rich Munson said he sees the proposed site plan as an improvement to the intersection and he thinks the plan is a great idea and he's been waiting for attractive commercial for a long time. gyerly -Moved approval of the application as a variance from Section 3.24.E to permit parking beyond the building setback area as shown on the site plan of the application. Henry seconded. Chairman McNosky called for the vote. The vote being: Colleyville Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -June 11, 2002 Page 6 of 6 Approved on Ju/y 9, 2002 Ayes: Byerly, Munson, Henry, McNosky Noes: none ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned by acclamation. They're being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Jan Levy, Planning & Zoning Assistant Approved on: July 9, 2002 as written. m/min/z b a minutes for 6-12-02