Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board of Adjustment-Minutes-3/25/2003ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING -MARCH 25, 2003 REGULAR MEETING: Chairman McNosky called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. on March 25, 2003. Roll Call Present: Rich Munson, Skip Reynolds, Butch Bercher, Larry Henry, Dee McNosky, Ron Sturgeon, Pat Davis Staff: Tom Niederauer, Jan Levy, Eddie Edwards Approval of Minutes March 11, 2003 Butch Bercher moved to approve the minutes. Larry Henry seconded the motion. The motion was passed by a unanimous vote. 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 (out of five) affirmative votes by members of the Board. The five voting members were: Rich Munson, Skip Reynolds, Butch Bercher, Dee McNosky, and Larry Henry; however, the alternate members may enter into the full discussion of the case. Agenda Items Case A-03-003 -PUBLIC HEARING - Request by Larry Cole, Foxcreek Residential Development, Inc. for a variance from the fence setback regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code at 401 Vintage Court, Lot 17, Block 5, Remington Park Addition, Phase III Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Board and reviewed the staff briefing. He displayed overheads of the location of the property, the site plan, and pictures of the property and surrounding areas. He said there was one letter of opposition included in their packets; however, three additional letters of opposition were received the afternoon of the meeting and copies of those letters have been made and distributed to the Board members and the applicant. There was a question about the location of the driveway on the adjacent lot at 6104 Remington Parkway. Staff informed the Board and showed a picture to indicate the driveway was located at the far end of the lot and was not immediately adjacent to the lot at 401 Vintage Court. Chairman McNosky opened the public hearing portion of the meeting. Those present wishing to speak were: Larry Cole, applicant, presented the case to the Board. He said he is the developer of Remington Park and also acts as the Chairman of the Architectural Control Board for the subdivision. He Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -March 25, 2003 Page 1 of 3 Approved on Apri/ 8, 2003 explained how this was a very unusually shaped lot that is impacted by having street setbacks on three sides and the owner, Peter Dibella, wanted to achieve some privacy in the back yard. He said seven of the eight board members on the Architectural Control Board viewed the plans and had no objections. He said they determined there would be no obstruction of view on the street and the aesthetics of the proposal was very important to the subdivision as a whole. He said the good side of the fence will face out and the Architectural Control Board agreed that they didn't want to look into the Dibellas' back yard. He said that Peter Dibella is a landscaper and what he will provide for landscaping will be very attractive and well maintained. Mr. Cole told the Zoning Board of Adjustment members that no neighbors spoke with him, as the developer of Remington Park, or the home owner, so they were surprised by the opposition and have not had time to talk with the neighbors who expressed opposition in writing, and did not attend the meeting to openly discuss their concerns. Pete Dibella, 401 Vintage Court, said there is a beautiful mature live oak tree on the lot closer to Vintage Court and they wanted to preserve the tree for the neighborhood. He said that is why they positioned their home as they did on the lot and they needed to build a home that is in the same style and size for the subdivision. He said they would like to build a pool off the patio as others have done in the neighborhood. Mr. Dibella said he will provide landscaping that benefits the neighborhood and he is open to adjusting the setback a little to provide for the landscaping. He said maintenance will not be a problem since he is in the business. Ron Sturgeon asked Mr. Dibella if he met with his neighbors, could a compromise be reached? Butch Bercher said there was a compromise offered in the packet with the possibility of using a wrought iron fence. Mr. Dibella said that privacy is an issue and the growth of the landscaping will not mature until three to four years to provide privacy. He said he has three children and it is very important to him that they have a fenced area to play in that is not visible from the street. Ron Sturgeon asked the applicant if he could split the difference from the setback he is asking for and the required setback and build the fence in that location. Larry Henry said there is possibility of the Board not granting a variance and before they get into negotiating a different setback for the fence, the Board needs to discuss the merits of the case. Larry Cole stated that originally he felt the less ground to be maintained outside the fence, the better it will be maintained. There was no one else present wishing to speak, and Chairman McNosky closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Rich Munson said he drove around Remington Park and thought this was the only site where a solid fence would be adjacent to the sidewalk. He said the elevation of the street across from the fence, Chestnut Bend, would allow people coming off that street to have a clear view into the Dibellas' back yard. He said he saw another lot with a wrought iron fence around the pool, and he is not inclined to agree with a solid fence built in that area. Larry Henry said the Board needs to deal with the ordinances and constraints they are to work within. He said a wrought iron fence with shrubs as proposed by the letter writer does not present Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -March 25, 2003 Page 2 of 3 Approved on Apri/ 8, 2003 a good argument for the safety issue. He said when the shrubs fill in, there will be a solid barrier and that will be no difference than a wooden fence. Butch Bercher said the applicant did not receive the letters of opposition until just prior to the meeting and that puts the applicant and the board at a disadvantage because the neighbors did not appear at the meeting. Skip Reynolds said it is significant that the applicant has requested the Board to table the case, but the next time they appear before the Board he wants more information. He said he is troubled with the fencing issues because facing the house the way the applicant has, it disturbs the neighbors. He said there are three issues that are of importance and they are the safety issues, the aesthetics and property values of the neighborhood. He said there have been occasions and it is helpful if an applicant proposes a compromise plan such as a Plan A and a Plan B to the Board. He encouraged the applicant to look at other types of fences that would be appealing to the neighbors. Skip Reynolds moved to table the case until the April 8, 2003 meeting. Butch Bercher seconded the motion. Skip Reynolds amended his motion to include that the case may be tabled up to thirty days if necessary and the applicant will contact the City staff and advise them of the status of the request. Rich Munson seconded the amendment. The vote being: Ayes: Munson, Reynolds, Bercher, Henry, McNosky Noes: None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by acclamation. They're being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Jan Levy, Planning & Zoning Assistant Approved on: April 8, 2003 as written. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes -March 25, 2003 Page 3 of 3 Approved on Apri/ 8, 2003