HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-03-06AGENDA
CITY OF GRAPEVINE
BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MEETING
MONDAY EVENING, MARCH 6, 1995, AT 6:00 P.M.
COURT ROOM /COUNCIL CHAMBERS, #205
307 WEST DALLAS ROAD
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS
EmoreTTININKS-1rarnMG,
Ii. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
III. NEW BUSINESS
A. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE
BZA95 -01, SUBMITTED BY FOUR SEASONS MANUFACTURING,
AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME.
B. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE
BZA95 -02, SUBMITTED BY JOHN & LAURIE EGELAND, AND
CONSIDERATION OF SAME.
C. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE
BZA95 -03, SUBMITTED BY PAUL DENNEHY, AND
CONSIDERATION OF SAME.
V. MINUTES
BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF
THE JANUARY 9TH, 1995 MEETING.
VI. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS AND /OR DISCUSSION
VII. ADJOURNMENT
IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND YOU HAVE A DISABILITY
THAT REQUIRES SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS AT THE MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT
THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AT (817) 481 -0377 AT LEAST 24
HOURS IN ADVANCE. REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS WILL BE MADE TO
ASSIST YOUR NEEDS.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551.001 et seq.
ACTS OF THE 1993 TEXAS LEGISLATURE, THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT
MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 3RD DAY OF
MARCH, 1995 AT 5:00 P.M.
• c�.►1`�
COMMUNITY •- DIRECTOR
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OFTARRANT
CITY OF GRAPEVINE
The Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Grapevine, Texas met on Monday
evening, March 6, 1995, at 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Room #205, 307
West Dallas Road, Grapevine, Texas, with the following members present to wit:
Chris Coy
Ery Meyer
Randy Howell
Carl Hecht
Jeff Wood
Jill Davis
Vice - Chairman
Secretary
Member
Member
1st Alternate
2nd Alternate
constituting a quorum. Also present was Councilman Gill Traverse and the following
City Staff:
Marcy Ratcliff
Teresa Wallace
CALL TO ORDER
Planner
Planning Secretary
Vice - Chairman Chris Coy called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
First on the agenda for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider were the election
of officers due to the resignation of Chuck Giffin.
Ery Meyer nominated Chris Coy as Chairman. Jeff Wood seconded the motion which
prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Meyer, Howell, Hecht and Wood
Nays: None
Abstain: Coy
Jeff Wood nominated Randy Howell as Vice Chairman. Ery Meyer seconded the
motion which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht and Wood
Nays: None
1
NEW BUSINESS
BZA95 -01 - FOUR SEASONS MANUFACTURING
The next item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA95 -01
submitted by James Slider who is requesting variances for 500 Industrial Boulevard,
Lot 8, Block 1, Grapevine Industrial Park. The request is to Grapevine Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance 82 -73, as follows:
Section 53.H.1., Landscaping Regulations for the Interior of Parking Lots and vehicular
Use Area which requires 10% of the gross parking areas to be devoted to living
landscaping by installing 9 x 18 foot planter islands at the ends of all rows of parking
and one every 12 parking spaces. The planter islands shall contain at least one tree
and the remainder shall be landscaped with shrubs, lawn, ground cover and other
appropriate material not to exceed three feet in height. Also, a minimum requirement
of one tree to be planted for each 400 square feet or fraction thereof of required
interior landscape area.
The applicant is requesting a 100% variance to the interior landscaping requirements
for a parking lot. If approved, the variance would allow a parking lot with 0% percent
landscaping, specifically no planter islands will be developed with at least one tree at
the ends of all rows of parking and one every 12 parking spaces and no tree planted
for each 400 square feet or fraction thereof of required interior landscape area.
Section 53.H.2., Landscaping Regulations for the Perimeter of Parking Lots and
Vehicular Use which requires all parking lots to be screened from all abutting
properties and/or public rights -of -way with a wall fence, hedge, berm or other durable
landscape barrier. All parking lots abutting an adjacent property line shall maintain a
10 foot perimeter landscape area. Perimeter landscaping areas shall contain at least
one tree for each fifty lineal feet or fraction thereof of perimeter area.
The applicant is requesting a 100% variance to the perimeter landscape barrier in the
front yard setback and the south perimeter landscape area, providing grass as the only
landscape feature. If approved, it would allow a parking lot without any durable
landscape barrier screening the parking lot from adjacent properties and the public
right -of -way.
Section 58.B., Parking and Loading Area Development Standards requires all required
off - street parking and loading and drives, vehicle (autos, trucks, trailers, boats, etc.)
sales, and display areas in all districts shall be paved to a minimum standard
equivalent to four (4) inch concrete slab with six (6) inches by ten (10) inches gauge
mesh or two (2) inch hot mix asphaltic concrete over six (6) inch crushed rock base.
Exceptions to these pavements must be approved by the City Engineer, and be based
2
on equivalency. All reinforcing in concrete shall be suspended in the center of the
slab.
The applicant is requesting a 100% variance to the paving standard. If approved the
variance would allow the applicant to pave a 140 space parking lot with 1.5 inches
of hot mix asphaltic concrete (HMAC) on 6 inches of lime stabilized subgrade (no
crushed rock).
Marcy Ratcliff, City Planner explained an application was submitted to the Department
of Development Services by James Slider for Four Seasons Manufacturing, Inc. Four
Seasons submitted a building permit and was denied because they did not meet the
Landscaping Regulations and Paving Standards. They requested the Public Works
Department review the paving proposal. The request was denied because it was not
equivalent to the current paving requirements.
Marcy Ratcliff further explained Staff finds a special condition for the first request to
vary from the interior landscaping requirements for the proposed off - street parking lot,
because of the existing development and the last expansion to the parking lot. Four
Seasons received a variance BZA84 -13 on the last expansion of the parking lot
allowing a 0% landscaped front yard and a 0% interior landscaping of the parking lot.
The variance was granted because when the building was originally constructed a
landscaped front yard and parking lot were not required. In reviewing the request,
Staff looked at the existing development and the surrounding properties and found
that most have no landscaping whatsoever. Staff felt by granting a variance to the
interior parking lot area would be in keeping with the existing and surrounding
development.
However, Staff did not see a special condition for the second and third requests.
Staff did not find any physical hardship for not providing the perimeter landscaping
barrier. The applicant is providing the appropriate setbacks, but is not willing to
landscape the property. Additionally, Staff did not find a physical hardship for not
providing the required paving standard. The applicant has noted the parking lot is
temporary, but we can not know the time span of their temporary use. Also, if the
parking lot were to become permanent, would the property owner then upgrade the
parking lot? Staff's position is that we look to the future to make sure all
development will be maintained to a certain standard to insure the health and welfare
of the City as a whole.
James Slider, Consultant for Four Seasons Manufacturing was introduced to address
questions from the Board relative to the number of parking spaces provided and the
reason they propose to develop a parking lot without any landscaping. Mr. Slider
related that the company is requesting to develop a parking lot that was similar in
nature to the existing parking lot which does not have planter islands or landscaping.
3
Mr. Ron George, Manager of the facility, was sworn in to address questions from the
Board relative to the parking lot. He told the Board that the company prefers not to
provide perimeter landscaping because they feel that they would present a security
problem for employee's vehicles. He said they were having vehicles vandalized and
felt that screening the parking lot would prohibit visibility and increase theft.
With no other guests to speak, Randy Howell moved to close the public hearing. Ery
Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
During discussion members questioned the validity of the request to vary from the
current parking lot pavement requirements. They also discussed the perimeter
landscaping of the parking lot as a safety concern. The Board could find no special
condition for the second and third requests.
Randy Howell moved, with a second by Ery Meyer, that a special condition did exist
for the first request only and that being the existing development did not have interior
landscaped planter islands because they were not required by the City of Grapevine
when the building was originally developed. The motion prevailed by the following
vote:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
Randy Howell moved, with a second by Ery Meyer, to approve a 100% variance to
the interior landscaping requirement for a parking lot allowing a parking lot with 0%
percent landscaping, specifically no planter island will be required with at least one
tree at the ends of all rows of parking and one every 12 parking spaces and no tree
planted for each 400 square feet or fraction thereof of required interior landscape area
as shown on the site plan for Lot 8, Block 1, Grapevine Industrial Park addressed as
500 Industrial Boulevard. The motion prevailed as follows:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
BZA95 -02 - JOHN & LAURIE EGELAND
Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA95 -02 submitted by John &
Laurie Egeland who are requesting a variance for 1 Basin Trail, Lot 17, Lake Forest
Addition. The requests are to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82 -73,
Section 15.G.2., "R -7.5" Single Family District which requires a twenty five (25) foot
rear yard setback. The first request is to allow a proposed room addition a five (5)
FA
foot variance to encroach the twenty five (25) foot rear yard. If approved, it would
allow a twenty (20) foot rear yard setback. The second request is to allow the
existing residence to encroach five (5) foot into the required rear yard setback. If
approved, it would allow a twenty (20) foot rear yard setback.
Marcy Ratcliff, City Planner, told the Board Mr. & Mrs. Egeland were proposing to add
an additional bedroom to their home. They were informed when they requested a
building permit for the bedroom addition that the existing house did not meet the
current twenty five foot rear yard setback requirement and the addition as shown on
the plot plan would also encroach the rear yard setback requirement. The Building
Inspection Department told Mrs. Egeland she would need to file for a variance to allow
the existing house and the proposed addition to encroach the twenty five foot rear
yard setback. She told the Board Staff could find no special exception for the first
request because the lot appeared to be large enough to build on the north side of the
existing house. Staff found a special condition exists for the house as currently
developed. The house was built in 1966 prior to the building line setback inspection
requirement by the city and was not the fault of the current owner.
John Egeland was introduced to respond to questions relative to the request. Mr.
Egeland told the Board his property was adjacent to the Corp of Engineer property and
he could not build below the 572 elevation flowage easement line which ran along the
north and east side of his property. He told the Board the 572 elevation line shown
on the plot plan was not accurate to the information he had from received from the
Corps of Engineers. Also, he told the Board he could not build an addition above the
existing house because the deed restrictions of the Lake Forest Addition would not
allow the view of the lake to be impeded by two story homes.
Marcy Ratcliff reported there were three letters of approval by surrounding property
owners.
Ery Meyer moved, with a second by Randy Howell, to close the public hearing. The
motion prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
After a brief discussion, Carl Hecht moved, with a second by Ery Meyer, that a special
condition did exists for both requests in that the lot was irregular in shape, with a
large portion existing below the Corps of Engineers 572 flowage easement line in
which no habitable structures could be built and deed restricted to one story. The
motion prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
5
Carl Hecht moved, with a second by Ery Meyer, to allow a five (5) foot variance to
the twenty five (25) foot rear yard setback allowing a twenty (20) foot rear yard
setback for the existing house and the proposed addition on Lot 17, Lake Forest
Addition addressed as 1 Basin Trail, Grapevine, Texas. The motion prevailed as
follows:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
BZA95 -03 - DELANEY VINEYARDS
Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA95 -03 submitted by Paul
Dennehy for Delaney Vineyards who is requesting a variance for 5001 Mulberry
Boulevard, Lot 2, Block 1, Delaney Vineyards. The request is to Grapevine
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82 -73, Section 60.1.3., Sign Standards which limits
the size of a construction sign to 64 square feet. The applicant is requesting a
variance to increase the area of the construction sign by 96 square feet to allow an
overall sign size of 160 square feet.
Mr. Paul Dennehy was sworn in to address any questions relative to the request. He
told Board members the sign placed on the property included a rendering of the
development as well as the names of the architects and contractors.
Councilman Gil Traverse was sworn in to speak to the Board regarding the request.
He told them the City Council was working very hard to attract wineries to Grapevine.
Construction signs typically contain only text indicating the names of architects,
engineers, landscape architects and contractors. This sign is different because it also
includes an artistic rendering of the proposed development. As currently shown, the
artistic rendering covers approximately 84 square feet of the sign. The remaining 76
square feet includes all the text. This sign is more than just a typical construction
sign. A special condition could be based on the fact that the majority of the sign is
an artistic rendering and is not addressed by the Grapevine Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Traverse also told the Board the applicant could have two separate signs; one
development sign and one construction sign. Each type of sign is allowed a maximum
of 64 square feet, which would total to 128 square feet. The applicant sign is still
32 square feet over what is allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. The text would meet
the requirements with two different signs. A special condition could be that if the
sign had been built as a development sign and a construction sign, the size of the sign
would be very close to meeting the requirement of a total of 128 square feet.
With no other guests to speak to the request, Ery Meyer moved to close the public
hearing. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
6
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
After a brief discussion, Carl Hecht moved that a special condition did exists to allow
a combination construction /development rendering sign and that being the sign would
not be visible from the highway if it were limited to the 64 square feet requirement
for construction signs. Jeff Wood seconded the motion which prevailed by the
following vote:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
Carl Hecht moved to approve the variance request to allow the increase of the total
area of the sign by 96 square feet to allow an overall sign size of 160 square feet on
Lot 2, Block 1, Delaney Vineyards Addition addressed as 5001 Mulberry Boulevard,
Grapevine, Texas. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the
following vote.
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
MINUTES
Next the Board of Zoning Adjustment considered the minutes of the January 9, 1995,
meeting.
Randy Howell moved to approve the minutes of January 9, 1995 as amended. Carl
Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
MISCELLANEOUS
Carl Hecht spoke briefly to the Board about a seminar the North Texas Commission
would be having on transportation and warehousing logistics for the metroplex area.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further discussion, Ery Meyer made a motion to adjourn. Randy Howell
seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Coy, Howell, Meyer, Hecht, and Wood
Nays: None
7
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 P.M.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY
OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 1995.
ATTEST:
SECRETARY
E--CMg
CHAIRMAN