Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-01-04AGENDA CITY OF GRAPEVINE - BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MEETING MONDAY EVENING, JANUARY 4, 1993, AT 6:00 P.M. COURT ROOM/COUNCIL CHAMBERS, #205 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD GRAPEVINE, TEXAS I. CALL TO ORDER II. OATH OF TRUTH III. NEW BUSINESS A. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA92-27, SUBMITTED BY PAYTON WRIGHT FORD AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. B. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA92-28, SUBMITTED BY DURAND BUILDERS AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. C. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA92-29, SUBMITTED BY ROBERT PRICE AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. IV. MINUTES BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 2, 1992, MEETING. V. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS AND/OR DISCUSSION VI. ADJOURNMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6252-17, V.A.T.C.S., AS AMENDED BY CHAPTER 227, ACTS OF THE 61ST LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SESSION, THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS .THE 31TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1992, AT 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY DEVtLOPMENT DIRECTOR STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Grapevine, Texas, met in regular session, Monday evening, January 4, 1993, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Room #205, 307 West Dallas Road, Grapevine, Texas, with the following members present to wit: Charles Giffin Chairman Patti Bass Vice -Chairman Randy Howell Secretary Ery Meyer Member Chris Coy Member constituting a quorum with 1 st Alternate, Ron Williams, and 2nd Alternate, Al Zimmerman absent. Also present was City Council Representative, Gil Traverse, and the following City Staff: Greg Wheeler Marcy Ratcliff Ray Collins Gerrie Anderson Building Official Planner Planner Administrative Secretary Chairman Charles Giffin called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. NEW BUSINESS The first item of new business was for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider BZA92-27, submitted by Payton -Wright Revocable Trust for Payton -Wright Ford located at 440 State Highway 114 West. Greg Wheeler explained that staff recommended approval for the third and fifth variances as requested, and denial for the first, second and fourth variances as requested; however Staff would recommend approval of the modified first and second request, if the applicant provided the required 10 foot landscape buffer as noted in Item 4. The variances requested are from Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 as follows: 11 1. Section 26.F.3. Highway Commercial - Minimum Open Space of the new development is 15 percent. The amount of open space required in Phase 3 Construction is 13,245 square feet. 2. Section 26.F.4. Highway Commercial - Maximum Impervious Surface of the new development is 85 percent. The maximum impervious surface is 75,550 square feet. 3. Section 26.G.3. Highway Commercial - Front Yard Setback, a required 25 foot landscape area with no parking, storage or vehicular use area, except for a driveway entrance. 4. Section 53. .2.b. Landscaping - Perimeter Landscaping requires a landscape buffer area of at least 10 feet to be maintained between the edge of the parking and the adjacent property line. 5. Section 43.E.3. Changing Nonconforming Uses, states the Board has the ability to approve as a special exception the remodeling or enlargement of an existing nonconforming building and allow the structure to exist as developed. The first request is to allow the Phase 3 Construction Area to be 100% paved area and provide no open space/landscaping area. If approved, the variance would be for 0% open space/landscaped area which is 15% less than the minimum required. Staff recommends denial of this request. Staff recommends approval of a modified variance of 8%, which would allow 7% of the lot to be open space which would be provided by the required 10 foot perimeter landscape buffer. The second request is to allow the Phase 3 Construction Area to be 100% impervious area (nonlandscaped area). If approved, the variance would be 100% impervious area, 15% more than the maximum allowed (85%). Staff recommends denial of this request. Staff also recommends approval of a modified variance of 8%, which would allow 93% of the lot to be impervious area. The third request is to allow the required 25 foot landscaped front yard setback in the Phase 3 Construction Area to be paved to the property line. If approved, the variance would be 25 feet, Staff recommends approval of this request, because of the existing development to the east. The fourth request is to allow the required 10 foot perimeter landscaped buffer be reduced to 0 feet. If approved, the variance would allow pavement up to the north and western property lines of the Phase 3 Construction Area. The applicant, by not providing this buffer area, is not providing open space. Staff recommends denial of this request, because there is ample room to provide the landscaped buffer area. Im The fifth request is a special exception to allow the enlargement of a nonconforming development and to allow the existing structure to remain as shown on the site plan. Staff recommends approval of this request, because of the development is existing and the expansion does not prolong the life of the use. Mr. Jimmy Payton took the Oath of Truth and added to the discussion. Mr. Payton explained that when the highway expanded, it took in part of the front of the property. He explained that in the front of a pipe fence that runs along the frontage road is a 25 foot ditch which they would like to fill-in and maintain. Also Mr. Payton noted that no one would be able to see the landscaping along the fence at the back of the property and that it would be hard to maintain. Mr. Payton also added that someday they would like to expand to the west. Charles Giffin asked about the drainage situation after the property next to them is developed. Mr. Walter Elliott took the Oath of Truth and explained the drainage would all be brought toward the front and flume out toward Highway 114. There was discussion concerning the buffer requirement along the rear property line that abuts residential and along the side property line that does not require a buffer between buildings because of the commercial zoning. Randy Howell made a motion to close the public hearing. Patti Bass seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Mr. Payton explained to the Board that 10 feet of landscaping required in the back would wipe out 25 parking spaces. He noted that their property is landlocked and can only expand to the side. After further discussion, Patti Bass made a motion that a special condition did exist for Item 5, Changing Non -conforming Uses. Ms. Bass stated the special conditions are the remodel and enlargement of the lot will not expand the life or use of the property. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman 3 Patti Bass made a motion to approve the special exception to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Section 43.E.3., Changing Nonconforming Uses, to allow the expansion of Payton Wright Ford for the pavement for parking. Chris Coy seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Patti Bass made a motion that a special condition did exist on Item 3, Section 26.G.3. Highway Commercial - Front Yard Setback, being the other half of the property has been developed with pavement up to the front property line and is able to maintain the conformity of the existing development. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Patti Bass then made a motion to grant the variance to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 26.G.., Highway Commercial, Front Yard Setback, to allow the required 25 foot landscaped front yard setback in the Phase 3 Construction Area to be paved to the property line. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman There was discussion about landscaping the area out front between the property line and the existing concrete instead of wasting the space in the rear as landscaping. Mr. Payton said the State Highway Department gave them permission to landscape along the frontage road as long as Payton Wright Ford maintains and pays for the landscaping. Ery Meyer made a motion that a special condition exist for the request for variance to the western and northern property lines, Phase 11 Construction Area, being the north property line is already existing and the variance and special condition applies to the northern property line and not the west property line and to maintain the 10 foot landscape buffer. Chris Coy seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: rd Ayes: Giffin, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: Bass Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Ery Meyer then made a motion to grant the variance to the perimeter landscaping that applies to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 52.H.2.b., to allow the 10 foot variance to the north property line and require a 10 foot perimeter landscaping for the west property line. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: Bass Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Chris Coy made a motion that a special condition exist for Section 26.F.3, Highway Commercial -Minimum Open Space and to Section 26.F.4, Highway Commercial - Maximum Impervious Surface requirements and that the lot, as designed with the variances we approve with the existing uses of the lot should be as the special conditions, to allow the minimum open space and maximum impervious surface area based on the percentage that is to be determined by Staff. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: Bass Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Chris Coy made a motion to approve the variance to Section 26.F.3, Highway Commercial -Minimum Open Space, to allow the variance as calculated by staff, and to Section 26.F.4, Highway Commercial -Maximum Impervious Surface, to cover the remaining area as calculated by staff. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: Bass Absent: Williams, Zimmerman The next item of new business for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA92-28, submitted by Durand Builders Service who is requesting variances for the property located at 650 Industrial Boulevard, Lot 9A, Grapevine Industrial Park. Durand Builders Service is requesting variances on the percentage of masonry required for the new addition and a special exception to allow the existing building to remain as developed. The variances requested are to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning 9 Ordinance 82-73, Section 54, Masonry Requirements, which requires all principal structures to have at least 70% of the exterior wall, excluding doors and windows to be constructed of brick, stone, or other masonry. This request is to allow the addition to the existing nonconforming structure to match the building's masonry as currently developed and shown on the elevation sheet, which would be a 28% variance. If approved, it would allow the proposed addition to contain only 42% masonry. The second request is to Section 43.E.3, Changing Nonconforming Uses, which states the Board has the ability to approve as a special exception the remodeling or enlargement of an existing nonconforming building and allow the structure to exist as developed. This request for a special exception would allow the existing building to remain as built and allow the enlargement of the nonconforming use. Staff recommends approval for both variance requests. Mel Roberts with Wrico Stamping took the Oath of Truth and explained the expansion of the building would enhance the property and would add new employees. After further discussion, Patti Bass made a motion to close the public hearing. Chris Coy seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Randy Howell then made a motion that a special condition does exist for the variance requested to Section 43.E.3, and the special condition being the existing building and parking lot structure was developed prior to the setback requirements for the parking lot and will not prolong the use of the property. Patti Bass seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Randy Howell made a motion to accept the variance requested to Section 43.E.3, Changing the Nonconforming Use to approve as a special exception the remodeling or enlargement of an existing nonconforming building and allow the structure to exist as developed. Patti Bass seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman 1.1 Randy Howell made a motion that a special condition does exist for Section 54, being the current building exists with 42% masonry requirements and not 70%, and would enhance the ability of maintaining the same structure as is, by allowing this variance. Chris Coy seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Randy Howell then made a motion to grant the variance to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 54, Masonry Requirements, to allow the proposed addition to contain only 42% masonry. Chris Coy seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman The last item of new business was for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider BZA92-29, submitted by Mr. Robert Price for his property located at 2947 Canyon Drive, Lot 13, Block 9, Oak Creek Estates. Mr. Price is requesting variances from Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 15.G.2., R-7.5, Single Family District Regulations which requires a 25 foot rear yard building setback. The request is to allow a proposed covered carport with a second story patio, a 15 foot variance to encroach into the rear yard as shown on the plot plan. If approved, it will allow a 10 foot rear yard setback. The second variance request is to Section 15.G.3, R-7.5, Single Family District Regulations which requires a six foot side yard building setback. This request is to allow a proposed covered carport with a second story patio, a three foot variance to encroach the six foot side yard as shown on the plot plan. If approved, it will allow a three foot side yard setback. Ray Collins stated that staff recommends denial for both requests because the lot is already being used to its maximum coverage. Ms. Collins explained that in 1987, Mr. Price came before the Board and requested variances to the side and rear yard requirements for the purpose of adding a room to his residence, but the Board found no special condition and denied the case. She also explained that if Mr. Price is granted the variance and builds the carport in the required setback, he can use the deck as a matter of right. Robert Price took the Oath of Truth and used the projector to show the Board slides of his property. Mr. Price explained that he does not have enough storage to place ig cars and tools under coverage. He also explained that if the carport was built in the required setback, there would not be enough room for two cars. William V. Martin, Jr., of 2940 Wentwood Drive, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth. Mr. Martin submitted additional photographs to the Board showing how his back yard would be exposed if the variance is granted for the carport and deck. Mr. Martin stated opposition of the variances requested. Laura Townsend of 2946 Wentwood, took the Oath of Truth and explained that she is directly behind Mr. Price and if the variance is granted to build the carport and deck, their privacy would be infringed upon. After further discussion, Patti Bass made a motion to close the public hearing. Chris Coy seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman Patti Bass then made a motion that a special condition did not exist for either request. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman MINUTES Next the Board of Zoning Adjustment considered the minutes of the November 2, 1992, meeting. Chris Coy made a motion to accept the minutes of the November 2, 1992, meeting as written. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman With no further discussion, Patti Bass made a motion to adjourn. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: FQ Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Howell, Meyer, Coy Nays: None Absent: Williams, Zimmerman The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 P.M. Lei agell OY-11 UXVA ILI I= I *N-AVIILOI ILI a 1 0 1 6M 1 -1 ME ATTEST: SE C R ET-A-RY 1"i9 0