HomeMy WebLinkAboutBBA1989-10ST14 01F,
CCUT17 OF TAPRAN3'
C-111"Y (_)p GIFY�PFVTINE
Me Fpi' i 1ding F.oard of AT.ppeals for the City of Gralyev'JIne, 7'exas, mt in
reQuiar session Monday, October 9, '1989, at 6-30 P.M., at 307 West Dallas
Road. Room #205, Grapevine, Texas, with the following, members present to
wit -
Joe ldps= Chairm, ar.
H. J. Harper Vice-Chairman
Art Gordon .umber
constituting a quorum with Members Greg Czapanskiy and Elbert Bailey
absent. Also present was Council Representative, Ted Ware, and the
following City Staff to wit:
Greg Wheeler Assistant Dailding Official
Carrie Taylor Administrative Secretary
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Joe Lipscoirb called the meeting to order at 6.30 P.M.
NEW BUSINESS
Chairman Lipscomb postponed Case BBA 89-08 until later in the meeting for
the applicant, Ms. Robbins to possibly be present to represent her case.
BBA 89-09, CHARTER FOSPTTAL OF DALTIAS/FORT WORTH
The first item of new business was for ti -ie Buillding Board of Appeals to
consider BBA 89-09, si-fttitted by Charter Hospital who is requesting ' r a
variance from Grapevine Code of Ordinance, Chapter 7, Article IV, Fences,
Section 7-127, front yard requirements for the Charter Hospital located at
2300 William D. Tate Avenue®
Greg Wheeler explained the property has reverse frontage, along Grayson
Drive, and the applicant is requestin to build a fence along Grayson
ysor
higher than three (3) feet with no visibilit)7. Mr. Wheeler stated Staff
recomendod approval because the State mandates the patient's right of
privacy.
With no one to speak either for or against the request, H. J. Harper made a
motion to grant the variance as requested. Art Gordon seconded the motion
which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Lipscomb, Harper, Gordon
Nays: None
Absent: Czapanskiy, Bailey
BRA 89-10, DAVID BAC-WET T, CORNY
The next item of new business was for the Building Board of Repeals t-
al
. n
consider BBA 89-10, submitted by the David Bagwell Company for a variance
EBOVAPI) OF
9, 1989
PAG,F 2
from Grapevino Code of Ordinance, (bapter 7, Article W, Fences,
Section 7-127, front yard requirements for the Gaade Earn Subdivision,
Greg Abeeler explained the David Bagwell Chgpany is reTiesting to bud1d. a
three (3) to six f6) foot landscape wall along Glade Road, The fence will
serve= as a Wndscaped entryway as well as a noise buffer from Glade Road
traffic.
George Field, representing the David Bagwell (brrpany, showed the board
detailed drawings of the fence and entrance into the subdivision,
With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Art Gordon
made a motion to grant the variance as requested. H. j. Harper seconded
the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Lipsccmb, Harper, Gordon
Nays: None
Absent: Czapanskiy, Dailey
MINUTES
The next ite-m was for the Building Board of Appeals to consider the minutes
of the June 19, 1989, nneting.
H. J. Harper made a action to accept the minutes as written. Art Gordon
seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote-,
Ayes: Lipscomb, Harper, Gordon
Nays: None
Absent: Czapanskiy, Dailey
BBA 89-08, SUE BOBBINS
The last item for the Building Board of Appeals to consider was BBA 8908,
submitted by own Sue Robbins who is requesting a variance from Grapevine
Code of Ordinance, Chapter 7, Article TV, Fences, Section 7-127, front yard
re,irements for her property located at 104 Jenkins Street.
Ms. Robbins was not present, but the Board decided to go ahead and discuss
the case,
Greg Tbeeler explained that the 10 foot fence was already erected and was
the same length as the building behind Ms. Robbins' building.
Mr. Harper explained that he felt there should be a legal determination of
the ordinance instead of this case falling under variances became of it
being more of a screening wall instead of a fence.
Staff thought the fencing ordinance would be the item it would fall under.
After ftirtber discussion, Art Gordon made a motion to table Case #89-08
until -tl-.e next regular scheduled meeting of November 13, 1989, so the case
can be further researched by the City attorney, and so the applicant could
_..w.. — ..,...d.�,-.. ...e....�.,_. f 1 I I L II I
�NGTON DP
p
— � , F --6 g I I � _gm.._ ✓ _ ) _44Ii _ [ ( i i i 4 f o ? ii{ I f =` I I T-� F iT ; � .i � - -� � a � 3 .. ...,.
_
_. _
_7_
. . . ........ . . .
15 1 2 4
-- .
i
ME
ASHCROF T DR.
j I � � " •2P8 B
rL � Q
40 S9 3ffi 37 4 3 52 O C 90
14 17
27 cc
a IS 29
26 i 20 14 28 3 10 I
25 O
21 la 2
24 w
cr
22 26 12
BRETTONMEADOW DRIVE 4 '
Ir $�4 13 27
s _
- . I
I ,p _
Q 22 ��/ I 3 a�g 1 z 144
m 2s 20 19 18 17 16 13 Ea I 13 12 — — '��ee Q I 28
10, UE _
< 2 2 d IS I 23
4 II I "'ITION Q 497 i � CLARET LANE ?S
ADDITION
22
ALTACREST DRIVE 17 €� t 2I 2f
1 2 4 5�I 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 It 18 f
a
- I
GLADE LAND NO 10' JE t9
20
LADE LANE 21
DDIT ON ; �, 22 A I
i z _10'UE__ I
P22 20 -•J 21
1
22 2;In-
ioss L
a
23
2A
� � 2 440
i�
N R 0-M-0 ()
E 2, 125, 890.00
u
I
t