Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-06-03AGENDA CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MEETING MONDAY EVENING, JUNE 3, 1996, 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. OLD BUSINESS A. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-15, SUBMITTED BY PAUL DENNEHY AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-17, SUBMITTED BY BRYAN BURTON AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. B. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-20, SUBMITTED BY PHIL MORLEY AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. C. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-23, SUBMITTED BY STANDARD BUILDING SYSTEMS AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. V. MINUTES BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1996 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 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 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 31ST DAY OF MAY, 1996 AT 5:00 P.M. --� RECTOR OF DEVELOPMfiNT SERVICES MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDING OFF IAL MARCY RATCLIFF, PLANNER SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-15 PAUL DENNEHY MEETING DATE: MONDAY, JUNE 3, 1996 Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment approve the request to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Delaney Vineyards Addition and addressed as 1900 Champagne Boulevard as follows: 1. Section 23A., "GV" Grapevine Vintage District prohibits parking lots as a principal use. Off-street parking is allowed as an accessory use to a principal use. lid F-MATORTINNINAM -am Staff finds a special condition exists for the request because the applicant is proposing to develop an off-street parking lot to serve the overflow needs of the wine production building across the street. Currently the overflow traffic is parking in the grass where the parking lot is proposed to be located. The variance if approved will go away with development of a principal use on the property. Future development or expansion will be required to provide the necessary off-street parking. An application was submitted to the Department of Development Services by Paul Dennehy representing Dennehy Architects. The subject property was rezoned April 16, 1996 from "R -MF -2" Multifamily to "GV" Grapevine Vintage District. The concept plan in your packet was approved by City Council with the rezoning. This case was tabled from the May 6, 1996 Board of Zoning Adjustment meeting. 0ABM96-15.4 j 2. 9 CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT APPLIS APPLICANT NAME: Paul M. Dennehy _Dennehy Architects ADDRESS: 3124 College Ave. Ft. Worth, Texas 76110 CITY/STATE: Ft- worth, Texas—ZIP: 76110 1-00— HOME: 817-926-5484 .—WORK: 817-923-2008 --FAX: 817-923-1925 PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: Grapevine Holdings Inc. Jerry R. Delaney ADDRESS: 2000 Champagne Blvd. CITY/STATE:- Grapevine, Texas —ZIP: 76051 HOME: WORK: 817-481-9989 FAX: 817-251-0472 STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) Delaney VineyardsAdditionLots 1 and 2 Block 2,% 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTIONS) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY US -E A SEPARATE SHEET. Sep 23A Grapevine Vintage District. Variance requested is for remote off-street parking for Delaney Vineyards. Variance is requested for a lot across the street from the Winery. I 6. STATE THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST AND DETAIL ANY SPECIAL C WHICH CAUSE HARDSHIP: THAT IN YOUR OPINION JUSTIFY TH ONS SPECIAL EXCEPTION(S) YOU ARE REQUESTING. EXAMPL , OR ARE: HILLS, '�E 3 ' NL�t NS VALLEYS, CREEKS, POWER POLES, ELEVA , RREGULAR LO OR TRACT SHAPES, ETC. THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUST T �Efi�R A SPECIAL CONDITION OR CONDITIONS EXIST(S) BEFORE MAKI MPION T 0 E A REQUEST. IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT NO SPECIAL CONDI E , THE N MUST BE TO DENY THE REQUEST. Special conditions that make this request nessesary are that there is a need for additional off street parking during special events at the Winery. With the current Vineyard location and development of a landscaped park area to the south of the present parking lot, the added parking lot and landscaping acroes the street would eliminate any on street parkinq or potential congestion. This parking lot will eventually tie , into the retail development planned for this site 7. EXPLAIN ANY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, IF APPLICABLE, NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE. EXAMPLES: (1) 1F THE GRAPEVINE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A PLAT PRIOR TO PRESENT ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS; OR (2) THE ORDINANCE WAS AMENDED OR A POLICY CHANGE WAS ADOPTED AFTER INITIATION OF THE PLANS CHECK PROCESS FORA BUILDING PERMIT OR OTHER PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. By providing this remote parking lot and the accompanying landscaping the overall aesthetics of this development are maintained. Many Wineries in the Napa Valley region of California use a similar planning technique. 3 8. ATTACH A DETAILED DIAGRAM OF THE SITE DRAWN TO SCALE, AND ANY OTHER DRAWINGS OR PICTURES NECESSARY TO HELP EXPLAIN THE CASE TO THE BOARD. SHOW ON THE DIAGRAM ALL EASEMENTS, BUILDING LINES, ENCROACHMENTS, AND THE VARIANCE(S) REQUESTED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE(S) SHOULD IFIED BY AN APPROPRIATE MEASUREMENT (DISTANCE, PERCENT PPR , 1996 APPLICANT (PRINT OR TYPE)- Paiii Dh' ect APPLICANT SIGNATURE 2S OWNER (PRINT)- Grapevine Holdings Inc. Jerry R. Delaney ,Priasident OWNER SIGNATUR �-- SUBSCRIBE -ORN TO THIS 1 st DAY OF April 19 96 t +�►_ _` tp,30,9g r SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS DAY OF -�Y I , 19a DIRECT QUESTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AT (817) 481-0377 FAX NUMBER (817) 424-0545 DELIVERY ADDRESS CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD, ROOM 209 P.O. BOX 95104 GRAPEVINE, TX 76051 GRAPEVINE, TX 76099 0 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDINGTQPL_1�4�MARCY RATCLIFF, PLANNE SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-17 BRYAN BURTON MEETING DATE: MONDAY, JUNE 3, 1996 Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment approve the request to Grapevine - Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 for Tract 9133K, Abstract 518, A. Foster Survey and addressed as 907 West Texas Street as follows: 1. Section 15.G.1., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a thirty (30) foot front yard setback. 2. Section 15.G.4., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a lot width of sixty-five (65) feet. Uzm���MSWHRWAA-719=^ WN MOO W40 -6 3. Section 15.G.5., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a one hundred (100) foot lot depth. 4. Section 15.F.6., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a minimum floor area not less than twelve hundred (1,200) square feet of floor area. • ••• -• ♦• •♦ • • -• • • •• 1101404 • • 5. Section 15.F.1., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a lot size of seventy-five hundred (7,500) square feet. a LVIN P I C-14 EWMOTRIVIN-1 N I 19 NOW IrWi-11 A Staff finds a special condition exists for the request in that the size of the lot can not be increased because of existing adjacent development. The proposed house size is not excessive. The variances proposed are generally conforming to the existing development in the neighborhood. An application was submitted to the Department of Development Services by Mr. Bryan Burton. The lot next door received similar variances (BZA96-02 - Hammock and Richards). O:\BZA\96-17.4 C0 3 -12 E 1 •+:/'_�+ tit ICS a � r 0 I � ���T � �`4 Z7 u91 co NORTHWEST HW P+�4E T m 3 Cu _02 Y - rsz BZA96-17 14 ' ' a u� �� ,�_°• T .!1 K .M 1M1 SS f l7R �t BRYAN BURTON 144;8 Z Kr'" F t••t'n P itA�i TP TR 9( W TO Y Ix LIC us T � TP iP .( �P •7 AC C tv c •C K GU L j 3 2.71 K• w TR TR Tq TR/ Q03 7R >ti � � Yt Yi N �I TR :R 1!'0 TR IQ rt • 7R It )V 7v L•Zv K 1'16 K 13 I74 U 7I7 •2 n n n Tr -Ale w w • 3X •3 6R "' K Y K T4 l3•t N N i- W TEXAS ST •R ES 1 Y 61 Zl 8 12 I NI tR .Pz n „ Y 192 0 c. / ( 1�$j 1-3 /uJt. 1 I 2+ 1 wTO 'T ST st i tie .c i NE SING I rr z7 tb 0 1 e; x IQ %Rx iR -03^ U 4C cle 1 i ITR qQ :.772 HOLLY st 84-53 2 'e BRIO 1e VC'RTH 5T v sn Oc •• .. OQ R--7 ^ tt; 5 1 1 5 � Ii m >• .c _ • GU o. o6 ' 7 c U88- ' 16 1e ( n%i13c t• 12 c is 4 K I rR I :�. K to • 1 ,t1 , SURREY 96A0 IArE >• .s. ' -�Ar (( � I "tura >P JJ �• 1013 f' 3 . s s 7 •c IT, ~° z 1 SU89 0 7 17 TO,• 3 ?yt x f z v FR <LIN 5T Is OVy 1 tR .a R_ .e R a M a_ �� 5 i > i +: r• Tr. i :. 1 K I ' Sf X 'z ' ! I KJ2 •y !`a rr.: L193-01 `0 s `' j s •/'�((�� • r'a• < 1 .s. 1 , l(15 �RI:1";',pvA 10a1 Cln.15C�;7D758 , I r i 1 1s rT E L 5T 1 / i hISTGfi! qr S:J'� 1 -7 14 Leo loR: n ip g _0 O ' f `,• I! `2 292 0711 S(- it c 'Wo JIT .If I Z8Z r7g ! 1 1.1 3 >E S •t 1 I 2.84 AC. 82 --IX 1 In Z91-03 I D��a J 1 :•'•K r� ., sv 1 ws •t 0.89 AC. (� E I • ! I , ^0 2-25 U95-12 4. To if In _7 TR _ TR G M rr :r� V ' -- --r : F �Aq ^-_ 1 / �. O iG� l z i .c 10 -� .136 t SS94-0 z , Al sa ,.21:. 1 �` ..• 1�91•e KI u 1 , .13E • .'� i :,..� ✓, :_i -i--�' -- '— ill 2. Ey I ADDRESS: co O VJ , C,© II Pc"; 'L. I CITY/STATE: Cc) ro, o -Q -o i m ZIP: � � o :5 1 6-11r z (o 9 HOME: fl 7� —WORK: 06 - FAX: PROPERTY OWNER(S) L a, CITY/STATE: �o u ll,' L_ C" k ZIP: :1 (. C-) q -I- '- HOME10 '411-3(91 WORK: FAX:2 0- 4 I- 3 9 8 STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) `103 k N .7 CAS 14 -IJ le am) z , 9 9:3 K 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. 4tti 4 -Sat 4- 1, on .�e_c+ion IS' -G.4 sec. iov, rt\bJ f- -T VA Wit_ kaL4-)d' * 0jVpAAV-4,. QM i JUZAI� 6 AM cy\, A i,:n J A*77 V 3 o' +u� tLcr^ Wk OL 165, 5is I -NYC' &LUZJ_o JA"� C�IAI o so, !"Ntz'z(b moo c rd R� rAP2 4 1996 STATE THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST AND DETAIL NDIT ONS WHICH CAUSE HARDSHIPS THAT IN YOUR OPINION JU ) OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION(S) YOU ARE REQUESTING. EXAMPLES OF SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE: HILLS, VALLEYS, CREEKS, POWER POLES, ELEVATIONS, IRREGULAR LOT OR TRACT SHAPES, ETC. THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MUST DETERMINE A SPECIAL CONDITION OR CONDITIONS EXIST(S) BEFORE MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE A REQUEST. IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT NO SPECIAL CONDITION EXISTS, THE MOTION MUST BE TO DENY THE REQUEST. -+ on IS -5 Ul (51A7 ,�,o ave o � Inr�.o rw .e"�(ko 2O .tum 4.f d (yap - ts 7. EXPLAIN ANY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, IF APPLICABLE, NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE. EXAMPLES: (1) IF THE GRAPEVINE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A PLAT PRIOR TO PRESENT ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS; OR (2) THE ORDINANCE WAS AMENDED OR A POLICY CHANGE WAS ADOPTED AFTER INITIATION OF THE PLANS CHECK PROCESS FOR A BUILDING PERMIT OR OTHER PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. 1•! _171170-0 11� n 2 4 199t-) j 8. ATTACH A DETAILED DIAGRAM OF THE SITE DRAWN TO SC ER DRAWINGS OR PICTURES NECESSARY TO HELP EXPLAIN THE SHOW ON THE DIAGRAM ALL EASEMENTS, BUILDING LINES, ENCROACHMENTS, AND THE VARIANCE(S) REQUESTED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE(S) SHOULD BE QUANTIFIED BY AN APPROPRIATE MEASUREMENT (DISTANCE, PERCENTAGE, ETC.) APPLICANT (PRINT OR TYPE) APPLICANT SIGNATURE L&=-- itE� OWNER (PRINT) 1V,4 Lt-/ 4 r2 b 4 -r r,4 -rx DL— 6q8?z-r-30 OWNER SIGNATURE —221 60 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS V711- DAY OF IPA j I-- , 191 6 ===rfl Texas B j COUCH CHJ I COUCH State of T M 'ission Expires 7-31-96 Notary , State Of Texas M Commission Expires 7-31-96 - 3/- 9 � SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS DAY OF Alolqll-, _, 19�6 ........a000000Ct 0000T r.rT ....... 1, ....... B. J. COUCH Notary Public, State of Tan My Corrunission Expires 7-31.96 ........................... -7- 3/ - C7 6v DIRECT QUESTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AT (817) 481-0377 FAX NUMBER (817) 424-0545 DELIVERY ADDRESS CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD, ROOM 209 P.O. BOX 95104 GRAPEVINE, 7X 76051 GRAPEVINE, TX 76099 0 s 60' D APR 2 4 1996 Jy� 11 X 12 i PATIO _ 0 111 (1 lyl 816 BEDROOM f 8X 10 N O � GARAGE I i VAULT VAULT 12 a 24T710. -- NWGL14 a 14 slZe i i I. ----- ----- wid e. _5 Awo. �j Gale w - I I f fro p.e r 1 tq 1. ► h e - ZZ ' Fia A�- yq ral. P o PQ ('.},t l 4 IS96 Country -Style Coziness MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDING 0 F IA6� MARCY RATCLIFF, PLANNER SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-20 PHIL MORLEY MEETING DATE: MONDAY, JUNE 3, 1996 Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment approve request #2 and #4 and to deny request #1,#3 and #5 to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 for Lots 1-16, Block 1, Azalea Court Addition as follows: 1. Section 15.G.1., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require reverse frontage lots to have two thirty (30) foot front yard setbacks. Reverse frontage lots are lots whose rear is adjacent to another lot's side yard. Lots 1 and 16 are considered reverse frontage lots because their rear yards are adjacent to the side yard of the Abundant Life Church and the Grant Pittard Addition. �• • •MITI!!• • •• '• •i • 2. Section 15.G.2., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a twenty- five (25) foot rear yard setback. �•mOTORN • • •• '� • • '1 3. Section 15.G.4., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a ninety-five (95) foot lot width for a reverse frontage lot. -010 MASS F-TIUM Will Mw VAROINZI WAIN 4. Section 15.G.5., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a one hundred (100) foot lot depth. -• .9*TMM 114OW INEIVEM7111116AIN•• -. •l . lIDEA a 1597AWNE M., - 5. Section 15.H., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a forty (40) foot buffer yard adjacent to a non-residential district. requestThe variance • allow Lots 5.6.7,8.and 9 a fifteen •• reduction of h- forty (40)•• buffer yard, If approved. it would allow I ots ��1 •U111111110HIR Staff finds a special condition for variance requests #2 and #4 for the rear yard setback and lot depth of Lot 16. City Staff worked diligently with the applicant to align Azalea Court with Azalea Drive. The alignment requirement creates the physical hardships for this lot. Staff did not find any special conditions for variance requests #1, #3, and #5. The applicant would be able to meet the requirements if he were not developing so may lots. The buffer yard requirement is in place to separate residential uses from commercial uses. Lots 5, 6 and 7 especially need a buffer yard because of the Northwest Plaza Development. Lots 8 and 9 will be impacted with future development. An application was submitted to the Department of Development Services by Mr. Phil Morley representing Morley Architects. The applicant has submitted a final plat application for Azalea Court Addition for the June 18, 1996 City Council Meeting. 0:\BZA\96-20.4 3 , ..2 ' iaK �. CC Z95-01 nfeeK.c _�4A t —s RPN L TR w PO ,K s3. BZA96-20 F o DEED Tot iRlp E G �AAl3 STR1C PHIL MORLEY 2" " 4 �Tot� K Ac Zq TR IV fv yi ws K U40 -,"G, 41 44 4 111 3Aa / il �t a . a W j OZ JO K / ' 0 \ ` ' 1ti l ra ,r,, K ,a6 Z87-02 i Ac. LL 15. 51 23,. K r1 R`PZ s. K NO 36 3 P '•��: �i-. •2 K To K7 .:1 K a.aa, a p FZK P 6s5� „+1;•,1,`:;:�: 3� CU89-19 • • msCU94-0 • R-7.5 :�1:�• A TF e5LL "' CU9 -10 Ta lag y �lr 0 _a6 s CU9 I— a ac Q_ K CU94-3 ~ 3 232 a •.. CU95-09 TO 14' ur �: 15- 51 ' WALL ST ' 2 `aS 1 20 2 A•FiS , 1 za „ 2 24 3J2 at 2 3 a 20 , 2t ! 2 S.aTa.K / 6 S 2 Y �-1! 7 294-06 ` T. 17 j7 � K S P / u u 12 I3 PO R ,7 16 ,3 „ t , 11 D ,R FERN Ci ,a 6 , I p ,a 7 T �� ' • a5 3 5422 4 t3 7 :3 a , it :3 u e R;--1 2 5 ; is 6® 11 56 .22 e I.J6 K 24 54 � P.O. LtvE TIONlie F QSjEv , t ' 12 =..>•e \ Z8T K 9 �IZN P 1:= Z87 , ApE SER _ 09 ��tS• Z74 GR GE PCD % 12-0At. �s r CU89-07 SU89-02 2 ' CU95-14 CU94-30EATON LN CU95-04 Q4- SU95-01 CU92-06cc Z87-0 l 8 AC ,a .3 CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT A 1. APPLICANT NAME: /,I --') 111al -/,t � 5. ADDRESS: CITY/STATE: a p�Y�hc,%`.�" ZIP: HOME: 1?I7-41?1- 3/S Z WORK: MP77-9ZSl FAX: 'P17 - 40 0 -SZ7- 7 2. PROPERTY OWNER(S) t5oy, t NAME: Sat l �G /45S pc/, •P , It e . ADDRESS: Z 07 Al. l2g! %e4 y S� CITY/STATE: e v� G, �XZIP: -7,0©j-; HOME: 0/7--'"1-4041 WORK: FAX: A/7 -'f00-3372 4. STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) O �.5 1- 1 CO , 'E®Cr- 1. A �, a lC at Ad dIo"m (f, f-,- 4 a n�6L - Zwka,- f of 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. ��J�.�. Q T( u. � lit t_.d •S'� eG'F�S� 6. STATE THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST AND DETAIL ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS WHICH CAUSE HARDSHIPS THAT IN YOUR OPINION JUSTIFY THE VARIANCE(S) OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION(S) YOU ARE REQUESTING. EXAMPLES OF SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE: HILLS, VALLEYS, CREEKS, POWER POLES, ELEVATIONS, IRREGULAR LOT OR TRACT SHAPES, ETC. THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MUST DETERMINE A SPECIAL CONDITION OR CONDITIONS EXIST(S) BEFORE MAKING A MOTION T VE A REQUEST. IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT NO SPECIAL CONDITION N MUST BE TO DENY THE REQUEST. t 7. EXPLAIN ANY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, IF APPLICABLE, NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE. EXAMPLES: (1) IF THE GRAPEVINE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A PLAT PRIOR TO PRESENT ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS; OR (2) THE ORDINANCE WAS AMENDED OR A POLICY CHANGE WAS ADOPTED AFTER INITIATION OF THE PLANS CHECK PROCESS FOR A BUILDING PERMIT OR OTHER PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. Ed ATTACH A DETAILED DIAGRAM OF THE SITE DRAWN TO SCALE, AND ANY OTHER DRAWINGS OR PICTURES NECESSARY TO HELP EXPLAIN THE CASE TO THE BOARD. SHOW ON THE DIAGRAM ALL EASEMENTS, BUILDING LINES, ENCROACHMENTS, AND THE VARIANCE(S) REQUESTED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE(S) SHOULD BE QUANTIFIED BY AN APPROPRIATE MEASUREMENT (DISTANCE, PERCENTAGE, ETC.) APPLICANT (PRINT OR APPLICANT SIGNATUR OWNER (PRINT) OWNER SIGNATURE SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS \" DAY OF 19'R DATE OF LICENSE EXPIRATION SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS DAY OF 19 NOTARY PUBLIC FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS DATE OF LICENSE EXPIRATION DIRECT QUESTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AT (817) 481-0377 FAX NUMBER (817) 424-0545 DEL/VERY ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD, ROOM 209 GRAPEVINE, TX 76051 CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION P.O. BOX 95104 GRAPEVINE, TX 76099 D MAY - 1 1996 i BACKGROUND: The 4.003 acre property we are planning to develop has 289.38 feet of frontage on Wall Street. We had intended to construct a new cul-de-sac street with a 50' R.O.W. centered on the property, with 16 developed lots on which we will construct homes in the $160K to $200K range. Lots 1 8z 16 would have a depth of 119.23' each. Because our property is in the vicinity of Azalea Drive, the City Engineering Department is requiring us to align Azalea Court with Azalea Drive. This results in a hardship situation because Lot 16 will lose 38.71' of depth along Wall Street. VARIANCE # 1: Lots 1 and 16 are corner lots fronting on Wall Street and Azalea Court. An - attractive masonry wall will run the length of the Wall Street frontage, leading to a landscaped entry. These lots will face Azalea Court. The width of Lot 1 will vary from 101.59' to 72.80', with an average width of 87.19'. The width of Lot 16 will vary from 80.73' to 97.78', with an average width of 89.25'. We request a variance to Section 15.G.4 requiring 95' width for reverse frontage lots. VARIANCE #2: Since Lots 1 and 16 will face Azalea Court, we would contend that the area between the houses on these lots and Wall Street should be considered a side yard, not a front yard. We request a variance to Section 15.G.1., allowing a 15' side setback on the Wall Street side of Lots 1 and 16 only. VARIANCE #3: For the reasons stated above, we are also requesting a variance to Section 15.G.2. allowing a 20' rear building setback on Lot 16 only, in lieu of the required 25' rear setback. The resulting building envelope of 38' deep x 62' wide will be adequate to construct a house of similar square footage to the others planned for the subdivision. VARIANCE #4: Again, because of the reasons stated above, the depth of Lot 16 will vary from 80.52' to 97.56', with an average depth of 89.04'. We would like to request a variance from Section 15.G.5. requiring an average depth of 100', for Lot 16 only. VARIANCE #5: Section 15.H. required a 40' buffer area between single family and a non-residential district. Lots 5 - 9 are affected by this provision. Lot 5 backs up primarily to a church parking lot, and is a considerable distance from the church. Lots 6 and 7 back up to the rear face of Northwest Plaza Shopping Center. Lots 8 and 9 back up to a commercially zoned tract, that when developed will be required to have buildings set back a minimum of 40'. We will be constructing an 8' wood fence between these five lots and the adjacent properties. The combination of the cul-de- sac, with its unusual shaped lots, and a 40' buffer yard, creates almost unbuildable lots. Lot 5 backs up to the church parking area, which is generally used only on Sundays, and an 8' fence combined with a 25' buffer yard should be more than adequate. We therefore request a variance to this section to allow a 25' rear buffer yard for Lot 5 - 9 only. TEXAS KENWORTH CO. V. 9545.P. 150 LOT 1. BLOCK 1 ON NORTH O.R. T. C.T. CAB. ti IDE 553f P.R. T.C.T. 60 0 60_ !SO mmmmmmc— Scale 1"=50' — — — is N85'28'17"E 281.24 "� • ,� _'_ — 7.4 16' ULA PROJECT i�-'F • C * 140.62 — SITE 8 9 ./ ..r.... Y n •'� aA.n« r o V.I� lnna.. r o1� /S o h °r•SJ /-) 1 In I Cn 34 C N LOT t• BLOCK i WANOA `✓ NORTHWEST PLAZA ADOITION I a r * 1 1 = I 0 V. 5E? • \ v. 388-166. P. 66 Cn i P.R.T.C.T. I / ' m \ I M 90.6 91.11 N VICINITY MAF S89'34 W ° A� $89'34.1' I O NUMBER OElT�_GIORD TU1N1 RAON$ t...a.. UIORO d ( 6 ' 11 C. '1036 Y)4 S 0334'2.' C_ 19.20 200.00 38.26 38.23 �••�+� r al .1r i r fio a.o 116.49 115.92 S89'34'34'W Si•34.34; ►' BLOCK 1 o 12 ". >� M :I 1•rd I U ( 116.70 v 389'34'34'w \ /' M I N4'E I - ' t16.1i6.1a i QW i Ja 13 O1 G e o N tl M tt R Q 116.74 9-34-34-W 58O � oM k,,d,4 O S89'34.34'w „ N Z I 116.35 0 14, , W � / re � 3 � � ��° no 64 00 Qt � 127.09 S89'3a'34'w o O m 15 N BLOCK 1 1 —73r o, , 97.56 2 ,lF S89'3t'34 w I.•o•a•o r 1= 141.54 j 16 J S69 34.'3a'w n7aa+ r o N .ate of 15856 ' 848" WP�4 5 T ---'_ i--- w 20 �I QUI _IJI r2O BLOCK 1 I I BLOCK 2 I Q Z e I ( 1 y I 19 0l I- O m 2 �I m e 19 ( I R100ECREST 1 3I v. 388-24, P. 25 P.R.T.C.T. OWNER. EHCINEER. SURAYOR: SALVER AND ASSOCIATES J.C. LENTT ENONEERS. INC. LO YD BRANSOM SURVEYORS, INC. 207 N. OOOLEY 726 COMMERCE ST. CHARLES B. HOOKS. JR. RP'LS CRAPEVWE. TEXAS 76051 SOUTHLAKE. TX 76092 1028 N. SYLVAIMA AVE •.�1 ��n_en.. A171 a -Ttl1 FMT WORTH. TEXAS 751tl DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT p FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDING OF I L MARCY RATCLIFF, PLANNER SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-23 STANDARD BUILDING SYSTEMS MEETING DATE: MONDAY, JUNE 3, 1996 Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment approve the request to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 with the condition the applicant provides solid screening around entire perimeter of the storage area for Lot 1, Block 6, W.R. Boyd Center and addressed as 204 North Dooley Street as follows: 1. Section 43.E.3., Nonconforming Uses and Structures allows the Board of Zoning Adjustment the ability to approve the remodeling or enlargement of a nonconforming use when such an enlargement would not tend to prolong the life of the nonconforming use. If the Board of Zoning Adjustment approves the special exception request, it would allow a 4,800 square foot metal building expansion of an existing non- conforming use in a Community Commercial District as shown on the site plan. Staff finds a special condition that this is an existing industrial use and development. The applicant is using an existing slab that is in place. This will give the Board an opportunity to require screening that is not currently there. An application was submitted to the Department of Development Services by Mr. John Daloise representing Standard Building Systems. The development occurred before the 1984 City Rezoning. 0AMAM-23.4 a' 3-V ac A nc �\ Q ISxz i 1� TR 76t � �f� ' P$ =s . a67 60� a� E9s� M nC2 F• Lv Oil e 3 14 5 i� �� zz 7 t o .Nn • v c P TW 2« 19 to «� E5 .s. .r eM p R—TH S • .75 K n 17 Liz KMK las'"R-5.0 R-'MI= —2 Z65 H ST _ 0 168 2 • 7 TP i t T R - Tom o K TW W BZA96-23 cH 5T 33 " ' ` """ �` ° STANDARD BUILDING SYSTEMS ,Z82-50 r TW u M >h n t- 2 K ♦ 13. u .7 K M 2% 28 N T r u ix U H r M .3 ZP9LL1 M 2% r � U s = TW AC Aso +-- �.. K u• GU 1.4'95 n Z78-117W rW JQ1 z " 7 ] 2e Z89-07 n m T NESS TR TRW 6 r ¢ M 3eC 16 J4.2 4 >0 TW M-0 36 138 4 Si 4i�IfvrJl 7 . 7 o M 31Aw JV TSR RQ OR 1.72 tW a 1588 ' " '2 '" 2! TW M AMw TM' Ai AY • M mm TIT x4 ze z♦ a K .c .2Sc K .742 • i 6 t xc r tiRHraH OR C 86 dos s i O 7 Ic t5 .1a u n r M a SR . 3W 2W tW 0� �' E l CLA-08 W �• - . P 4 C 91-21 •�'. •.'. 310 r ,RPP NES i E� �OwAaE 0 W a y • CC 8i1 PQRK , 13 NP QOaN Z 1 s 36 8•'08 ] ZNNG 1 1 160c�6 c 10 ,>>q2 2 W 2 CRO5Q5���� Z82-01 m 9 '0 u S qk 2� •• 2 Z8341. a5 r • ,• • 300 2 u f Ai aA 5 c 7• 3 t t 3030 CU91-16 ''[ i •,+ N tem Im'.per+ Il (, • i s+ (� —ZT M ]if • y I S c 7 e i] t(. { '- '}" "•`4'5'1 T,yKZC CU91-16 1 CC IQRTH _ CU9Z T 32 38 c�u�a�_ RTHWEST HWY 37 to T M T. To M M in A .T9 • cw .« • w f 20 CU9S Z1�!•T 14 a c ov2 E f t4a of '� TW ATN Tw Dalt P i:. TW 29D IMr Z TR M .7f♦ f 4W Tt 4i Mf .,•C 4�.10•A t 1 EO�O e i ' w 77 /'a ( L!.)! . D �+ "` R F r w1• ! tzc uc ue{ AM x K Z79 pet t _Y K •t I M av x c 64 tet �(] «.r :jj - ;cc 13♦ i . s t17 •. e :2 n b - 1 ,� -o e°c K PP �5 G• ] 206x0 ! I EE STILL ST TIT 52 Tr 13V OT { w •tT i I S iT • t 2 ] S i i ♦ n N • r M W. i M � �iT _ '� S T I .]0 aCf 1 i.Ze K I Se i y E i 12 «.T 'l�♦�'' 2 j K tot iTp 2t I Ti f TW , TW s —1 • ! 4 T ( "! E 7 ♦ r ,'1 1 M M T« M i 24 2 6DI •� K sib '] Is 14 C i E TEtAS ST K'K a a•i. cx. K ! K a • /� { 1 7 K 3 S 11� rn 1� � se «r��� �1 GG � 1. i ��c : c � .a all ? c 7 ♦ 1 In I] tIT ] j f T TIS r !JI 84-53 4e ♦.9 V(`RTH ST 44 •" VQRTN TT v 1 Not `6862 K PT l 1Y s 1 j GU 0.06 F. m 3 riDS i i �T T •T t ;� , 2 S;i I'7� ! I It 2 6 I V88 I U N S TIT ►T 2 '' I S I S I c• i ,! 1 11J 1 1 W 1 5 r 5 1 7 1 i• -� 1 i I Gd I J K J 6 Zt7;-2 I a 1• rt R i i ►7 eT I!� I( 17 S i l i! 2 j} p � 1� i ,1 b :3 • Vt 7 � 1 1 t' FAGrocIIN ` t STREET ClOSEC T SU89) 1% r E1r 1 t 1 n it 1 - -'n'y) 1 Fi v i v FR KilH 5T n a «r r t 1 s t z) �� l.s 1 f , . 1 2 . s .i ,r ♦ r 11 ]T K 13 1 I S 72 D 1 r $T >a w 1 280-1 1, to ;«f b I v 2 • s s . ] f . .Tei a J, I ice' 1 t ' _ 2 T ) X11 9 3-01 w it• 1 C8�] c �Q xj »a Il I �j s I E .IS5:4•� 1 Z86 I ro TA iVAT:2 i. t.{•K I . CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION APPLICANT NAME- CITY/STATE: 41% —zip: 'I SZ30 HOME: ---WORK:7-111- 177(fft'010 FAX (al 2. PROPERTY OWNER(S) ADDRESS:- 7-0!j 140PS-Tlt 000UF�S--j7Rea7— CITY/STATE:-(Q9jRt=-&St!7 Zip: -1 (0(3:SA— HOME: WORK:Zll-q2J k--3S%A7 FAX l-lAt8-1i811'6 4. STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) 7- () � - 4 0 pInt &)n6 v E.7N 45 -vk'Eif —\ 7-9,At-r ot%z o TAra A.r. # "lq( 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTIONS) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. 6 WIF - ft •-22. �(o 2 6. STATE THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST AND DETAIL ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS WHICH CAUSE HARDSHIPS THAT IN YOUR OPINION JUSTIFY THE VARIANCE(S) OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION(S) YOU ARE REQUESTING. EXAMPLES OF SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE: HILLS, VALLEYS, CREEKS, POWER POLES, ELEVATIONS, IRREGULAR LOT OR TRACT SHAPES, ETC. THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MUST DETERMINE A SPECIAL CONDITION OR CONDITIONS EXIST(S) BEFORE MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE A REQUEST. IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT NO SPECIAL CONDITION EXISTS, THE MOTION MUST BE TO DENY THE REQUEST. Thi s ii E SAS CL6 QUx�,o)46 ``m' T�tu: PS oO \-TA 70 -11"IFE t ASOWIZ`, �X�6CZ WN 1_D 7. EXPLAIN ANY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, IF APPLICABLE, NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE. EXAMPLES: (1) IF THE GRAPEVINE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A PLAT PRIOR TO PRESENT ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS; OR (2) THE ORDINANCE WAS AMENDED OR A POLICY CHANGE WAS ADOPTED AFTER INITIATION OF THE PLANS CHECK PROCESS FOR A BUILDING PERMIT OR OTHER PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. 3 8. ATTACH A DETAILED DIAGRAM OF THE SITE DRAWN TO SCALE, AND ANY OTHER DRAWINGS OR PICTURES NECESSARY TO HELP EXPLAIN THE CASE TO THE BOARD. SHOW ON THE DIAGRAM ALL EASEMENTS, BUILDING LINES, ENCROACHMENTS, AND THE VARIANCE(S) REQUESTED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE(S) SHOULD BE QUANTIFIED BY AN APPROPRIATE MEASUREMENT (DISTANCE, PERCENTAGE, ETC.) APPLICANT (PRINT OR TYPE) APPLICANT SIGNA OWNER (PRINT) C-''' OWNER SIGNATUR SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS DAY OF JO AN X WOOD N TARY PUBLIC FOR THE TA March 29, IM 03�.29�98' SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS 74.6 DAY OF £SEi�M JO ANN K WOOD March 29 11, 998 c I 03/.29/9.p DIRECT QUESTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AT (817) 481-0377 FAX NUMBER (817) 424-0545 DELIVERY ADDRESS CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD, ROOM 209 P.O. BOX 95104 GRAPEVINE, TX 76051 GRAPEVINE, TX 76099 0 UTILITY LINE UTILITY POLE E--- U71LITf LINE NORTH 653.4' EXISn - - t5n� ®'� DRIVE DRIVE DRIVE MAIM I1 1 3.0 AGf2E5 EXISTING EXISTING METAL BUILDN6 DRIVE o COW -REI n / SLAB I45' X 150' 1 1 al NTIN6 EXI5TIN6 EXISTiNb 1 O<-1GE LD BUILORASE E -- E --E E -- E --E E -- E UTILITY LINE SOUTH 653.4' OGALM 1' • 80' in F— I +NOF �9N�WOP �aP+wmwsn M�r�Ma SEW D&M rnom wm, YMT OLeVATION WALE, W.tW NO" ILLATION gc�Lz. K.. 110. /Atm_ MLD" !'QST MLOVATION w16 ue• . r -c MGrA6 PA VA TMM NOTE MCrIL PAM" MI. - IN WLM d 5:3: c w .� X1 ill �dY�1NCb�OQ wr a mNna� MlY OfNMi M MM lNpOl6 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Grapevine, Texas met on Monday evening, May 6, 1996, 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 Jill Davis Dennis Luers Chairman Secretary Vice -Chairman Member Member 1 st Alternate constituting a quorum. Also present were the following City Staff: Scott Williams Building Official Marcy Ratcliff City Planner Kelly Prater Building Inspection Secretary Chairman Chris Coy called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. The first item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-09 submitted by the City of Grapevine who requested the variance request for Track 10J1, A. Foster Survey, Abstract 518, specifically addressed as 411 Ball Street be withdrawn. The City requested to withdraw the application as variances were not needed. Ery Meyer moved to withdraw the request for BZA96-09. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None BZA Minutes 4/01/96 Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA96-11 submitted by Greg Wright requesting a variance for Lot 25, Shorecrest Acres Addition, specifically addressed as 1859 Chris Craft Drive. The request was to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 15.G.2., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations which require a twenty- five (25) foot rear yard setback. The proposed variance would allow an eight (8) foot encroachment into the required twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback. If approved, it would allow a seventeen (17) foot rear yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Marcy Ratcliff, City Planner, explained Staff found a special condition for the request being the platted lot depth is too shallow to met the current zoning ordinance requirements. Ms. Ratcliff further noted many variances have been granted in this area for lot depth. Greg Wright (2805 Johnson Road, Southlake, Texas) introduced Rick Smith, future tenant of the proposed house. The lot is simply to small to build a house of any caliber by today's standard. Rick Smith (1723 Anglers Plaza, Grapevine, Texas) noted to the Board that a number of variances have been granted in this area. The purpose of the request is to maintain the required thirty (30) foot front yard setback and move the house back since the lot to the rear is vacant. One letter of protest was received regarding the case. Ery Meyer moved to close the public hearing. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None After a brief discussion, Carl Hecht moved that a special condition did exist and that being the lot depth is too shallow to met the current zoning ordinance requirements. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: 2 BZA Minutes 4/01/96 Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Carl Hecht moved, with a second by Ery Meyer, to grant the variance request to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 15.G.2., Single Family District Regulations for Lot 25, Shorecrest Acres Addition, specifically addressed as 1859 Chris Craft Drive, to allow an eight (8) foot encroachment into the required twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback allowing a seventeen (17) foot rear yard setback as shown on the plot plan. The motion prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA96-12 submitted by George Boedecker who requested a variance for the Lot 4, Block 2, Shoreview Estates Addition and to be addressed as 3104 Lakeview Drive. The request was to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 14.G.1., "R-12.5" Single Family District Regulations require a thirty-five (35) foot front yard setback. The proposed variance would allow a seven (7) foot encroachment into the required thirty-five (35) foot front yard setback. If approved, it would allow a twenty-eight (28) foot front yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Section 14.G.3., "R-12.5" Single Family District Regulations require an eight (8) foot side yard back. The proposed variance would allow a two (2) foot encroachment into the required eight (8) foot side yard setback. If approved, it would allow a six (6) foot side yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Mr. Williams explained Staff found a special condition for the request in that the encroachment is not the fault of the owner. The house was built prior to front building line inspection requirements. No written correspondence of was received. With no other guests to speak to the request, Randy Howell moved to close the public hearing. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: 3 BZA Minutes 4/01/96 Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis and Luers Nays: None Randy Howell moved that a special condition did exist for the request and that being the encroachment is not the fault of the owner. The house was built prior to front building line inspection requirements. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Randy Howell moved, with a second by Jill Davis, to grant the variance to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 14.G.1. and Section 14.G.3., Single Family District Regulations for Lot 4, Block 2, Shoreview Estates Addition, addressed as 3104 Lakeview Drive, to allow a seven (7) foot encroachment allowing a twenty-eight (28) foot front yard and a two (2) foot encroachment allowing a six (6) foot side yard setback as shown on the plot plan. The motion prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA96-15 submitted by Paul Dennehy representing Dennehy Architects requesting a variance for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Delaney Vineyards Addition, addressed as 1900 Champagne Boulevard. The request was to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 23A., "GV" Grapevine Vintage District prohibits parking lots as a principal use. Off-street parking is allowed as an accessory use to a principal use. The variance request is to allow development of an accessory off-street parking lot without development of a principal use as shown on the plan. Ms. Ratcliff explained Staff found a special condition for the request being the applicant is proposing to develop an off-street parking lot to serve the overflow needs of the wine production building across the street. Currently the overflow traffic is parking in the grass where the parking lot is proposed to be located. The variance if approved will go away with development of a principal use on the property. Future development or expansion will be required to provide the necessary off-street parking. Paul Dennehy (3124 College Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas) illustrated to the Board 4 BZA Minutes ' 4/01/96 exhibits for the request. Within the last month the property has been rezoned from Multi -family to Grapevine Vintage District. Delaney's desire is to develop the area around the recently completed building into a Vintage District. The trees in the southwest corner will be saved to provide landscaping for that lot. The photographs submitted explain how the parking is handled at many of the vineyards in different areas. The 189 spaces requested are due to retail, restaurant area, and the recent opening of Delaney Vineyards. The Grapevine Vintage District Requirements require a fifteen (15) foot side yard, which has been maintained with the credit received for the existing trees and the additional landscaping that will by far exceed the City's landscape requirements. No building in the future development would be closer than ninety (90) feet to the eastern property line. When we eventually developed the retail and restuarant area we are requesting on our concept plan 78 parking spaces over the City's minimum requirement for use development. Chris Coy mentioned that when buildings area actually built on this lot, the variance will go away. Bryan Blackwell (5110 Caverdale Drive, Grapevine, Texas) noted he had protested the first change from Multifamily to Grapevine Vintage. Retail and restuarants do not belong in a residential district. Heat, noise, pollution, and reduction in residential property values will be a result from this development. Chris Coy added this area has already been rezoned. They can go ahead and build the entire complex tomorrow with the restaurants and parking. The City Council has already approved the development. Ms. Ratcliff noted the zoning is already in place. According to the concept plan approved by Council, which the submitted drawing is a replica of. In order to develop this they would have to go for the conditional use because the proposed development contains 100,000 square feet. Bill Rodgers (407 East 2nd Street, Irving, Texas) explained he is concerned the effect the development will have on the residential lots. He is in protest of the variance. Ms. Davis noted that the Board of Zoning Adjustment does not have the authority to change zoning. Cynthia Strain (5114 Heatherdale, Grapevine, Texas) noted that retail will add to trash, noise, pollution, decrease in property value to the neighborhood. Eight letters of protest were received. Sherri Blackwell (5110 Heatherdale, Grapevine, Texas) stated there needs to be more awareness in the neighborhood. She is in protest of the request. k, BZA Minutes 4/01/96 Paul Dennehy showed the homeowners in the audience drawings of their proposed plans. Chris Coy stated there would be a fifteen (15) foot landscape buffer behind the fence. Ms. Ratcliff noted dumpsters are required to be fifty (50) feet away from residential districts. Virginia Flores (5206 Heatherdale Drive, Grapevine, Texas) requested to see the location of the parking lot in relation to her lot. Greg Cooper (5112 Heatherdale Drive, Grapevine, Texas) stated he did not want the restaurants and retail in this area as well. The vineyard is very enjoyful. There are other areas the parking lot can go. Marcy Ratcliff noted in order for Delaney to develop they would have to go before City Council due to the size and square footage of the building. If they size down they would only have to go back and change their concept plan which would also be another public hearing. Randy Howell added that regardless, they will have another public hearing whether it is scaled down or remains the same. Dondee Blanton (5100 Heatherdale Drive, Grapevine, Texas) stated she supports the proposal. It is not a low scale project and will do good for the community. Bryan Blackwell added there is understanding the zoning has already changed. The plans can be built as is. All that is being asked today is that this variance not be approved. Paul Dennehy explained their entent is to enhance the entire area. Carl Hecht questioned Mr. Dennehy requarding how many special events does he plan on having per year. Mr. Dennehy replied special events occur frequently on weekends such as Weddings, Christmas parties, Blessing of the Vines, etc. Randy Howell moved to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers 11 BZA Minutes 4/01/96 Nays: None After a brief discussion, Carl Hecht moved that no special condition exists for the request. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Hecht and Davis Nays: Coy, Meyer, and Howell Chris Coy explained the option for the applicant to request the Board to table the request. Mr. Dennehy requested to table the request to the next meeting. He will speak with the neighbors to work things out. Chris Coy moved, with a second by Ery Meyer, to table the variance request to the next Board Zoning Adjustment June 3, 1996 meeting. The motion prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA96-16 submitted by Mr. John McGee who submitted a variance request for Lot 10R, Block 2, Woodland Estates and as 3809 Kelsey Court. The request was to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 42.C.3., Supplementary District Regulations require a detached accessory building in the R-20 zoning district be located a least fifteen (15) feet from the side property line. The variance request is to allow a covered, unenclosed carport attachment to an accessory building to encroach nine (9) feet into the required fifteen (15) foot side yard setback. If approved, it would allow a six (6) foot side yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Mr. Williams explained Staff found a special condition for the request. The major portion of this accessory structure does not violate the Zoning Ordinance. The building has an unenclosed covered attachment that projects into the required side yard setback. This structure would comply with the zoning ordinance as a patio cover used exclusively for recreational purposes. The applicant has indicated that this structure will be used to shelter a travel trailer for a very short time each year when 7 BZA Minutes 4/01/96 relatives visit. A complying unenclosed covered attachment could be placed alongside the main building towards the center of the yard with no encroachments, however, it would require the removal of trees. Lastly, Staff feels the variance request should be approved, as the applicant built the structure in accordance with plans approved by the Building Inspection Department. Staff became aware of the encroachment problem well after the structure was underway and almost complete. Staff became aware of the encroachment as a result from a complaint from an adjacent property owner. Mr. John McGee, applicant, is present to represent the case. John McGee (3809 Kelsey Court, Grapevine, Texas) stated he prepared a brochure on the structure and distributed to the Board. Page one is the plat submitted to the City with the carport highlighted. This was designated as a carport from the beginning. The carport was placed adjacent to the workshop with storage above it. This building is legal as it sets as we speak. Page two shows the orginial plans submitted to the City. Again, the word carport is highlighted on the plans from the beginning. Photographs of the structure were included in the packet showing the overhang and during rain. These plans were approved by the City Staff. He went to the bank and borrowed the money. To date there is about $30,000 put into it. This pad is two feet deep in some places. The pad is poured to City approval in 1993. If the he has to move the pad it going to produce hardships for them financially, trees are going to be affected, underground telephone cables will have to be moved. The structure, barn, has already been green tagged. It was never his intend to be out of compliance with any zoning ordinance. At the back of your book, is a petition signed by the neighbors on Kelsey Court asking the Board to grant the variance to finish the carport as he applied for the permit. The second petition there in good faith if you don't feel that you can request that they permit me to continue would you have any objestions. Note that all the neighbors have signed both petitions. Kathy McGee (3809 Kelsey Court, Grapevine, Texas) noted that a video was made of the property and the trees for the City's record. Over the weekend a letter was received by a neighbor about our continuing and would also like to submitt to the file. Tom Ryan (3815 Kelsey Court, Grapevine, Texas) explained he is located on the south side of Mr. McGee. Mr. Ryan submitted three photographs to the Board illustrating closeness to property. He requested the variance not be granted. Jill Davis questioned Mr. Ryan how much lower his property sits than the adjacent property. Mr. Ryan answered Mr. McGee's lot is 150 feet wide as is mine. I am probably two or two and a half foot lower at that property line on that side. BZA Minutes 4/01/96 Art Moore (3719 Kelsey Court, Grapevine, Texas) explained he is recommends approval for the request. He noted to the Board that the area he is in was once R-20 and City Council rezoned to R-7.5. Four (4) written corresponse for approval were received. Randy Howell moved to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Board members discussed there concern regarding the protesters. After a brief discussion, Carl Hecht moved that a special condition exist and that the applicant has built a structure in accordance with plans approved by the Building Inspection Department. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Carl Hecht moved, with a second by Jill Davis, to grant the variance to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 42.C.3., Supplementary District Regulations for Lot 10R, Block 2, Woodland Estates, specifically addressed as 3809 Kelsey Court, to allow a covered, unenclosed carport attachment to an accessory building to encroach nine (9) feet into the required fifteen (15) foot side yard setback allowing a six (6) foot side yard setback as shown on the plot plan. The motion prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Next for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider were the minutes of the April 1, 1996 meeting. Ery Meyer moved to approve as amended the meeting as amended. Carl Hecht seconded following vote: E minutes of the December 4, 1996 the motion which prevailed by the BZA Minutes 4/01/96 Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None F-11019111 1 With no further discussion, Ery Meyer made a motion to adjourn. Randy Howell seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Howell, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None 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 JUNE, 1996. ATTEST: SECRETARY CHAIRMAN 10 ATE OF TEXAS I W -W t NQ "MiaRwaidw IWel J - lel.lw&ol�i .1 , I The Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Grapevine, Texas met on Monday evening, June 3, 1996, 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 Carl Hecht Jill Davis Dennis Luers Chairman Secretary Member Member 1 st Alternate constituting a quorum. Also present were the following City Staff: Scott Williams Building Official Marcy Ratcliff City Planner Kelly Prater Building Inspection Secretary The first item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-15 submitted by Paul Dennehy of Dennehy Architects representing Delaney Vineyards who requested a variance for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Delaney Vineyards Addition, specifically addressed as 1900 Champagne Boulevard. The request was to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 23A., "GV" Grapevine Vintage District prohibits parking lots as a principal use. Off-street parking is allowed as an accessory use to a principal use. The variance request is to allow development of an accessory off-street parking lot without the development of a principal use as shown on the site plan. The subject property was rezoned April 16, 1996 from "R -MF -2" Multifamily District to "GV" Grapevine Vintage District. This variance request was tabled at the May 6, 1996 Board of Zoning Adjustment meeting until tonight's meeting. BZA Minutes 6/03/96 Marcy Ratcliff, Planner, explained Staff found a special condition for the request because the applicant is proposing to develop an off-street parking lot to serve the overflow needs of the wine production building across the street. Currently, the overflow traffic is parking in the grass where the parking lot is proposed to be located. The variance, if approved, will go away with the development of a principal use on the property. Future development or expansion will be required to provide the necessary off-street parking. Paul and Sandra Dennehy, 3124 College Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas, Dennehy Architects spoke to the request. Mr. Dennehy related he had met with the neighborhood after the last meeting and had been able to reconcile some of the misunderstandings about the request. Chris Hall, 5118 Heatherdale, Grapevine, Texas, spoke in favor of the case. He told the Board that his house backs up to the proposed parking lot and he has no objections to granting the request. Vivian Douglas, 1811 Branch Hollow, Grapevine, Texas, former President of the Homeowners Association also spoke in favor of the request. She also commented she believes the Grapevine Vintage District will be an asset to the area. Ery Meyer moved to close the public hearing, Dennis Luers seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None After a brief discussion, Ery Meyer moved that a special condition did exist and that being the applicant is proposing to develop an off-street parking lot to serve the overflow needs of the wine production building across the street. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays. None Ery Meyer moved, with a second by Carl Hecht, to grant the variance request to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 23A., "GV" Grapevine Vintage District for Lots 1 and 2 , Block 2, Delaney Vineyards Addition, specifically addressed as 1900 Champagne Boulevard, to allow the development of an accessory off-street parking lot without the development of a principal use as shown on the site 2 Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA96-17 submitted by Bryan Burton requesting variances for Tract 9R3K, Abstract 518, A. Foster Survey, specifically addressed as 907 West Texas Street. The request was to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 15.6.1., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a thirty (30) foot front yard setback. The variance request is to allow an eight (8) foot encroachment into the required thirty (30) foot front yard setback. If approved, it would allow a twenty-two (22) foot front yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Section 15.6.4., 'R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a lot width of sixty- five (65) feet. The variance request is to allow a five (5) foot reduction from the required sixty-five (65) foot lot width. If approved, it would allow a lot width of sixty (60) feet as shown on the plot plan. Section 15.6.5., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a one hundred (100) foot lot depth. The variance request is to allow a twelve (12) foot reduction to the required one hundred (100) foot lot depth. If approved, it Vvould allow a lot depth of eighty-eight (88) feet as shown on the plot plan. Section 15.F.6., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a minimum floor area not less than twelve hundred (1,200) square feet of floor area. The proposed variance would allow a one hundred -fifty (150) square foot reduction of the required floor area. If approved, it would allow a floor area of 1,050 square feet. 3 BZA Minutes 6/03/96 Section 15.F.1., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a lot size of seventy-five hundred (7,500) square feet. The proposed variance would allow a 2,124 square foot reduction from the required seventy-five hundred (7,500) square feet. If approved, it would allow a 5,376 square foot lot size. Ms. Ratcliff explained Staff found a special condition exists for the request in that the size of the lot can not be increased because of existing adjacent development. The proposed house size is not excessive. The variances proposed are generally conforming to the existing development in the neighborhood. Mr. Bryan Burton was present to answer questions relative to the case. One letter was received in favor of the request. Another letter was received to inform us he no longer owns the property. Carl Hecht moved to close the public hearing. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote. Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None After a brief discussion, Carl Hecht moved that a special condition exists and that being the size of the lot can not be increased because of existing adjacent development; and the proposed house size is not excessive. These proposed variances are generally conforming to the existing development in the neighborhood. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes- Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Carl Hecht moved, with a second by Jill Davis, to grant the variance requests to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 15.G.2., 15.G.4., 15.G.5., 15.F.6., 15.F.1., Single Family District Regulations for Tract 9R3K, Abstract 518, A. Foster Survey, specifically addressed as 907 West Texas Street, to allow a seventeen (17) foot rear yard setback; a lot width of sixty (60) feet; a lot depth of eighty-eight (88) feet; a floor area of 1,050 square feet; and a 5,376 square foot lot size. The motion prevailed by the following vote: 4 Ayes. Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA96-20 submitted by Phil Morley who requested variances for the Lots 1-16, Block 1, Azalea Court Addition. The requests were to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 15.6.1., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require reverse frontage lots to have two thirty (30) foot front yard setbacks. Reverse frontage lots are lots whose rear is adjacent to another lot's side yard. Lots 1 and 16 are considered reverse frontage lots because their rear yards are adjacent to the side yard of the Abundant Life Church and the Grant Pittard Addition. The variance request is to allow Lots 1 and 16 a fifteen (15) foot reduction of the required front yard setback along Wall Street. If approved, it would allow a fifteen (15) foot front yard setback along Wall Street. Section 15.6.2., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback. The variance request is to allow Lot 16 a five (5) foot reduction of the twenty-five (25) foot required rear yard setback. If approved, it would allow Lot 16 a twenty (20) foot rear yard setback. Section 15.6.4., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a ninety-five (95) foot lot width for a reverse frontage lot. The variance request is to allow Lot 1 to have a seventeen (17) foot reduction and Lot 16 to have a four (4) foot reduction from the required reverse frontage lot width. If approved, it would allow Lot 1 to have a minimum lot width of seventy-eight (78) feet and Lot 16 to have a minimum lot width of ninety-one (91) feet. Section 15.6.5., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a one hundred (100) foot lot depth. The variance request is to allow Lot 16 an eleven (11) foot reduction of the one hundred (100) foot lot depth. If approved, it would allow Lot 16 an eighty-nine (89) foot lot depth. 9 BZA Minutes 6/03/96 Section 15.H., "R-7.5" Single Family District Regulations require a forty (40) foot buffer yard adjacent to a non-residential district. The variance request is to allow Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 a fifteen 0 5) foot reduction of the forty (40) foot buffer yard. If approved, it would allow Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 a twenty-five (25) buffer yard adjacent to a non-residential district. Ms. Ratclif explained Staff found a special condition for variance requests #2 and #4 for the rear yard setback and lot depth of Lot 16. City Staff worked diligently with the applicant to align Azalea Court with Azalea Drive. The alignment requirement creates the physical hardships for this lot. Ms. Ratcliff further explained Staff did not find any special conditions for variance requests #11, #3, and #5. The applicant would be able to meet the requirements if he were not developing so may lots. The buffer yard requirement is in place to separate residential uses from commercial uses. Lots 5, 6 and 7 especially need a buffer yard because of the Northwest Plaza Development. Lots 8 and 9 will be impacted with future development. The applicant has submitted a final plat application for Azalea Court Addition for the June 18, 1996 City Council Meeting. Philip Morley (210 South Park Boulevard Suite 100, Grapevine, Texas) explained his case to the Board. Mr. Morley noted that he had been working with the Engineering Department to align Azalea Court with Azalea Drive. Grant Pittard (1364 West Wall Street, Grapevine, Texas) spoke in opposition of the case. Mr. Pittard stated the development is inappropriate and does not conform to the surroundings. Tim Lancaster (2010 Forest Hills Road, Grapevine, Texas) stated to the Board that he supports Staff's recommendation. Carl Hecht questioned Mr. Morley on how many house could be built if no variances were granted. Mr. Morley replied a minimum of three (3) lots would be lost if variances were not granted. Three letters of objection were received. With no other guests to speak to the request, Carl Hecht moved to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis and Luers N. s V, Carl Hecht moved no special condition exists for the request. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Meyer, Hecht, and Davis Nays: Coy, Luers Mr. Morley noted to the Board that Lot 16 is losing thirty-eight (38) feet because the Engineering Department has requested him to.align Azalea Court with Azalea Drive. The average lot size in this Azalea Court Addition is 8,500 square feet. Mr. Morley proposed an alternative of approval on the buffer and he would do away with the Lot 16. Ery Meyer moved, with a second by Jill Davis, to table the variance requests to the next Board of Zoning Adjustment meeting on July 1, 1996. The motion prevailed by the following vote. Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Next for the Board of Adjustment to consider was BZA96-23 submitted by John Daloise representing Standard Building Systems requesting a special exception for Lot 1, Block 6, W.R. Boyd Center, addressed as 204 North Dooley Street. The request was to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, as follows: Section 43.E.3., Nonconforming Uses and Structures allows the Board of Zoning Adjustment the ability to approve the remodeling or enlargement of a nonconforming use when such an enlargement would not tend to prolong the life of the nonconforming use. If the Board of Zoning Adjustment approves the special exception request, it would allow a 4,800 square foot metal building expansion of an existing non -conforming use in a Community Commercial District as shown on the site plan. Marcy Ratcliff explained Staff found a special condition for the request in that this is an existing industrial use and development. The applicant is using an existing slab that is in place. This will give the Board an opportunity to require screening that is not currently there. The development occurred before the 1984 City Rezoning. 6 BZA Minutes 6/03/96 John Daloise (7538 Malabar Lane, Dallas, Texas) explained his case to the Board. No written correspondence was received. Ms. Ratcliff noted to the Board that the front parking lot recently was landscaped. Ms. Ratcliff recommended that the Board specify.an exact fence height of six (6) to eight (8) feet. City staff recommends that a solid screening around the entire perimeter of the storage area be provided. Mr. Daloise added the large tanks will, be moved- within the building or behind the screening. Only the buildings, cars, and landscaping will be visible. Ery Meyer moved to close the public hearing. Dennis Luers seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None After a brief discussion, Ery Meyer moved a special condition does exists for the request being that this is an existing industrial use and development. The applicant is using an existing slab that is in place. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Ery Meyer moved, with a second by Carl Hecht, to grant the special exception to the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 43.E.3., Nonconforming Uses and Structures for Lot 1, Block 6, W.R. Boyd Survey, specifically addressed as 204 North Dooley Street, to allow 4,800 square foot metal building expansion of an existing nonconforming use as shown on the site plan with the stipulation that the storage area be screened with a six (6) foot solid fence. The motion prevailed by the following vote: Ayes- Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None RIM11§111064wivi --- rrrr I Next for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider were the minutes of the May 6, 1996 meeting. 3 BZA Minutes 6/03/96 Ery Meyer moved to approve the minutes of the May 6, 1996 meeting as amended. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None Scott Williams discussed submitted plans for the OMPA office building located at, 1450 Hughes Road. Children's Courtyard second addition located at 5200 Champagne Boulevard is underway. The ground breaking for the Mills Mall is set for June 26, 1996 at 10:00 a.m. With no further discussion, Ery Meyer made a motion to adjourn. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes- Coy, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, and Luers Nays: None PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 1996. ATTEST: SECRETARY C IIA' I RY4D455�-- pi