Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-12-02AGENDA CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MEETING MONDAY.EVENING, DECEMBER 2, 1996, AT 6:00 P.M. COURT ROOM/COUNCIL CHAMBERS, #205 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD GRAPEVINE, TEXAS I. CALL TO ORDER 11. OATH OF TRUTH 111. NEW BUSINESS A. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-40, SUBMITTED BY DAVID WILSON AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. B. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-42, SUBMITTED BY JON KENNEDY AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. C BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-43, SUBMITTED BY WILLIAM EASTWOOD AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. D. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-44, SUBMITTED BY RICHARD PEMBERTON AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARIN* RELATIVE TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA96-45, SUBMITTED BY DONNA POTTER AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME. IV. MINUTES BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 4, 1996, MEETING. V. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS AND/OR DISCUSSION VI. 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 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996 AT 5:00 P.M. ;4 DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDING OFFICIA RON STOMBAUGH, PLANNER V SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-40 DAVID WILSON MEETING DATE: MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1996 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment approve the request to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 for property legally described by metes and bounds and addressed as 829 South Dooley Street as follows 1. Section 31.F, Light Industrial District, requires a minimum lot size ,of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. The proposed variance would allow a 10.621 square foot reduction in the required lot size. If approved. it would allow a lot 'size of 9.379 square feet 2. ` Section 31.6.1, Light Industrial District, requires a minimum lot width of one hundred (100) feet. The proposed variance would allow a fifteen (15) font reduction in the required lot width. If approved. it would allow a lot width of eighty-five (85) feet � 3. Section 31.G.2, Light Industrial District, requires a minimum lot depth of one hundred fifty (150) feet. The proposed variance would allow a seven (7) foot redaction in the required lot depth. If approved. it would allow a lot depth of one hundred forty-three - Y- ree (143) feet. 4. Section 31.G.3, Light Industrial District, requires a front yard of not less than thirty (30) feet in depth which shall be utilized as a landscaped setback area. Front yards shall not be used for any building, structure, fence, wall, parking or storage area, except that signs shall be permitted in this area. The proposed variance would allow perking in the `required front yard setback, If approved it would allow two (2) mini the required front yard setback, 5. Section 31.G.4,Light` Industrial District, requires' every lot to have two side yards, each of which shall not be less than fifteen 05) feet in width. The proposed variance would allow a three (3) foot reduction to the required side yard to the north. If approved. it would' allow a side yard of twelve (12)' feet along the north property line. 6. Section 53.H.2.b, Landscaping Regulations, requires that whenever an off- street parking ffstreet'parking or vehicular use area abuts an adjacent property line,'a perimeter landscape area of at least ten (10) feet in width shall be maintained between the edge of the parking area and the adjacent property line. The proposed variance would allow a five (5) foot reduction` in the perimeter landscape area depth. ' If approved. it would "allow a perimeter landscape area of five (5) feet. SPECIAL CONDITION: Staff finds that a special condition exists for all of the proposed variances because the lot and structure, previously used as a single family residence,` are existing in a zoning' district now zoned Light Industrial. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: An application was submitted to the Department of Development Services by David Wilson'. RS/rs 0:\BZA\96-40.4 �'� E ' ! I t s . 271 e i I ESTILL ST+ / ^'W —� ! i P T w Pt TA AC Ta 2 3♦ g t r-- r 1 2 3 ♦ g S f. i 0- ��t w 3 E� 1 Imms w it TEXAS ST j4Arot 61 tR 528 TP ' p3 qC 28 AC 62C ! M TRTR 5 1 i 6t1d `'j�'�y1► 43 I 6T8 �� !6 Oa` ' I E TEXAS AC q pa tR 62a� •� 25 ' 25 6 / a 8`9 0� t i K 'Aai eC 58 w IPt /� i jet , �RjGG I t a R 1 -it6 T S /R } 6 7 E I v 3 S+1 ► T I f T i i 24;. 1 S► 2 1 4, • --1 � 9 1 i (-17a ljIJTII 4 1V9 1 0 2 3 4STN T N Fti — S ( NFT qi � i ! 6c t ♦ KD ' I 2 E, w E v( E . ETk I ' PT S F i pt PT PT PT;�.1 SST $IPT G�11 t) E 1 E �* r 1 i I. 1 PT 12 ! P* PT PT �. cy 1 t, ( 1 6 t I :o la; 9a 1 ei ' 12I) s s 7 a E M PT PE t I ( w*i . v'' c' ` STREET :LO$EC; aAc)] 1 2 3 s S 5 ht 9 10 PT I ,� rJ-- L' N' g I i v ST 7Ci a II 10 • 7 POI �a1 3-i2� I� , } E` ; I 211 I ♦N 3 W J ! 5 ( i ! t2 u ' 39 c 8 o ----� i ' q N CU93-08 1 ' so sa! S.: IpZ 9'4 - t � 1p2 2j ,, 490-098�- BZA 96-40 -, '90-64 1CU87 —�---- ! —os ♦ is 6 '` I �`. DAVID WILSON ES ?i 5TR ,. i ----'" T--' t� T ) 2Mg L 2C U 'a EQ�N tTRI I s; EI A J j r� F' R C 1 [.aa AC AC �. s 5�i Tq > ___i ! uN T= z_ A� 1 TR TR rTAI 7 1 r I F 2` ( 681 � `SI. � - - i -- I � I �. � TR DALLAS RDcl . p'" Tp/ Zit 202 • j TR 2C2 � 28 -R ti c ! 2C2e I S aC 9 'FC M I TaAC 37A t--+----�-{-�� t I i" TR l a 3c CP I I v' 9 ,6 AC TA 2q —09 ITR ICI `n! 1. ?P �c �-L.�PeD c� aS�E AS 3 1.7a aC C I c� i lu. 4 ;p TR 3" �`` �c 7 � 7o I +g 8 I l t 9 4 2 4 TR 2x LVM K 22 L-- CA*4ON-STt. 6 7 TR Zr L730' LI TFUQ L627 • 7.9+3 n r FM E M PT PE t I ( w*i . v'' c' ` STREET :LO$EC; aAc)] 1 2 3 s S 5 ht 9 10 PT I ,� rJ-- L' N' g I i v ST 7Ci a II 10 • 7 POI �a1 3-i2� I� , } E` ; I 211 I ♦N 3 W J ! 5 ( i ! t2 u ' 39 c 8 o ----� i ' q N CU93-08 1 ' so sa! S.: IpZ 9'4 - t � 1p2 2j ,, 490-098�- BZA 96-40 -, '90-64 1CU87 —�---- ! —os ♦ is 6 '` I �`. DAVID WILSON ES ?i 5TR ,. i ----'" T--' t� T ) 2Mg L 2C U 'a EQ�N tTRI I s; EI A J j r� F' R C 1 [.aa AC AC �. s 5�i Tq > ___i ! uN T= z_ A� 1 TR TR rTAI 7 1 r I F 2` ( 681 � `SI. � - - i -- I � I �. � TR DALLAS RDcl . p'" Tp/ Zit 202 • j TR 2C2 � 28 -R ti c ! 2C2e I S aC 9 'FC M I TaAC 37A t--+----�-{-�� t I i" TR l a 3c CP I I v' 9 ,6 AC TA 2q —09 ITR ICI `n! 1. ?P �c �-L.�PeD c� aS�E AS 3 1.7a aC C I c� i lu. 4 ;p TR 3" �`` �c 7 � 7o I +g 8 I l t 9 4 2 4 TR 2x LVM K 22 L-- CA*4ON-STt. 6 7 TR Zr L730' LI TFUQ L627 • 7.9+3 9 C! S EE P 3 0 CITY OF GRAPEVINE -Z4-4'�- - BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT APP -4GAT40N APPLICANT -) NAM 44,) Io bjj6.0� 114jo AV0 RfA)4 #74,",DA) ADDRESS: SC) � Ste' /Z/ 5,14- --- CITY/STATE:— 624,0e,,,1 A- "� ZIP: 7& o� / HOME: PROPERTY OWNER(S) WORK. 49 8"08 9<v FAX: NAME: bAVID Will.,0,'J AAJ Q VCOLA m c(oAl 19 s ADDRESS: is -o I s" /r 5S4 CITY/STATE: -zip: W0%KHOME:. �14 FAX: STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) ?2-17 s- D00184 s-/- 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. in I m u rn i i ar� W�t r -I Al - q 500 S�' - Ace- dl.u-c [-c-� tip's +h (�p Saij,lc)f 1S apo ccX.11)) c' aor co dA -(f] line. of) NO -4 -fl ailck L�h (-- �j I Jl Ntr a i \j ,-- � cfe -f tip/ jj e-') cd - 1S ii -F+, 6. STATE THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST AND DETAIL`I4�� (#xC S:S�Alp TIONS WHICH CAUSE HARDSHIPS THAT IN YOUR OPINION J SYTHE VARIAN S) OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION(S) YOU ARE REQUESTING. EXAMP IAL 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. �rr)unCITE ail D w 1 This ex l s� i n o, +ru �-t i t-c) a a rm 1 ce- i d -h C-L h lLl�) wcula nof mee+- h6Ao n ,)(aIeofi z�1"h use -)or tLk bui W does - a i lkSa!M_.. tUrl� Cts i S �oaC oriIry l C e evvtc lea QH S LQyvoSc,qne,(�reep-.. A-2eA4 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. 8. ATTACH A DETAILED DIAGRAM OF THE SITE DRAWN TO,J "LE; -�AND A -N- � HER DRAWINGS OR PICTURES NECESSARY TO HELP EXPLAIN HE RD. 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 (PRI OWNER SIGNATUR D4jllj z7 ()6 E- GcJi �S�K, o.J IF—' - zc/ -�r_ SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS DAY OF 19 xxxxxxxxxxxxxrrxrrrxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx�C x x N07A,Y PU3LC - TEXAS x x uA 'f ,my r'om t'ss:oN EXPIRES x x ' +'�= ,1- R P. 1998 x x �OF ZF Xnnnn......nn..n..,.n................,.,�nn.,,.......n...................... x xxxxxxxxxxx)r...,..,'xxxXY';%YX?%X xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS DATE OF LICENSE EX IRATIOP 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 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 (rr 1 I tt� LLrr__i , s ,GI b3�(19 ,OI z j z i i � LU Q N S � I i i w z z N S � I i i w W v � '- wcci z N S � I i i w W g N S � I- -4x.00 FT. 21'-4' 13'-2 1/4' 14'-1 3/4' 1m'-1 1n' i 1 I � i 1 I � p <TC�4E t i i i I I 4'-8 in' 1 5TOfRAG;EFc- CE FT I ON N w HTR 8'-8' 13'-8 1/4' 3'-3 1/2' --1 OFF ICE CLS. T SEP 3 0 i We $. DOOLEY STREET LOT 1 BLK 1 SCALE: 1/4' 0 SEF -24-36 21:27 Scott Williams City of Grapevine Grapevine, Texas 76051 Fa)(* 817-424-0545 Dear Mr. Williams. - I EL: Pursuant to my phone conversation with you today, here is a detailed plan of our business @ 829 S- Dooley in Grapevine. We plan to put in a catering kitchen and office in the Dooley location. The building of approximately 1200 square feet has 7 rooms. The back tm rooms consist of the kitchen and back parch room. These two rooms will be utilized for our cooking area. One of the biggest rooms v will use for our offices, one room is a bathroom and the other 3 rooms will be used for storage- One of the storage rooms will store our food items, one for our catering equipment such as cambf-o boxes, etc, and the last room for our linens, tableware, etc. Our business requires that we visit clients rather than them coming to our place of business- At the present time, we buy all our own produce, grocery and dry goods at Sam's, etc. I have talked to David Wilson who has worked out with Jan Dawson to Supply you with the plans you require. I look forward to your response so that I may proceed - Respectfully, X Rena M. Marson -7 -- MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDING OFFICIA RON STOMBAUGH, PLANNER hce,- SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-42 JON KENNEDY MEETING DATE: MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1996 Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment approve the request to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 for Lot 1, Block 1 TWK Addition`and 1. Section 43.E.3., Nonconforming Uses and Structures, 'allows the Board of Zoning Adjustment to approve the remodeling or enlargement of a nonconforming use or structure. The proposed special exception would allow the enlargement of an existing building and the use of an existing concrete pad fQRarking If approved special excea ion would allow'the enlargement of an ` existing building and allow narking on an existina concrete pad, 2. ' Section 53.H.2.b,` Landscaping Regulations, requires that whenever an off- street parking or vehicular use abuts an adjacent property line, a perimeter landscape area of at least ten (10) feet in width shall be maintained between the edge of the parking area and the adjacent property line. 'I i The proposed variance would eliminate the required ten feet of perimeter landscapes area around the 1roposed off-street _l2arkfing area. If approved: it mould allow the development of an -off-street arking area -without the required u„ ten (10) foot perimeter landsca inq. 3. Section 31.H, Light Industrial District, requires that whenever a Light Industrial District abuts a residentially zoned district, a landscape buffer zone of not less than twenty-five (25) feet in depth shall be provided from the lot line. The proposed variance would allow a nine (9) foot red ction `in the required buffer zone at the neer buil ing line. and a twenty-two (22) -foot reduction in the required buffer zone at the end of a concrete Dad at the entrance of the new building. if approved. it would allow a buffer zone of'sixt en (161 feet at the building line and three (3) feet at the 'end of the concrete pad SPECIAL CONDITION: Staff finds a special condition exists for the proposed special exception since the building and concrete pad already exist. A special condition exists for the proposed variance to the landscaping requirement around the concrete pad to be used as a parking area because the concrete pad is in place 212 feet along the rear` lot line and 195 feet along the east lot line. A special condition exists for the proposed variance to the buffer' requirement due to the irregular shape of the lot and the existing building placement within the lot. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: A solid wood screening fence already exists along the rear and west property lines. A 1,942 square foot warehouse addition is 'proposed to be added to the existing 6,978 square foot warehouse. The concrete pad will be used for loading/staging access' to the new warehouse addition. A 5,092 square foot proposed 'office addition will be added to the 4,667 square foot existing office area. Additional parking will be provided at the front of the building. An application was submitted to the Department of Development Services by Jon Kennedy of International Turbine Service, Inc. RS/rs 0:\BZA\96-42.4 z SEE SHI 2t52-464 I mHz ` 84-24 UU 5-15-84 46 L I �NegO CU95-11 Sp �Z� S 34 K - f s 73 U94-14 �on — 7 • 1 2 S 2� PCD , Y U } i S 4 D 4 • • m 2 m 2v fn 7...133 K � BZA 96-42 � 2 ; .c y 0 69 PID JON KENNEDY Qn © n 71 �ooR� R TA 71.72 Ac E— b 19 N al a2 t3 44 a3 37 .: m 2AID n 3f � t3.39t 21 b 31 1 -2 r 1. 25 26 27 28 71 46 •'r. 23 2. � 41 Y ST Im to 73 .'�•�. EAS 72• 12a N 76 Y •'.v�� 1'. 72 � � 123 W277 •v 1445 71 so � lae t27 - C� U 78 167 ' 13e 145121 6Q+g467y 7e 9 151 Itt 1e5 M 52 •• C'`��� 15 tt s C 57 165 152 143 j 13e 17V 2 aw µ p 67 St j 6334 m 2A1 161 ISS 142 W Ill U8 1~ ft7 J 13 t2 �- 6.7. aC S to i6 3e .c3 sa u1 (A U7 0 lee y - ,z 55 N6�4 rn M-2 162 M. tat N 137 tl6 2 lel L95 sc M � 2271 K 161 eat Ir 134 Iia ue 18 05 63 se 5tN 94-01 2AIa TR . tst rn lb in lls ul t+ es cz s j Z fi�3 W2H m L 1 3 A rs+ 15e 137 736 U3 U2 • O n 79 1 Z73-19 Z .73 DALLAS RD. ES R 9 _TR 3e7 �""W"D vz 1 264. 1R 2t 1 1.817 K � T la © CRR 66g$G m I TR 11 1210'a Up205 F j m .A ►�T P V 64T2 2 K 7.37t����'� F R m 211 V RZR 7-3 K S �. . >R Fw L I >s q0�g m ► 2.71� s31x L!3 `.�8 1SU91 -L92 TR 2 � SEE SHT 2132 -ASE T"S ►AAP WAS 006t'lED 8Y UREESE ANp NiQiOIS. W.VSNG DATA OBTZIE FR011 THE CITY OF 6R 1P£VarE LN2 THE TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT A 1. APPLICANT NAME- JON W. KENNEDY 2. N ADDRESS: 1060 E. Northwest Highway CITY/STATE: Grapevine, Texas ZIP: 76051 HOME: 817/488-1174 WORK: 817/481-6531 FAX: 817/329-0317 PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: LYNN E. EDGINGTON ADDRESS: 1060 E. Northwest Highway CITY/STATE: Grapevine, Texas ZIP: 76051 HOME: 817/329-3434 WORK: R 1 .1121-65•--1 FAX: 817/329-0317 STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) Lot# I Block# I T.W.K. Addition 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. 30' Building line required in rear Existing structure at 14' 0" Requesting new structure to be 16' 0" 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 EXCEPTIONS) 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. 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. N/A 0 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 PE) JON KENNEDY---- \ ' "_"� APPLICANT SIGN TU OWNER (PRINT) L E. E GINGTON OWNER SIGNATU SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS 1st DAY OF October SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS 1st DAY OF October F LICE 9 96 MICHAEL PERKINS Notary Public, State at Texas WTni(61dt►lExpires 02.23.1998 DIRECT QUESTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AT (817) 481-0377 FAX NUMBER (817) 424-0545 DELIVERY 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 3 ^ � v PU ppOt rU C vz ZI i 1"I'l 3 �z ff N N p �0 I r rAl i 1 1 a o� d Q� N a U 0 Q a b r x~ 2 0 a a S MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDING OFFICIA RON STOMBAUGH, PLANNER rzC4 ! �� SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-43 WILLIAM S. EASTWOOD MEETING DATE: MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, '1996 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment dny the variance request to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 for the proposed Lot 6, Block 2,' Park Central Addition, addressed as 1917 Rose Court, Grapevine, Texas, as follows 1.Section 16.G.6, R-5.0, Zero Lot Line District Regulations, Density Requirements, requires a iweive (71) root separation between buildings on adjacent properties. The proposed variance would allow an eight (8) foot reduction in the Separation requirements. If approved it would allow a four (4) foot separation between buildings on adjacent lots. 2. Section 42.C.3., Supplementary District Regulations, requires a detached accessory building to be separated ten (10) feet from the main residence and have the same sideyard setback as required for the main' structure, eleven (11) feet. The proposed variance- would allow a seven (7) foot reduction in separation setback. If approved; it would allow a minimum separation of three 13) feel between the accessoW building and the main structure and a minimum of three (3) feet between th accessory building A13d the side property line_ SPECIAL CONDITION: j Staff finds a special condition does not exist for the proposed variance, as there is I room on the lot for a complying structure. Additionally, the separation requirements E between structures are partially due to fire safety and emergency access requirements.' BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Mr. William S. Eastwood filed a variance request on October 29, 1996. This case is a result of a complaint. 0:%szn\9e-43.4 1 n to 17 s . 3' 2i "RB 21 ]) 1• 1, .1 .. .7 5 11 t 7 � � 3 7 r 35 23 22 31 ( 2, � 26 2 13 N 5 2 � BROOKCATE DR 2521 12 7/ 14 % 26 �a It N e ,l3 , (e 7 6 s . 3 2 1 Tot: 3 • 6 1 1 w 0' 1 2 7 1. '3 .e 1 + � 13 7 I — 1 6 3, ¢ 2 : .2 > Is 1, 2.q 10ic 1.7 9 2c 7 ] 2 �� t • ¢ S 6 ' 4 2 6 10 II • ` 1 22 ] 5 37 40 I2 le 17 N i r 1 s 3q UJ 0. Z t 21: 2; a 3Al 1 + \ G IA 13 3 6 % a Km 14 z• .2 2+ 27 30 . 28 P 2! s •� 1 I. t 37 21 25... 26 31 5 ` ' 1-1 , S ` SV 63 2 34 AS°ENWDOD OR N e SEDUCIIA CIR ta'. 5 ¢ 11 12 6 . b 35 37 25 3. » ]z n 3b 32 t ' 162 5 3 g 7 u 7 ' w 13 It 32 2� 2e 27 26 25 24 O 33 o n 6 0 e a 22 a .a 1b 10 31 13 H 15 `76 l7 le N 20 21 22 23 1 ]' It IB i , J K 7 = p 17 e U , 3, ;.. 22 10 u STESPLEWOOD; DR ti 311 35 11 f CARLSEAD 36 1S 0.... j } 16,. 1 Is y 21 3S 1, 1 ,I 29 .2e 27 24 25 z. 23 '5 .. '.3 42 4t 40 31 13 37 CT 1l IS 16 w t. , IS' 1• It 20 a �I 37 \ 2e 30 14 Is 16 r. 1s w 2e .6 .) .e ., Sb 51 52 53 21 m w tai p � 1•' REDWOOD i. u 21 @ I, 13 < 36Y5 4 WINDING TR. q Iz 1:. 47 CREEv . 40 A e 50 S —J • to 34 ' 51 S2' S3 a 55 56 57 58 5p : 14 j7 So U U 4 , b 7 : 6 e . 7 2 t : 1b it 16 IS GRAPEviGE CDLLErv[LLE :w y e ­VVIN6S 16 I.tl R—MF.-233 1 Isla i2 I N� S p f 1+ z 3 s c) b, Ib u 32 2 2 SME m [ i 31 3 If PR PP ROSE CT. e „ D�PKE ' a 17E AC 4i 1 SSR 35 e 13 K' wp0 A Z72-28 25 If z ZR 2 1'. 7 t r_ 14 1131 12 11 10 E`— 3 3. 3 t0 Q0� 6 7 5 '87-05 [ g LN�./1V 26 33 tt u R—MF —2 '18 �"5 32 x 5 6 5 W h 0,��. .. u3ACaC. :s Ir 13 u 11 `, 0 1 6 0: p 4 :... . r , A25 26 2 26 2. 2 37 I ,,Ltja 3VO 6 7 13 y p "dab` 15w • , u D ' 2. 24 3t is :. 2 2 11 > 1 P,�( R-3. {3 • ' is � D ED RESTRICTED TO �...� 56 tb , 20 21 3e .3 16 UNIT PER ACRE B`A 96-43 1 22,416 u '� `= V (� \/ u TR 6.e AI:CR � WILL IAM _A7 R00 DR p m 0 0 TP 2E,C 16 15 � 1- 13 12 11 TO e 7 6 5 2 34 7 41 EAST CLO 8 2.772 a FRITCHARD. ORIYE •.6 :4 0 7 �.. 0: m 5� ,c o 15 N 13 12 I1 10 1 2 e ) 6 S s ] 2 Z+ 27 : 15 li U 12 L W , e iz p a e Z 1 t I 5 3 a 23 22 + 2` INWDOD R7 55 0, 2� , . trlTa 2fC 377 0 ..�:.� t7 le zo 6 1:3 is 11 N b :12 i 1.2E�a GRPp 0� CN �u88-A3 /w le „ _ 6 //� 1 Y .46 AC 3 a U ,�.,:. 13 5 �f� 5 III z CN as -,a �- ;� z )R 2(6 1 24 t2 s C N , p q / C.iy LIMI ICf 17' 1 3 Il P 0� 2 NPT 3 7d Ar/ L ! hs e A� 4� 5 TP 3 f 2 1 7 166 6 2 3RMA IF 2 N 1• PO 3Ftt t5? THS MAP WAS COMPILED BY FREESE AND NICHOLS. INC. USM DATA OBTAINED FROM THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE M0 THE TARRANT APPRAdSAL DISTRICT::; g�a�'G 4� CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION 1. APPLICANT NAME: W I LL L6.(f 7-u)06�0 ADDRESS: 11/7 ROS 5 <f- �[ CITY/STATE: ZIP: C'o 5-1 HOME: 11� � Zl 6!26L -WORK: 2-1Y 67141 6`37Z FAX: 2. PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: Wlt-1-141'1 S, &61 hVaL Il- F:i"�77WOLI)oO ADDRESS: Z �/ Z- ROIL- Cl- CITY/STATE: C--k4ipt'-- 7' Zip: HOMEJ'/ 7 ya/ 226 2- WORK: Z-lq - Cf4 - �J 7 4 -TAX: 4. STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. /0/ff� 167 �. I / r- -f- PJV1441-V6 Z-/-Z/)t- 6 - - , :�g �S Jai -ro 1) 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. 6vF-- 7-0 GI-z1F- 1,5 0 CoNszA4JC-r6I 6)I✓ 6' W. Op/c- Z-4-7-- 4:1 Q r- blfdlstf- /�U/Lc�figS� l�'►�� L'� �- SF� O� T'Z�.� �''/ �G4c JIV /V Y fj•�C/T i'�}2�. Gi/�S C//�i'ful!� �� 7`/�� �tJrLOr�/6 1rr�� f%Cc �sS ��5 5"T,e(jc r(j1t - Is 4 "v y Ff lf�6tfi�r7 it- L/v 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. �v �L�r�c lti�' i �L.��--.a F�-�..�✓Gf� ���1� f3�'�2ox /' FI Gt/�r q 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) IZ-&M-M A -0&4J f.' f-457k&?"l APPLICANT SIGNATUR OWNER (PRINT) -4 OWNER SIGNATURE SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS U Id— DAY OF A '199/ 4ZL� I � �ai- E KEVIN D. BAILEY E 1** NOTARY PUBLIC - State of Texas COMM Exp 09-14-97 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS /6 1� DAY OF 199� DATE OF LICENSE EXPIRATION Fky P, .'0-^ _ 0 KEVIN D. 13 AILEY NOTARY PUBLIC cot I State of Texas CommEXP 09-14-97 � -)(/-g -2 DATE OF LICENSE EXPIRATION 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 October 8, 1996 From: William S Eastwood To: Board of Zoning Adjustment, City of Grapevine, Texas Subj: Application for zoning variation, enclosed. I hope this cover letter will help to clear up my position in requesting a zoning variation for my residence at 1917 Rose Ct. Unaware of the easement along my north property line, I built a small tool shed in my back yard in the only logical place to put it. I realize now that it will have to be moved or torn down because it stands less than three feet from my next door neighbors residence. I am requesting the variance in order to comply with this restriction. If approved, I will move the shed three feet east but it would remain on the easement. I built it low, standing only seven feet tall at the tallest point so it would not be visible from the street (see enclosed photos). My next door neighbor, Mr. Mike Comparoni owns the house with the easement restriction. He doesn't mind having the shed where it is right now and has offered to help me move it three feet east if this request is approved. If there is some document he would need to sign, he has indicated his willingness to do so. He can be contacted at work at 214-650-6269 or at home at 251-0278. If you have any questions of me please call me at 421- 6962. If you are unable to approve this variance I will tear the shed down as there is just no place else to put it. Thank you for your consideration. ��S,,i /ncerely, William S. Eastwood (PLAT S.88`55'22" E. 56.0') ME�SURE S.88`55'22" E. 55.92 -.....-DIRECTIONAL CON OL LINE o0 Ui r 14.6 O . r r - w ,` � X6.7 ., \18.7 I: N 00 o o BRICK & FRA ME z, C4 RESIDENCE Oc 40.0\ �U) cl- Q M `-- W LOT 6 0.13 ACRES A 1/2" I.R. FND. 117.0' TO LILAC LANE Buildii RESIDENCE //- K:" - m D r�- �D m V? �a V) • • 0 O .p.. O cn Ln °o v' w 'I N o0 Ui r 14.6 O . r r - w ,` � X6.7 ., \18.7 I: N 00 o o BRICK & FRA ME z, C4 RESIDENCE Oc 40.0\ �U) cl- Q M `-- W LOT 6 0.13 ACRES A 1/2" I.R. FND. 117.0' TO LILAC LANE Buildii RESIDENCE //- K:" - m D r�- �D m V? �a V) • • 0 O .p.. O cn Ln °o v' w REFERENCE NO.: 37214 MORTGAGE CO.: AMERITEX 620 W. PIPELINE RD, HURST 76053 TITLE CO.: FIRST AMERICAN 1864 NORWOOD DR, HURST 76054 PURCHASER: EASTWOOD GF# 93-1600ND/LJ ADDRESS: 1917 ROSE COURT, GRAPEVINE, TEXAS PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lot 6, Block 2, PARR CENTRAL GARDEN HOMES, an Addition to the City of Grapevine, Tarrant County, Texas, according to the Revised Plat recorded in Volume 388-214, Page 34, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas. The following easement does not affect this Lot: Easement recorded in 8457/1536, DRTCT. 1/2' I.R. 25' BUILDING LINE a Y O O N ^ O 1 ^wl co M ch Y O 5 sZ Z'aI w ac gin aal l' Building Line 1/2' I.R. FNO 1917 ROSE COURT �O \\\\\ /—I/2' I.N. FND. (PLAT 5.88.55'22"E. 56.0') E7SG_REQ 5.88'55'22"E. 55.9 7.0 TO DIRECTI AL CON 0L LINE LILAC LANE �\ 11' Building Line °' 1 � a N I RESIDENCE _ �IT-- J O LJ mN n 00 p BRICK & FRAME N HG RESIDENCE < o A Z t~ 40.0 i I g: U0' OI A� �I vi N LOT 6 i 0.13 ACRES a ml � 1• ,, 5D� &_U.E. 388-214/34 IA EASURED N.89.06'05"W. 565 (PLAT N.88'55'22"W. 56.0') 1/2 I.R. FND. FLOOD CERTIFICATION According fo riRM Map 4843900030 G DATED: 1-6-93 this property Is not located In a special flood hazard area. Thls properly Is located In zone - SURVEYORS CERTIFICATION 7 The undersigned Registered Public surveyor certifies to purchaser. Lender and Title Company as named above, and their Underwriters that (A) this plot of survey and the properly description set forth heron are a true and correct representation of facts found of the time of an actual on -the -ground survey; (B) such survey was conducled by the surveyor, or under his suporvlsion; (C) all monuments shown hereon exist and the locailon, size, and type of malarial on correctly shown; (D) except as shown. Ihere ore no visible encroachments or righl-of-ways onto the property there are no visible discrepancies, conflicts, shortages In area of boundary Ii except as shown; (E) the si is, location. and type of Improvements are as shown hereon; (F) the distance I the nearest intersecting street Is per plot; (G) the property has occess Io o pubitc succi unless of harwi3. nofed; {H) the Hood sludement Is baled on the most recent cola available to the surveyor, and while This survey may show the properly not to he to a 'rectal flood hazard area, all flood zones may be subject b some degree at flooding, for oro Information contact the. local flood rloin administrator or The Fede -I Emergency Management Agency; (1) survey reitecis oil easeme nis oilecling The properly, evidence of which is visible on the ground, or of which the surveyor has legal notice. JAMES H, DOWDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. r> 2569 GRAVEL DRIVE DATED: 2-i6-93 FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76118 N JAMES H. DOWDY r ^; •2970 a:t (4\19,�Y a,r SS •o .yam r , 1� x,. � ��, , � 1 r , iw � t � «t r � :i ♦ ♦w y � � • ' r +t 'r� y 4. � !�� n 1 r r ,,lL:.�• x'1.1.• I. �2 i. P - An MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: BOARD OF ZONINGADJUSTMENT FROM: SCOTT WILLIAMS, BUILDING OFFICIAL RON STOMBAUGH, PLANNER V t SUBJECT: BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-44 RICHARD PEMBERTON MEETING DATE: MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1996 RECOMMENDATION:' Staff recommends the Board of Zoning Adjustment*foll: he variance request to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 fhris Craft Drive, legally„ described as Lot 21, Shorecrest Acres Addition as 1. Section 15.F.2.,Single Family District Area Regulations, which requires a minimum lot size of seventy-five hundred (7,500) square feet. The proposed variance would allow a seven hundred (700) foot reduction of the minimum lot size. If approved. it would Allow a minimum lot size of sixty- eight hundred (6.`8001 ' quare feet for the existing, 2. Section 15.G.1.,` R-7.5 Single Family District - Area Regulations, requires a thirty (30) foot front yard setback. The proposed variance would allow a ten (10) foot reduction of the front yard setback. If approved. it world allow a twenty (20) foot front yard setback. 3. Section 15.G.2., R-7.5 Single Family District - Area Regulations, which requires s twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback. The proposed variance Mould allow a on (1) foot reduction of the rear' yard setback. If approved. it would allow a twenty-four (24) foot rear yard setback. 4.' Section 15.G.5., R-7.5 Single, Family District - Area Regulations, which requires a minimum lot depth of one hundred (100) feet. The proposed variance request would allow a fifteen J15) 'foot reduction of the minimum lot depth If approved it would allgw an eighty-five (85) `foot minimum lot depth. 1 SPECIAL CONDITION: Staff finds a special condition does exist for the proposed variance due to the unusually small existing lot size. This lot size presents considerable hardship in placing 'even `a small structure on the lot. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Mr. Richard Pemberton, the property owner and builder, submitted a `variance request on October 29, 1996. The Board has previously granted'` several similar variances in, the subdivision. 2 nR to, it 9 12 25 3 OUNN GT 47 \ \ 1 ,� 13 (2 2{ le \ � ` ` 3 232i 51 2 n 24 4C 46 65 2 3 R x 23 a TR 1838 P ZQ 4'1 6t 1.3 ACw l 22 6' S u 0 9 .. 31 {t o 63 0 !T Ta Si 43 62 to rR Im 7 ,2 51 / La 8c -3430 �g603 zo ice c ¢ TAM 1 31 a y BZA 96-44 cc 4 V 1 I RICHARD 3 �34 qa►0 PEMBERTON �` !' >_ 36 39 55 5e T3 ` TR 1< \ 1R R TR late ` 1425 K 1.04 AC 74 i> .IeRu KP 37 30 SG 57 75 1 ra ,s2 12s RpOS1A �N - ^ -- 584aa REDBUD LN. ' L >, 7R 6 S _ GU 1 14 23 14 23 32 33 34 41 42 43 f TR 3AZ uTR ~ 2.25 L65 AC u 22 25 31 V 35 46 r- u p "l21 � 27 36 = 36 39 LL 45 / o — I 29 37 >e _>- 46 tHGHVEW IN 10 HI 1 GUA s i , 2 3 S 6 7 8 9 16 u 12 13 TR SSA SSS AC a O 25 24 2322 21 2t1 14 3S 1T 15 14 O TR 55C L M 0 2.33 AC LAKEWOOD IN TR 550 6 IN ¢ tftK 4 `Z� 3 S 6 T 8 1 le u L3 4 I5 2S 24 23 Z2 21 26 i, a 17 16 t5 14 6 3 OAK IN Z78-14 CN T 1 = OAK . LN TR 55 TR 560 / o� 13 t 1 , a u iz 15Y BUSHONG RD. 2 3 l t 2 _ It 12 13 14 33 2a 28 Z7 2C 23 2t ra tszE (f� tete 4 RIVSERS[DE NORTH RIVERSIDE OR 26 W J O (J 241 t/ 114 eEVERLT 2. rem lowtvVE CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION APPLI( NAME ADDRESS:/?,2 CITY/STATE: OiC.Aj? e-UlAj -C,I; q'7x, ZIP: 7L/, HOME:&7- 2 2—WORK:a2/k - 2Y- IL/, ff.- FAX: ?1'7 -Nf -,?h7 PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME:- CITY/STATE: Z IP: HOME:9Z2-(S&—h[72 WORK: 5F -FAX 4. STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) . (!hr i -I—' �r� 1 4 —1) r i'vv 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. /I 6-r- -Ti�.c- F-�j A/L e- A 0— ^-t 4c 'S i z <. t' /ot' IX- . . . .......... . . F&IAA /VA c 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. 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. q 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 SIGNATUR OWNER (PRI OWNER SIGNATU SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS f;L A"z t PL? N S m NOTARY PUBLIC FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS DATE OF LICENSE EXPIRATION DAY OF �" 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 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 LOT 21 SHoREc.2EST 1kC,2,ES G2,hQEvitiE, I �--X• _it EXtsrttUG ' t't (o2 /. DI' FT UTI L . EA5e. E(tSTitJG SLAB PIkTl o FROOT POR -Gat 4' CONC• W A LK I(p'GoWC- D(�. :i • occ WGu- PUAP PLOT PLAN SCALE.- 11 = -2- 5Q. F T i IA E E GIivUND A( C,IIY r �'ag,.a:•E�„�E_ _____ T -)C S'—DECSRIBL , AS FOLLOWS BEING LOT NO. � )_. _ 13L OCK _ _ Of �xnret�2E5Sg €3s a sstid�si�Lcf�dr ��* aQc.Jg.�. �d_N1�+,,AN AD0111ON 10 TtiE CI(Y OF CLBP�Y_�� LAS r �1, TEXAS, ACCORDING TO Tf iE .P_-.is1 _____ RE(,, 1 1_i) ItJ -- $' - - ------ OF TIIE - --- - - - s�.a _ fZECORD� 01� _ Toa¢q"�-r-__..----Ct)lJMY, TEXAS. 4� au a�7 C�a Ffl asp) N 06 3300 W 7 Z+o 0 - iV - 1 _ V\ _— ZS 349v � t 101' S 00 33 00 E-- {Gn�,.�EP OF %{C C H P 15 - CR -AFT p \;DTE p GFJj EASE MEw7 T- -TC)'AS ow�2 E LGN 7 FE o2C£'v TO: ----- ------ '%— 255�D 1 1Z6, P /z T T Ooas r -T To THG BEST and to: OF M -f K.Dow LEPGe Ar f7 -r-,-i,5 (2uPeQ-Y THE PLAT HEREON 15 A ?RUE, CORRECT ANO ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF THE PROPERTY F. E. M. A. AS DETERMINED BY SURVEY, THE LINES AND DIMENSIONS OF SAID PROPERTY BEING AS INDICATED BY PUT, TIIE S12E LOCATION AND TYPE OF BUII DINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS ARE ACCORDING TO COMMUNITY AS SHOWN, ALL IMPROVEMENTS ©LING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPEw'y. EXCEPT PANEL 598 00058 'HIS PROOPERTPERT- Y IS LOCATED AS SI10WN, SET BACK fl20M THE PROPERTY IINCS TfiE DISTANCES INDICATED. iN ZONE .G. THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS, CONFLICITS. PROTRu;,iu,, Vii APPARENT U3[MENIS, MAP DATED: Nov. 17 982 EXCEPT AS SfIOWN. 1333 CORPORATE DRIVE p Texas SUITE # 103 S RVING, TEXAS 75038 Prcolessonal HUGH E. PEISER, R.P.L.S, NO. 3688 TN INC X21 4 570-5437 Su vcyoro 1214 714-0282 FAX DATE: 7- ;z ry ? 928 KINGS CAN`T N DR. PEISER SURVEYING CO. INC. GRAPEVINE, TEXA'a 76051 r (817) 481-37{J 5 MLTRO wjl,t'M Since 1977 COMMERCIAL. • RESIDENTIAL DOUNDARYS 'COPOGRAPIIY MORTGAGE. P y r 9 U p < V\ _— ZS 349v � t 101' S 00 33 00 E-- {Gn�,.�EP OF %{C C H P 15 - CR -AFT p \;DTE p GFJj EASE MEw7 T- -TC)'AS ow�2 E LGN 7 FE o2C£'v TO: ----- ------ '%— 255�D 1 1Z6, P /z T T Ooas r -T To THG BEST and to: OF M -f K.Dow LEPGe Ar f7 -r-,-i,5 (2uPeQ-Y THE PLAT HEREON 15 A ?RUE, CORRECT ANO ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF THE PROPERTY F. E. M. A. AS DETERMINED BY SURVEY, THE LINES AND DIMENSIONS OF SAID PROPERTY BEING AS INDICATED BY PUT, TIIE S12E LOCATION AND TYPE OF BUII DINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS ARE ACCORDING TO COMMUNITY AS SHOWN, ALL IMPROVEMENTS ©LING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPEw'y. EXCEPT PANEL 598 00058 'HIS PROOPERTPERT- Y IS LOCATED AS SI10WN, SET BACK fl20M THE PROPERTY IINCS TfiE DISTANCES INDICATED. iN ZONE .G. THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS, CONFLICITS. PROTRu;,iu,, Vii APPARENT U3[MENIS, MAP DATED: Nov. 17 982 EXCEPT AS SfIOWN. 1333 CORPORATE DRIVE p Texas SUITE # 103 S RVING, TEXAS 75038 Prcolessonal HUGH E. PEISER, R.P.L.S, NO. 3688 TN INC X21 4 570-5437 Su vcyoro 1214 714-0282 FAX DATE: 7- ;z ry ? 928 KINGS CAN`T N DR. PEISER SURVEYING CO. INC. GRAPEVINE, TEXA'a 76051 r (817) 481-37{J 5 MLTRO wjl,t'M Since 1977 COMMERCIAL. • RESIDENTIAL DOUNDARYS 'COPOGRAPIIY MORTGAGE. P y r 9 EFFICIENT LAYOUT HIGHLIGHTS CLASSIC RICH PLA 9849 (REFER TO PRICE LEVEL LI) • A charming covered porch leads visitors directly into the living room where they view the dining area ahead. The living room features a fireplace. • The dining area includes sliding glass doors and a con- venient entry to the garage. ♦ The L-shaped kitchen opens up to the dining area for serving ease. A worktop island with a snack bar pro- vides plenty of preparation space. ♦ The bedroom wing of this home houses three gener- ously sized bedrooms which share a full bath with dual vanity. ♦ Plan includes a daylight basement foundation. If heat- ed. it will add an additional 1.176 square feet to the total living area. TOTAL LIVING AREA: A10 _J_�SQ. FT. BEDROOMS:3 BATHS:I 10 WONUN-S DAY FAVORITE HOME PUNS WINTER 1996 t XCLUSIV frs order bl«ef)"WS. Pb011e toll jrt-e 1 526-400 `. MEMORANDUM MEMO TO: BOARD OF FROM: SCOTT WIL RON STOM SUBJECT: BOARD OF DONNA CA MEETING DATE: MONDAY, I RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Grapevine Comorehensive Zon platted 1. S S1 I f Staff fii to press propeM DA^V^ i DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ZONING ADJUSTMENT LIAMS, BUILDING OFFICIAL BAUGH, PLANNER (2(.S ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE #BZA96-45 SE POTTER )ECEMBER 2, 1996 Zoning Adjustment approve the variance request to Ing Ordinance 82-73 for 1423 Rio Send Court, and I Creek Estates as follows: nentary District Regulations, requires an accessory ten (10) feet from the main residence and have the special condition does exist for the proposed variance due to an effort ees, and if granted, will result in greater setbacks from the side and rear than are required. 1D INFORMATION- Ms. Donna Potter submitted a, request for the variance to allow the development of a proposed detached garage to supplement the existing two car 'garage on the property. The applicant has indicated that the proposed structure will be designed to be architecturally compatible with the existing house. 0:\bza\96-45.4 -''° K'— s K J Ac � .n Ac TR in m xs E , O 2 1.! S' 7 • �TR 29381 TR 36a30 V i K 30 43 Ac ri .243 K.43 Ac 8 > 3 C' r n >6 C n K tot 263A TR 2t Ry I 7.as a �! 3610 „ y.., i3 22 L .71 AC GUCHAR. HOLLOWoR .AC =33°3 .23 Z73-35 wr 4 1 1 1131 is 36ta ` ]rz iR ]A J TR � 96azs K �, 0 t. tl 1� n • N to 21 22 v za 23 38ta TI! 3e ra 24 161 2317 354 DUBLIN• C k 14 At7 TR in I\ r 2, ` QH t % t 0 u 79R R' p...GL ON--57 2 , J 2 q n -"��S TR -VS t2 26 t 1,4 j� t 10 9 .32 -c it Yf,. 3 CHOTEAU OR 27 ALIBI p a 5 iR 6 , s I t A rt sev 9 1 1 2 3 4 3 i tIt 7827 13 AC 1 S' 20 11 TR ♦` i2a2 AC DOVE RD. _ >s GU to t5 t3 t2 It .1 , Z77-22 R a - TR is , 16 /,S:, WOOD IN pow CU9 t —13 u•7� F rart j! 1 9 17 t t71t 215° a 1 19 a 4z C. _ f 2 799 t ,e : J 2 K 2 : 13 2: 5.. 1ft� q 3 is 3 II 3 3 a 1R— �. i l'� 2p s •: d u: a n •: -j T J �V 21 „' 10 S Z 9t2 s 3 , c ; rR tci '( TR 3 t2 a Ir / 23 is zs zb N a e T D 2.572 a SUPv�g 9t.O AC 30 C j�; - Qt7 TR am 31 f 12 a ,o AR It TR t6$ /�TR 175 AC G U 61S N' r 26 27 v t2 R K� 9 3 rn a 3v1`�''_ t n u / p !6 t 2�s 12 IS taa' `� ,E t� Esa T" Ic �c3A 41-2072 7 ` '0 ,�„� • ; .33: Ar' 2E i a Ta 33 3 36 2� ` \ w' -"'S a ON pRa•c < R ICa f . 2J 21133 �,L t 27 b 11- .to�_ K K IT a a r9N oG1ti TR Kt2 TR Il �.1. ^} It ° E IC t I / V" fR 1810 iR Y,O - 2 20 TR Ki)11 If ICs la° sc u R— . C is n a u 3 2• ' 0• •Nt rn tc1. f rR ra m l Tit Z85-22 ZZ • y 1Ct tel �!` • 114.14 AC S • I � 4 `1" A rt TR 1i71��1 it tit 1 f a W _ 2 X10 iJ r • KQW MRT" J2 2 1.i ICU i 0 tC t 5 t: i :� r rr MpSR ; a a 8 iti c 1 2t 1^OAp 42 Is t 3 +T, 1 al Ia MEROOYBROOK. 1l '' zr GNE � ra sa 796-4%5 (/a/�� a„ K a. 12 3 6 7 BZA 96- ■ 12 11 / �1 s Q 2 to 17 t°, 13 . 16... K „ is 15 DONNA POTTER 1. v CT az ' u Aalc LL �1 • Sir, 1 z t5 t 6 r ra s°t n x as T a Ic >s u a.at Ac Sd a Z 7 , 13 it to s< a�a i S a 7 2 i Ctr000n9OOR sl. C a 93 SHA 0 a a 23: a ,6. / \\ p w 52 5 5 t. Q s a U s 17 If 11 18 �RR� y� 30 w o 22 1a f�i (V= -z 11 t • t5 4 a N 31. 1 G 1`2S v a to , 7 jo�19 - 27 26 r >~ S< 31 1 ) K Y 3 u 28 c 15 I 13 12 u a 2.3 Ac /' N 2 SANDHURST CT 55 2 2 17 ao Y 31 Ze // COl1NTR`. FORE ,I. t2. 21 a 2 23 ZZ Zi 291 ro SC 1 { b 1 23 2+ 25 26 27 6 1 13 �$ tz. I1 AZ�� 22 cr p 1 ,z `1y2 St1Ao I�IIu�6lili�� Is \ 75 4 5 14 T3 IG 17 34 Y J 2 1 ) to I7 ,1 3z n 30 zo 26 a a CIRCLE YIEW CT 2 2 rn SH L%3 a 7 tc 15 16 1aa TIFFANY FOREST: OR to a v a a c 5 a 3. t. i5a 13 7 K F CITY OF GRAPEVINE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION • APPLICANT NAME: o � N A C 005 E PO r T lF- R ADDRESS: x CITY/STATE: C—P'ApevlN� T� ZIP: 7(o c, q ci ;: . � I e HOME 7 302�WORK:Q�Z-Z43-40 FAX: 2. PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME- T F -\i C h)POTTEf, A N; D -k K! N pt Pt S E P0 'r T ADDRESS:— 14-21) Rio ZE:N-D Cojp-r CITY/STATE: R A P i N E T( ZIP: 76 HOME. 2 1#7 2-+1-- - 3u2t,-, n R 3 -24 7Z - 7-43 - -4 cOl _��, F A X- 4. STREET ADDRESS AND LOT, BLOCK AND SUBDIVISION NAME OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PLEASE ATTACH SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY) I423 LUT ��OCvC OOT) k- EST ATE S 5. LIST THE PERTINENT SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND INDICATE THE SPECIFIC VARIANCE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED. IF NECESSARY USE A SEPARATE SHEET. L, 3 0F THF - R - S.Z F-P,o - LL Ll hie -DE A SEPARA-TEf) LIN(- 1 -3 V A c 5 FEE,— uE Q v E L pj 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. Sef EX H t 1B ITS i - 7, ATTAco O e In an effort to preserve a 14 inch oak tree, we are submitting this application to request an adjustment to Section 42 C.3 of the R-5.0 Zero -Lot -Line District Regulations. Our intent is to construct a detached accessory building, of the- same material and style as the house, on the driveway side of our new home. Section 42 C.3 requires minimum distance of 10 feet between the dwelling and the detached accessory building. We would like to request an adjustment to 5 feet for that distance. If the variance is granted, we will be able to construct the accessory building without removing a 14 inch oak tree. The shade and beauty from this mature oak tree graces not only our property but that of the neighbors behind us and future neighbors to the side. 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 OTHEF 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► -00 Q Q A} l _ ASF-Pn-r-r;:o APPLICANT SIGNATU OWNER (PRINT) 57E EIj )?. Pp TT EP- AND OWNER SIGNATUR LO Y04 A CASE SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS _DAY OF - Ae 19_n •SPPY PU�� 11## ELIZABETH J. PEi�INY } �F Notry ;' a:ic. Sate of Texas i q- a -';� -- SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THIS DAY OF NOTARYi�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 CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT SERV/CES DEVELOPMENT SERV/CES PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD, ROOM 209 P.O. BOX 95104 GRAPEVINE, TX 76051 GRAPEVINE, TX 76099 rd 6 '� t' Steven and Donna Potter P.O. Box 863 Grapevine, Texas 76099 (817) 242-3026 November 4, 1996 Board of Zoning Adjustment Development Services Department City of Grapevine 307 West Dallas Road, Room 209 Grapevine, Texas 76051 cc: Mr. Scott Williams, City of Grapevine Dear Members of the Board of Zoning Adjustment, We have recently purchased a new home at 1423 Rio Bend Court in Wood Creek Estates and look forward to becoming part of and enjoying the Grapevine community. In an effort to preserve a 14 inch oak tree on our property, we are submitting the attached application to request an adjustment to Section 42 C.3 of the R-5.0 Zero -Lot -Line District Regulations. Our intent is to construct a detached accessory building, of the same material and style as the house, on the driveway side of our new home. Section 42 C.3 requires 10 feet of distance between the dwelling and the detached accessory building. We would like to request an adjustment to 5 feet for that distance. If the variance is granted, we will be able to construct the accessory building without removing the 14 inch oak tree. The shade and beauty from this mature oak tree graces not only our property but that of the neighbors behind us and future neighbors to the side. Please accept the attached application, photographs, supporting information, and filing fee as our request for your favorable consideration. We are available at your convenience to provide any additional information or to discuss the application. Sincerely, Steven R. Potter '/-/w,- /�7 4�--�- Donna Case Potter i �; Address: 1423 Rio Bend Court, Grapevine, Texas 76051 Lot 5, Block 1, Wood Creek Estates, Grapevine, Texas 76051, Tarrant County Index of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Plat of Wood Creek Estates showing Rio Bend Court Exhibit 2: Survey of Lot 5, Block 1, Wood Creek Estates Exhibit 3: Tree Survey - Lot 5, Block 1, Wood Creek Estates The yellow highlights indicate which trees were left by the developer, The Counter Companies, Inc. Exhibit 4: Tree Survey, showing tree size, of a portion of Wood Creek Estates, including Lot 5, Block 1. The yellow highlights indicate the trees which were left by the developer. Note the 14 inch oak close to the rear property line. Exhibit 5: Lot 5, Block 1 plot plan of site. This shows the tree survey overlayed on the site with the existing dwelling and the future accessory building at a distance of 10 feet. Exhibit 6: Lot 5, Block 1 plot plan of site. This shows the tree survey overlayed on the site with the existing dwelling and the future accessory building at a distance of 5 feet 1 inch. Exhibit 7: Photographs of the existing dwelling, the 14 inch oak tree, and the site area where the future detached accessory building will be constructed. �n C) O C) 0 A reird 01 CD C3 CD v) Ln vi Ln to LL. 4' in L'i .54:1 L6 A- 0) T< 4- 0 0 4e °K s 4", C) '01 9' 5: t, >< �� / �_ U-) JAMOD amma Om 00 00 06 3 GtP.f9.G9 N 3N1 -1 XZ)V913S -1 1 9 N "IAS3 $S3 OV '9 b- ,Tlw, 3 N 5T5W6 f j 9 1 r, vi r 0 I\., — to �2 d> a� JN 1 8L3, E.99 N 3NI XJV81�)S j uh=— 5*68 N'iAST —SS30.-�V—.9 -)NI T Nvi7 its v U� to in to CO is cn m :4 C) co -.1 2 vi Lr) r— C4 V CO �3 JR I'ZZ 00- c I I M .,9S;.91P*66 N xfdj 008ZXd:1�3 I NO -1: C I GV:VT 96, SzzOT tQ :t;tg Ss tc declare that haus+: prppprty located atL423 Bmmig j TABS60 County, Tex deFGrFbmc 1tj en Addition to the City of GRAPE Piat'of the same recorded in CA County, Texas: atja R. , cars P u 1 follows: r uoT't- tILL (,OWJt4l;, AI-' Ceprt-r) i/2" C-YrtfL, kZooc' , t2rdMpt-r) " MOAK. C�urzv. Iiic., . GFt2 ant} accurate survey on the ground of the �ih the City of GRAPEVINE LeC1C 1, HOOD CRZ 8 S County, Texas, according fo the :AE 2498, PLA? Records of'RRANT _ 143 V-10 F�E7-ND C, U tZr a-")9°,4r:�1071f C�2U, Oo` fi� Exhibit 2: Survey of Lot 5, Block 1, Wood Creek Estates Nb�`F kZlo Y'-two.couar I'i TOWN ON INE coTV-t-&j- gl(,Kl i l-IbWtrVE-lZ- T"1.11:- t2-�Gol2hen p�Qr �t-iOWS P��KP�E-Nt7 Cdlit1-�" The plat hereon ,is an accurate representation of ah actual survey made on the ground under m6 superv'isIon'and the Iinos, corners, and dimensions of said property are as indicated; THe;.aiae, joca-0 on, and type of buildings' and Improvements shown are as indicated: iirtpc�ovtments laeine wjSaid thin the boundaries of the proty, except as mhown,.dnd"set back f Eraq: tper he paundorw '.lines' the'• distances', indicated: The distance ,frbm;.tha nearest lilt¢ SgCt ng street or road is as showrrt; There are no apparent encroachrla�a,' protrusions, i t`tpun�nl�y",ins conflicts, ,visible easements or easements of record as furn{shed to us, e4oVt its shown or noted otherw.ist.` LEGEND FW(D -STESLROp Sue •!°%%�, i .sET>'CAPP£R STEE4 WO kFaISTEREO is OF ;tibNi{j CRQO tT( IN .CONCE ET£ LAND SUR1/E1�Of��t ff G J 0 �j P.I pE P. Q. 90x 1034 < 6 ?'T ass -n 1 I D'�ARC, STAKE ` NCP�e .LINE kiURST, 7ExAS 7ib53 PATE on ompraseicn Beal and, pdgh 4l Ted e�vmed to eollLaM un orl*+y'aijyYaH Exhibit 3 Tree Survey - Lot 5, Block 1, Wood Creek Estates The yellow highlights indicate which trees were left by the developer, The Counter Companies, Inc. Builder/Owner to verify and check all aspects of this site and plot plan prior to any construction Exhibit 4: Tree Survey, showing tree size, of a portion of Wood Creek Estates, including Lot 5, Block 1. The yellow highlights indicate the trees which were left by the developer. Note the 14 inch oak close to the rear property line. ,-Orta-a 3E::..NG=PASION GF EE- PG. 81 `-R aLAU'' •oFfL aPEANE E ac I.;;4C7 N,) ai3 °CT 'w C - EX. V G..`y£ LANL'rN(,-R�..A SE •:N� vGL. ;4fi-IR5 RG. 1� 4- N 01'28'32' W X380.33' Z3.4-- 3WAlt a t F OA c . ^+�'" 0 i � �' 'tires o • Fp � O 7�AK t F F P ¢ d 6 nA RA,S�� "C• fi r • . T� S07 Ai " 2 :� e*4 TAX FOP 0 .- K! ��47 u �� Old O S LrJr V L K 4fOAII JO. r P O r rt . 3` • P� ,!... (.Z K '��^ FO+ 1. 'y�i • ,t ' cC`� r.7 •e rc5�� PK '$CASK �?3 •i�pP u 8'OAK o t C g•'G. p+ o r • r Yom. 3 a _ ! JP��o� AK-. 00 a� Exhibit 5: Lot 5, Block 1 plot plan of site. This shows the tree survey overlayed on the site with the existing dwelling and the future accessory building at a distance of 10 feet. Budde,/Owner �o verify ona cheCk ,i ssaects of this site cmi oiot pian prior to nny construction Exhibit 6: Lot 5, Block 1 plot plan of site. This shows the tree survey overlayed on the site with the existing dwelling and the future accessory building at a distance of 5 feet 1 inch. Builder/Owner to verify and check oil aspects cf this site and slot plan prior to any construction IN, 4 _ fSi .- s4 ark `, 'F. Y f i'• . �.� �4�= •! •::/' ��.-t` 1. s , 1004 ~ t :- ■ v 541 0 -- -ti � STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Grapevine, Texas met on Monday evening, November 4, 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: Randy Howell Carl Hecht Ery Meyer Dennis Luers Jill Davis Russell Anderson Chairman Vice -Chairman Secretary Member Member 1 st Alternate constituting a quorum. Also present was City Councilman Roy Stewart and the following City Staff: H. T. (Tommy) Hardy John Boyle Scott Williams Ron Stombaugh Tim Fleming Gerrie Anderson Director of Development Services City Attorney Building Official City Planner Plans Checker/Field Coordinator Secretary Chairman Randy Howell called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. The first item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-41 submitted by James D. and Teresa Brodrick who requested a variance for Lot 70, Shorecrest Acres Addition and addressed as 1806 Silverside Drive. The variance was from the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 15.A., R-7.5 Single Family District Regulations which allows specific permitted uses but does not include any commercial uses. The proposed special exception, if approved, would authorize a commercial use to operate in a R-7.5, Single Family District. Mr. Williams explained the case and that Staff found no special condition existed. James Daryl Brodrick, applicant of 1806 Silverside, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that when he and his wife purchased Lots 69 and 70, it was BZA Minutes 11/04/96 obvious the out building had been used as a commercial building. Mr. Brodrick noted they had renovated the house and out building, put in landscaping and cleaned the property. Mr. Brodrick explained that his business hours were 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., there were no signs on the property and all his trucks were new and in good working condition. Mr. Brodrick did have available a petition from approximately 20 neighbors in favor of their request. Teresa Brodrick, applicant of 1806 Silverside, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that the business does not cause any problems to the neighbors. Art Brown of 1822 Silverside Drive, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that he had lived in the neighborhood since 1981. Mr. Brown noted that the Brodricks had improved the deteriorated building and that he was in favor of the request. Richard Grant of 1846 Anglers Plaza, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth. Mr. Grant explained that he was concerned with safety of children playing in the streets and elderly people that walk in the neighborhood with the increased truck traffic from the Brodrick's business and from another business being run in the neighborhood. Mr. Grant noted that the streets are narrow and there are no sidewalks. Bob Lowry of 1710 Silverside Drive, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained he was against the request. Mr. Lowry explained that he had built a new home in the neighborhood and did not want to see a continuation of commercial businesses in residential areas. Bob Fahey of 1730 Silverside Drive, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that he had no complaints concerning the business. Mr. Fahey noted how the Brodricks have cleaned up the property. Kenneth Tucker of 1805 Silverside Drive, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained he had built a new home in the neighborhood two years ago and does not have a problem with the Brodrick's business. Geraldine Lowry of 1710 Silverside Drive, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that she and her husband were the newest residents in the neighborhood and was not in favor of the request. Ms. Lowry noted that where she lives, she sees 20 trucks a day going to and from the business. N BZA Minutes 11/04/96 Kathy Owens of 1734 Chris Craft Drive, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that she lives two streets from the Brodricks, feels the streets are safe and does not see many commercial vehicles in the neighborhood. Mrs. Brodrick also noted that their business only has four commercial vehicles. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Ery Meyer made a motion to close the public hearing. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Mr. John Boyle, City Attorney spoke and explained that the property was residentially zoned and being utilized for a commercial purpose with employees and there is no ability to grant a variance for a principal use. Mr. Boyle noted that the Brodricks could seek to change the zoning and go before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ery Meyer made a motion that no special condition exists. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next item of business for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-34 submitted by Grapevine Relief and Community Exchange who requested a variance for the west portion of Block 3, Grapevine Service Center Addition and addressed as 604 Shady Brook Drive. The variance was from the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 54, Masonry Requirements, which requires all structures in the Government Use District to have at least seventy (70) per cent of the total exterior walls constructed of masonry. The requested variance would allow a one hundred (100) per cent reduction of the exterior masonry requirement on an existing building. If the Board of Zoning BZA Minutes 11/04/96 Adjustment approves the request, it would allow an existing structure to be moved onto the site with no exterior masonry. Mr. Williams explained that Staff found a special condition existed for the request being that the existing building was originally designed without masonry veneer, and the energy and expense of adding masonry would preclude its utilization, resulting in its demolition, and the loss of a resource. Mr. Williams explained that the garage was originally built adjacent to the residential structure that was recently moved to the property. The Board of Zoning Adjustment approved a 100% reduction in masonry to the main structure at its May 13, 1996, meeting. Ms. Tricia Wood, representing GRACE, was present to answer any questions. There being one letter in opposition of the request and no one else to speak either for or against the request, Carl Hecht made a motion to close the public hearing. Dennis Luers seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl Hecht then made a motion that a special condition existed, being the garage was originally built to match the structure that was moved to the property in May and that the garage and house do not have masonry. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl Hecht moved to approve the variance to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 54., Masonry Requirements, to allow a one hundred (100) percent reduction of the exterior masonry requirement on an existing building, allowing an existing structure to be moved onto the site with no exterior masonry. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None H BZA Minutes 11/04/96 The next item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-35, submitted by Ms. Shirley Armstrong who requested a variance for 1041 Riverside Drive South, legally described as Lot 1, Block H, The Woods Subdivision, Phase II. The variance was from Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 15.G.1., Single Family District Regulations which requires a thirty (30) foot front yard setback. The requested variance would allow a three (3) foot encroachment of the existing house into the required thirty (30) foot front yard setback. If approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, it would allow the existing house a twenty-seven (27) foot front yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Mr. Williams explained that Staff found a special condition existed and the special condition being that the encroachment is not the fault of the current owner. Shirley Armstrong, applicant, of 2934 Oak Forest, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that she had purchased the property in 1986 and resided there for 10 years. Ms. Armstrong explained that during the sal this property, it was again surveyed and she was advised of the three (3) foot encroachment. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Jill Davis made a motion to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Jill Davis made a motion that a special condition existed, that being the structure is existing and the encroachment is no fault of the owner. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Jill Davis then made a motion to approve the variance to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 15.G.1., Single Family District Regulations, allowing 5 BZA Minutes 11/04/96 a three (3) foot encroachment of the existing house into the required thirty (30) foot front yard setback, allowing the existing house a twenty-seven (27) foot front yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next item of business for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-36, submitted by Richard Carter Companies who requested a variance for Lot 16R, Block A, Bear Run Addition, addressed as 1972 North Port Court. The variance was from the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 15.H., R-7.5 Single Family District, Buffer Area Regulations, which requires a forty (40) foot buffer yard along the western property line whenever a R-7.5, Single Family development is located adjacent to a non-residential district, without any division such as a dedicated public street, park or permanent open space, and all principal buildings or structures shall be set back a minimum of forty (40) feet from the adjoining property line. The requested variance would allow a reduction of one (1) foot to the forty (40) foot buffer yard required between residentially and commercially zoned property. If approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, it would allow a thirty-nine (39) foot buffer yard along the western property line. Mr. Williams explained the case and noted that Staff found no special condition for the proposed variance; therefore, recommended denial of the request. Mr. Williams explained that the purpose of the buffer yard was to provide separation between residential and commercial uses. Mr. Jackie Fluitt, with Washington and Associates, representing Mr. Carter, took the Oath of Truth and explained that early in the process of developing this property, there were negotiations with the City of Grapevine concerning park land. He explained the subdivision was designed to accommodate the park land to the north and east property lines. Mr. Fluitt went on to explain that Drees Homes currently has 38 homes constructed, the remaining lots are under contract and because the buildable area on this lot is only forty (40) feet wide, this is the last lot to be built on in the subdivision. A BZA Minutes 11/04/96 Tim Denihan with Drees Homes, took the Oath of Truth and explained that a variance was needed in order to build a home compatible with what is marketable in the area. Mr. Denihan also explained that if a variance was not granted, Drees Homes would not buy the lot. Richard Carter, applicant of 3838 Oak Lawn, Suite 915, Dallas, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that because of negotiations with the City of Grapevine about the 45 acre park, the whole subdivision was pushed south and four (4) lots were lost. Mr. Carter noted that this lot has not sold within two years because a forty (40) foot wide house is not marketable. Mr. Carter noted that the deed restrictions for the subdivision requires 1650 square feet. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Jill Davis made a motion to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Chairman Randy Howell, remarked that there was usually a reason for a lot to be sold last and he hated to see lots sitting vacant. After discussion among the members about not being able to find a hardship, Jill Davis made a motion that no special condition existed. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-37, submitted by Terry Bouton who requested a variance for Lot 6, Windmill Estates, addressed as 3257 Oak Tree Lane. The variance was from the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 42.C.3., Supplementary District Regulations which requires an accessory structure to be at least ten (10) feet from any dwelling. 7 BZA Minutes 11/04/96 The requested variance would allow a carport to encroach a minimum of four (4) feet into the required ten (10) foot building separation. If approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, it would allow a minimum separation of six (6) feet between the carport structure and the existing house. Mr. Williams explained that Staff found a special condition existed for the proposed variance due to the existing topography of the lot, and the existing four foot retaining wall and existing tree, and in addition, the available rear yard was very limited. Mr. Williams also explained that the applicant submitted a request for the variance to allow the development of a proposed 11 x 21 foot carport at the rear of the existing house. Mr. Terry Bouton, applicant, of 3257 Oak Tree Lane, Grapevine, Texas, took the Oath of Truth and explained that he had lived in the house for 11 years and with a teenager and a third car, a covered carport was needed. Mr. Bouton noted that the existing garage would still be used as a garage. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Carl Hecht made a motion to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl Hecht then made a motion that a special condition existed due to the topography of the lot and the existing four foot retaining wall and existing tree, and in addition, the available rear yard was very limited. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl Hecht made a motion to approve the variance to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 42.C.3., Supplementary District Regulations to allow a carport to encroach a minimum of four (4) feet into the required ten (10) foot building separation, allowing a minimum separation of six (6) feet between the carport structure and the existing house. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: BZA Minutes 11/04/96 Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next item of business was for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider BZA96-38, submitted by Linda L. Laer who requested variances for 3125 Trail Lake Drive, legally described as Lot 1, Block 2, Trail Lake Addition. The following variances were from the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 15.G.2., R-7.5, Single Family District Regulations which requires a twenty- five (25) foot rear yard setback. The requested variance would allow the proposed garage to encroach a maximum of nineteen (19) feet into the required twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback. If approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, it would allow a principal structure with a minimum six (6) foot rear yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Section 15.G.1., R-7.5, Single Family District Regulations, requires a thirty (30) foot front yard setback. The requested variance would allow the existing house an encroachment of two (2) feet into the required thirty (30) foot front yard setback. If approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, it would allow the existing house a minimum twenty-eight (28) foot front yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Mr. Williams explained that Staff found a special condition existed for the proposed variance to the rear yard setback due to the inaccessibility to the existing two car garage and the current drainage problems of the lot. Staff also found a special condition existed for the proposed variance to the front yard setback because the house was existing and was not the fault of the owner. Linda Laer, applicant, of 3125 Trail Lake Drive, took the Oath of Truth and explained that the house was built in 1985 and was left unfinished for six to eight months due to the builder declaring bankruptcy. Ms. Laer also explained that two cars could not fit in the garage because of the way it was oriented. With no one to speak either for or against the request, Ery Meyer made a motion to close the public hearing. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: 0J BZA Minutes 11/04/96 Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Ery Meyer made a motion that a special condition existed for the rear yard setback due to the inaccessibility to the existing two car garage and the current drainage problems of the lot, and that a special condition also existed for the proposed variance to the front yard setback because the house is existing and is not the fault of the owner. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Ery Meyer made a motion to approve the variances requested to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 15.G.2., R-7.5, Single Family District Regulations, to allow the proposed garage to encroach a maximum of nineteen (19) feet into the required twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback, allowing a principal structure with a minimum six (6) foot rear yard setback as shown on the plot plan and to Section 15.G.1., R-7.5, Single Family District Regulations, to allow the existing house an encroachment of two (2) feet into the required thirty (30) foot front yard setback allowing the existing house a minimum twenty-eight (28) foot front yard setback as shown on the plot plan. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next item of business for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider as BZA96- 39, submitted by Ms. June Stevenson who requested a special exception for 409 West Wall Street, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Sathre Addition. The special exception was to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 54 Masonry Regulations which requires 70% of the exterior walls, excluding doors and windows, to be constructed of brick, stone or other masonry or material of equal characteristics in accordance with the City's Building Code and Fire Prevention Code. 10 BZA Minutes 11/04/96 The proposed special exception would allow construction of a new structure with a 100% reduction to the masonry requirements. Mr. Williams explained the case and that Staff found that a special condition existed for the proposed special exception because the applicant was trying to recreate a historic structure which was close to the original site location. Mr. Williams also noted that the Historic Preservation Commission informally reviewed the proposed exterior building elevations at their October 23, 1996, meeting and recommended approval of the conceptual renderings of the exterior. Phil Morley, representing Ms. Stevenson, took the Oath of Truth and explained that the original building was built in 1912 at the corner of Wall Street and Main Street, until Ms. Stevenson bought it and moved it to 409 West Wall Street. Mr. Morley explained that the building burned to the ground late last year and Ms. Stevenson retained his firm to attempt to recreate it exactly as it was before. Mr. Morley also explained that he had met with the Historic Preservation Commission and that P.W. MCCallum, Acting Foundation Director, pointed out the exact type of siding that was almost certainly used on the original structure. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Carl Hecht made a motion to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None After further discussion, Carl Hecht made a motion that a special condition existed because the original house burned and that the applicant was trying to recreate a historic structure which is close to the original site location. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, Anderson Nays: None Absent: None Abstain: Luers Carl Hecht then made a motion to approve the special exception to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 54 Masonry Regulations, to allow construction of a new structure with a 100% reduction to the masonry requirements. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: 11 BZA Minutes 11/04/96 Ayes: Howell, Meyer, Hecht, Davis, Anderson Nays: None Absent: None Abstain: Luers Last for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider were the minutes of the October 7, 1996, meeting. Ery Meyer made a motion to accept the minutes of the October 7, 1996, meeting as corrected. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyer, Luers, Davis, Anderson Nays: None Absent: None There were questions asked about a dent repair shop being run from Mr. Daniel's building at the corner of Dallas Road and Main Street. Mr. Hardy explained to the Board that the dent repair business in Mr. Daniel's building was for estimates only, they would have to go before City Council as a Conditional Use Request to do repairs. Mr. Williams explained to the Board that Certificate of Occupancies are required for all change of businesses. There being no further discussion, Ery Meyer made a motion to adjourn. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyer, Luers, Davis, Anderson Nays: None Absent: None The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M. 12 BZA Minutes 11/04/96 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 1996. ATTEST: SECRETARY CHAIRMAN 13 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Grapevine, Texas met on Monday evening, December 2, 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: Randy Howell Chairman Carl Hecht Vice -Chairman Ery Meyer Secretary Dennis Luers Member Jill Davis Member Russell Anderson 1 st Alternate constituting a quorum. Also present was City Councilman Roy Stewart and the following City Staff: Scott Williams Building Official Ron Stombaugh City Planner Tim Fleming Plans Checker/Field Coordinator Gerrie Anderson Secretary e0-9 Chairman Randy Howell called the meeting to order at 6:02 P.M. fiki The first item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-40 submitted by David Wilson who requested variances for 829 South Dooley Street. The variances are from the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 31.F, Light Industrial District, requires a minimum lot size of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. The proposed variance would allow a ten thousand -six hundred and twenty-one (10,621) square foot reduction in the required lot size. If approved, it would allow a lot size of nine thousand -three hundred and seventy nine (9,379) square feet. Section 31.G.1, Light Industrial District, requires a minimum lot width of one hundred (100) feet. The proposed variance would allow a fifteen (15) foot reduction in the required lot width. If approved, it would allow a lot width of eighty-five (85) feet. BZA Minutes 12/02/96 Section 31.G.2, Light Industrial District, requires a minimum lot depth of one hundred fifty (150) feet. The proposed variance would allow a seven (7) foot reduction in the required lot depth. If approved, it would allow a lot depth of one hundred forty-three (143) feet. Section 31.G.3, Light Industrial District, requires a front yard of not less than thirty (30) feet in depth which shall be utilized as a landscaped setback area. Front yards shall not be used for any building, structure, fence, wall, parking or storage area, except that signs shall be permitted in this area. The proposed variance would allow parking in the required front yard setback. If approved, it would allow two (2) parking spaces in the required front yard setback. Section 31.G.4, Light Industrial District, requires every lot to have two side yards, each of which shall not be less than fifteen (15) feet in width. The proposed variance would allow a three (3) foot reduction to the required side yard to the north. If approved, it would allow a side yard of twelve (12) feet along the north property line. Section 53.H.2.b, Landscaping Regulations, requires that whenever an off-street parking or vehicular use area abuts an adjacent property line, a perimeter landscape area of at least ten (10) feet in width shall be maintained between the edge of the parking area and the adjacent property line. The proposed variance would allow a five (5) foot reduction in the perimeter landscape area depth. If approved, it would allow a perimeter landscape area of five (5) feet. Mr. Stombaugh explained that Staff found special conditions existed for all the proposed variances because the lot and structure, previously used as a single family residence, were existing in a zoning district now zoned Light Industrial. Mr. David Wilson, applicant, of 501 Smith Street, Grapevine, took the Oath of Truth and explained about the lot, parking and that the plat was going before the City Council December 17, 1996. There was discussion about there being enough parking for future uses of the property. The Board discussed the option of deleting the two head -in parking spaces K BZA Minutes 12/02/96 shown on the plot plan and adding a third parallel space in line with the two parallel spaces shown on the plot plan. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Carl Hecht made a motion to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyer, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl Hecht made a motion that special conditions existed being the existing zoning of the property is now LI -Light Industrial and had previously been single family and that the structure is also existing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyer, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl Hecht then made a motion to approve the variances to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73 as follows: Section 31.F, Light Industrial District, allowing a ten thousand -six hundred and twenty one (10,621) square foot reduction to the required twenty thousand (20,000) square foot lot size, allowing a lot size of nine thousand -three hundred and seventy nine (9,379) square feet. Section 31.G.1, Light Industrial District, allowing a fifteen (15) foot reduction to the required one hundred (100) foot lot width, allowing a lot width of eighty-five (85) feet. Section 31.G.2, Light Industrial District, allowing a seven (7) foot reduction to the required one hundred -fifty (150) foot lot depth, allowing a lot depth of one hundred forty-three (143) feet. Section 31.G.3, Light Industrial District, allowing the required thirty (30) foot front yard, which shall be utilized as a landscaped setback area, be reduced to twenty (20) feet, allowing a ten (10) foot variance; where one (1) parallel parking space would be permitted. The two (2) head -in parking spaces as shown on the plot plan are to be deleted. 3 BZA Minutes 12/02/96 Section 31.G.4, Light Industrial District, allowing a three (3) foot reduction to the required fifteen (15) foot side yard requirement, allowing a side yard of twelve (12) feet along the north property line. Section 53.H.2.b, Landscaping Regulations, allowing a five (5) foot reduction in the required ten (10) foot perimeter landscape area depth, allowing a perimeter landscape area of five (5) feet. Dennis Luers seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-42, submitted by Jon Kennedy who requested variances for 1060 East Northwest Highway, platted as Lot 1, Block 1, TWK Addition. The variances were from the Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 43.E.3., Nonconforming Uses and Structures, which allows the Board of Zoning Adjustment to approve the remodeling or enlargement of a nonconforming use or structure. The requested special exception would allow the enlargement of an existing building and the use of an existing concrete pad for parking. Section 53.H.2.b, Landscaping Regulations, which requires that whenever an off- street parking or vehicular use abuts an adjacent property line, a perimeter landscape area of at least ten (10) feet in width shall be maintained between the edge of the parking area and the adjacent property line. The requested variance would eliminate the required ten (10) feet of perimeter landscape area around the proposed off-street parking area. If approved, it would allow the development of an off-street parking area without the required ten (10) foot perimeter landscaping. Section 31.H, Light Industrial District, which requires whenever a Light Industrial District abuts a residentially zoned district, a landscape buffer zone of not less than twenty-five (25) feet in depth shall be provided from the lot line. 4 BZA Minutes 12/02/96 The requested variance would allow a nine (9) foot reduction in the required buffer zone at the new building line, and a twenty-two (22) foot reduction in the required buffer zone at the end of a concrete pad at the entrance of the new building. If approved, it would allow a buffer zone of sixteen (16) feet at the building line and three (3) feet at the end of the concrete pad. Mr. Stombaugh explained the case and noted that Staff found that special conditions existed for the proposed special exception since the building and concrete pad already exist; for the proposed variance to the landscaping requirement around the concrete pad to be used as a parking area because the concrete pad is in place two hundred - twelve (212) feet along the rear lot line and one hundred -ninety-five (195) feet along the east lot line; and for the proposed variance to the buffer requirement due to the irregular shape of the lot and the existing building placement within the lot. A solid wood screening fence already existed along the rear .and west property lines. A one thousand -nine hundred and forty two (1,942) square foot warehouse addition is proposed to be added to the existing 6,978 square foot warehouse. The concrete pad will be used for loading/staging access to the new warehouse addition. A five thousand -ninety two (5,092) square foot proposed office addition will be added to the four thousand -six hundred and sixty seven (4,667) square foot existing office area. Additional parking will be provided at the front of the building. Mr. Jon Kennedy, applicant, took the Oath of Truth and explained that the building was built in 1980 and there were variances at that time. Mr. Kennedy explained that he was proposing to double the office size. Mr. Stombaugh noted that the required number of parking spaces, (37) per the gross square footage of the building, were provided. Mr. Kennedy explained that the area to the north, that is shown with slash marks on the plot plan, is already existing concrete and will be removed for the expansion of the building on the north end. The front entry will be changed to the north side. There was discussion concerning how trucks would enter the property. Mr. Kennedy explained that the trucks would enter the property through the north entry between the concrete area west of the parking area and the building. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Dennis Luers made a motion to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: 5 BZA Minutes 12/02/96 Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Ery Meyer made a motion that special conditions exists for the proposed special exception since the building and concrete pad already exists; for the proposed variance to the landscaping requirement around the concrete pad to be used as a parking area because the concrete pad is in place two hundred -twelve (212) feet along the rear lot line and one hundred - ninety-five (195) feet along the east lot line; and for the proposed variance to the buffer requirement due to the irregular shape of the lot and the existing building placement within the lot. Dennis Luers seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Ery Meyer made a motion to approve the special exception and variances to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 43.E.3., to allow the enlargement of an existing building and the use of an existing concrete pad for parking; Section 53.H.2.b. to allow the elimination of the required ten (10) feet of perimeter landscape area around the proposed off-street parking area; and to Section 31.H., to allow a nine (9) foot reduction in the required buffer zone at the new building line and a twenty-two (22) foot reduction in the required buffer zone at the end of a concrete pad at the entrance of the new building, allowing a buffer zone of sixteen (16) feet at the building line and three (3) feet at the end of the concrete pad. Dennis Luers seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Mr. Williams explained that Mr. Eastwood submitted a letter to the Board requesting his case be tabled until the January, 1997, meeting. Carl Hecht made a motion to table BZA96-43, submitted by Mr. William S. Eastwood, until the January 6, 1997, meeting. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: M BZA Minutes 12/02/96 Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next ' item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-44, submitted by Mr. Richard Pemberton who requested variances for Lot 21, Shorecrest Acres Addition.- The following variances are from Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 15.F.2.,Single Family District - Area Regulations, which requires a minimum lot size of seventy-five hundred (7,500) square feet. The proposed variance would allow a seven hundred (700) foot reduction of the minimum lot size. If approved, it would allow a minimum lot size of sixty-eight hundred (6,800) square feet for the existing lot. Section 15.G.1., R-7.5 Single Family District - Area Regulations, requires a thirty (30) foot front yard setback. The proposed variance would allow a ten (10) foot reduction of the front yard setback. If approved, it would allow a twenty (20) foot front yard setback. Section- 15.G.2:, R-7.5 Single Family District - Area Regulations, which requires a twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback. The proposed variance would allow a one (1) foot reduction of the rear yard setback. If approved, it would allow a twenty-four (24) foot rear yard setback. Section 15.G.5., R-7.5 Single Family District - Area Regulations, which requires a minimum lot depth of one hundred (100) feet. The proposed variance ,.request would allow a fifteen (15) foot reduction of the minimum lot depth. If approved, it would allow an eighty-five (85) foot minimum lot depth. Mr. Williams explained that staff found special conditions existed for the proposed variances due to the unusually small existing lot size. Mr. Williams explained that the lot size presented considerable hardship in placing even a small structure on the lot. fi BZA Minutes 12/02/96 Mr. Larry Dickherber of 1830 Teton Drive, Grapevine, took the Oath of Truth .and explained that when he purchased his house, he was informed by the City and his builder that nothing would be built on the lot behind him because of it being too small. Richard Pemberton, applicant, of 1829 Chris Craft Drive, Grapevine, took the Oath of Truth and explained that the well on the property used to be a community well for Shorecrest Acres, but it was shut off when new City water lines were installed. Mr. Pemberton explained that the well was plugged and the house would not be built over the well. With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Carl Hecht made a motion to close the public hearing. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl- Hecht then made a motion that a special condition existed for the proposed variance due to the unusually small existing lot size and that the lot size presents considerable hardship in placing even a small structure on the lot. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Carl Hecht made a motion to approve the following variances to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 15.F.2., to allow a seven hundred (700) foot reduction of the minimum lot size, allowing a minimum lot size of sixty-eight hundred (6,800) square feet for the existing lot. Section 15.G.1., to allow a ten (10) foot reduction of the front yard setback, allowing a twenty (20) foot front yard setback. Section 15.G.2., to allow a one (1) foot reduction of the rear yard setback, allowing a twenty-four (24) foot rear yard setback. N BZA Minutes 12/02/96 Section 15.G.5., to allow a fifteen (15) foot reduction of the minimum lot depth, allowing an eighty-five (85) foot minimum lot depth. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None The next item for the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider was BZA96-45, submitted by Ms. Donna Potter for 1423 Rio Bend Court, and platted as Lot 5, Block 1, Wood Creek Estates. The variance was to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73: Section 42.C.3., Supplementary District Regulations which requires a detached accessory structure to be at least ten (10) feet from the main residence and have the same sideyard setback as required for the main structure. The proposed variance request would allow an accessory structure to encroach five (5) feet into the required ten (10) foot building separation. If approved, it would allow a minimum separation of five (5) feet between the accessory building and the main residence. Mr. Williams explained that staff found a special condition existed for the proposed variance due to an effort to preserve trees, and if granted, will result in greater setbacks from the side and rear property lines than are required. Mr. John Metzler of 1412 Hampton Road, Grapevine, took the Oath of Truth and asked Ms. Potter what was intended to be built and would any trees be removed. Ms. Donna Potter, applicant, took the Oath of Truth and explained the need for an extra two car garage and wanting to move the garage closer to the house in order to protect the root area of the oak trees toward the rear of the lot. Cyncha Farris, who lives behind the property, took the Oath of Truth and expressed concern to which trees would be removed. E BZA Minutes 12/02/96 With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Ery Meyer made a motion to close the public hearing. Dennis Luers seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Ery Meyer made a motion that a special condition existed and that being due to an effort to preserve trees, and if granted, will result in greater setbacks from the side and rear property line than are required. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Ery Meyer than made a motion to approve the variance to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Section 42.C.3.,' allowing an accessory structure to encroach five (5) feet into the required ten (10) foot building separation, allowing a minimum separation of five (5) feet between the accessory building and the main residence. Jill Davis seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis Nays: None Absent: None Next, the Board of Zoning Adjustment considered the minutes of the November 4, 1996, meeting. Ery Meyer made a motion to approve the minutes, with changes, of the November 4, 1996, meeting. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis, Anderson Nays: None Absent: None 10 BZA Minutes 12/02/96 Carl Hecht asked why the zoning ordinance required a ten (10) foot separation from the auxiliary structure and the main structure. Mr. Williams explained that the requirement for separation between buildings is for access, and open space reasons to avoid clutter in the neighborhoods. Carl Hecht briefed the Board on the TransComp 1996 meeting that he attended in Atlanta. Mr. Hecht explained that the North Texas Commission attended the annual meeting of the National Industrial Transportation League to get the word out nationally that the Metroplex is a logistic center; a place to do warehousing and distribution. Mr. Hecht explained that there was excellent response of people inquiring at their booth. Mr. Hecht also explained that Grapevine had all the entities with the adoption of the Freeport Tax Exemption, to be a truly logistic center. F-1101011UNMA49111 With no further discussion, Ery Meyer made a motion to adjourn. Carl Hecht seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Howell, Hecht, Meyers, Luers, Davis, Anderson Nays: None Absent: None The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 P.M. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1997. ATTEST - SECRETARY 11 wjz-.. .ell