Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-09-21AGENDA CITY OF GRAPEVINE SPECIAL BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT WORKSHOP MEETING MONDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 21, 1992, AT 6:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM, #204 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD GRAPEVINE, TEXAS 1. DINNER II. CALL TO ORDER III. NEW BUSINESS A. ROLE OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT B. REVIEW OF 1991 AND 1992 APPLICATIONS IV. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS AND /OR DISCUSSION • . IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6252 -17, V.A.T.C.S., AS AMENDED BY CHAPTER 227, ACTS OF THE 61ST LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SESSION, THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1992, AT 5:00 P.M. Lw-oj-uv s In] �. STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Grapevine, Texas, met in special workshop session, Monday evening, September 21, 1992, at 6:00 P.M., in the Conference Room, #204, 307 West Dallas Road, Grapevine, Texas, with the following members present to wit: Charles Giffin Chairman Randy Howell Secretary Ery Meyer Member Chris Coy Member Ron Williams 1 st Alternate Al Zimmerman 2nd Alternate constituting a quorum with Vice - President Patti Bass absent. Also present was City Council Representative, Gil Traverse. The following City Staff was also present: H. T. (Tommy) Hardy Marcy Ratcliff Greg Wheeler Ray Collins Teresa Wallace Gerrie Anderson CALL TO ORDER Community Development Director Planner Building Official Planner Planning Secretary Administrative Secretary At 6:00 P.M. the Board of Zoning Adjustment enjoyed a meal provided by Staff. At 6:33 P.M., Chairman Charles Giffin called the workshop session to order. NEW BUSINESS ROLE OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT Tommy Hardy went over the outline of the Agenda on the Functions of the Board. Mr. Hardy informed the Board they were doing well in making decisions. 1. AUTHORITY Mr. Hardy explained that all decisions have to have four votes and the decisions of this Board are all final, unlike the Planning and Zoning Commission whose recommendation goes to the City Council. 11. FUNCTION Mr. Hardy explained the functions of the Board: A. Hear and decide on appeals from administrative decisions. B. Hear and decide on special exceptions: (ie: to allow someone to expand to use the property) C. Authorize variances: (ie: existing buildings that encroach) D. Nonconforming uses: Mr. Hardy noted that there are not many of these cases because of the hard work that has been put into updating the Zoning Ordinance. + • :•+•• Mr. Hardy explained the Board was a Quasi - judicial board; appeals are made to District Court not to City Council. -- •• 11 • • 11 Greg Wheeler explained that after City Staff has made an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance and the person disagrees with Staff's interpretation, that person has the option to appeal Staff's decision to the Board of Zoning Adjustment. If the person does not agree with the Board's decision the next step would be to appeal the case to the district court. Marcy Ratcliff explained that if something is not clear in the Zoning Ordinance, Staff will bring the item before the Planning and Zoning Commission for them to establish a clear interpretation. Tommy Hardy added there are not many appeals that come before the Board because Staff works hard with each person in trying to make their situation work. V. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS Marcy Ratcliff explained a couple of the special exception cases to the Board. Ms. Ratcliff said that on special exceptions, the Board needs to look at how long the business has been there, what the business does, what the applicant is asking for and what the consequences are. Tommy Hardy explained that special exceptions make a property legal. Gil Traverse asked, besides a property being destroyed by a fire, how could a special exception on property go away. Marcy Ratcliff answered that the Board could say it is time to terminate or tear down the building. VI. VARIANCES Marcy Ratcliff explained about area variances being so many feet to vary from the Ordinance. She explained that Staff looks at these cases real hard and if the Ordinance can be met, then Staff is more strict in enforcing the Ordinance. Greg Wheeler explained use variances are not listed in the ordinance and a person can go before the Board to challenge staff's interpretation of the uses allowed. VII. NONCONFORMING USES Greg Wheeler gave examples of nonconforming uses. 1). A home located in the CBD, Central Business District occupied as living quarters is nonconforming, because the CBD District does not allow living quarters. 2). When a nonconforming business moves out of a building or a nonconforming residence is vacated for six months or more, the grandfather clause is gone. If someone wants to continue a business or residence, they would go before the Board. To correct the problem, the property would have to be brought into conformance or brought before the Board. 3) If a nonconforming use moves from a place, someone else moves in and the original use wants to move in again, that person would have to go before the Board. 4) If the building is destroyed 60% or more, the nonconforming use is terminated or if destroyed 60% or more it becomes a dangerous building. Mr. Wheeler noted that if someone asks to extend the life of a nonconforming use, the Board can grant or deny the case. VIII. PROCEDURAL ELEMENTS A. Special Conditions Marcy Ratcliff explained that special conditions need something to back up the support and gave some of the factors to consider which are listed on the handout the Board received in their packets. C N • • Marcy Ratcliff explained that in order to grant a variance the Board has to find a special condition. Marcy Ratcliff went over a variety of cases from different years. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS Marcy Ratcliff explained to the Board that Allen Birmingham was asking to withdraw his request for a sign variance, BZA92 -18 and asked if the Board wanted to hold a meeting in October for this case or wait until the November meeting. After discussion, Chris Coy made a motion to meet in November to hear the Birmingham case that had been tabled. Ery Meyer seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Howell, Meyer, Coy, Williams, Zimmerman Nays: None Absent: Bass ADJOURNMENT With no further discussion, Ery Meyer made a motion to adjourn. Chris Coy seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Giffin, Howell, Meyer, Coy, Williams, Zimmerman Nays: None Absent: Bass The workshop session was adjourned at 8:45 P.M. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE �CD DAY OF %`J � 1992. ATTEST: �r TM _- ECR; E