HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA1991-26City stiff fielded quegtions from Members, advising t ha.t there is
� -Io z on i nq ordinance definition for 14 spe-ci a.l condition." Mr. tardy
also gave examples of subdivision platting before economic
conditions dictated larger ]..cat sizes; and advised development on
the lots not meeting the present market need would be beneficial
and less unsightly than vacant lots.
Member John Dorety expressed support for the variance requests; and
offered a motion that special conditions to justify the variances
do exist, as follows: to keep the home product consistent with
those developed in the subdivision; the subject lots are the only
lots on the block making a 5 foot front yard setback Less evident;
lot width is adequate and the variances provide more flexibility to
save existing mature trees; fencing along Dove Loop can offer rear
yard screening and the subdivision size and individual lot sizes
were limited when platted. Ron Williams seconded the motion, which
prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Giffin, Dorety, Zimmerman and Williams
Nays: Bass
Absent: Thompson and Howell
Then John Dorety's motion and Ron Williams' second was to approve
the variances to Grapevine Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82 -73,
Section 15.G.1 to allow five foot (5¢) variances and to Section
15.G.2 for two foot (21) rear yard variances for Lots 1 through 4,
Block 2 of Blair Manor Subdivision, with the prevailing vote as
follows:
Ayes: Giffin, Dorety, Zimmerman and Williams
Nays: Bass
Absent: Thompson and Howell
HOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA91- 26- SCHWOB & SAGE BUILDING
CORPORATION
Next the Board of Zoning Adjustment was to consider a variance
request from Schwob and Sage Building Corporation for 3215 William
D. Tate Avenue, the H. C. B. Addition, a triangular tract between
William D. Tate Avenue (SH 121), Bear Run Common Area and State
Highway 360.
Chairman Giffin declared open the public hearing; and Greg Wheeler
briefly discussed the variance requested to Grapevine Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance 82 -73, Section 54 which requires 70% masonry for
principal structures in all commercial and industrial zoning
districts. He noted Staff recommended approval contingent the
applicant provide landscape screening for the State Highway 360
boundary and match the siding of the existing buildings. Staff
contends that the special condition is minimal visibility from any
arterials and the proposed building is in the center of the
3
developed non-conforming tract, built beforP masonry was required
by 1384 ordinance am n ent
With no one to speak for or against the request and no
correspondence to report, Ron Williams' motion and Patti Bass's
second was to close the public hearing, with the prevailing vote as
follows
Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Dorety, Williams and Zimmerman
Nays: None
Absent: Thompson and Howell
Mr. Hardy advised screening for existing development is better than
brick on a non visible building. Then, with no further discussion,
a motion from Ron Williams and second from Patti Bass was that a
special condition does exist, it being visibility from other
developed or developable properties is minimal; grid masonry for the
proposed smaller building would not be noticeable and would be
inconsistent with the existing buildings' siding. The prevailing
vote was as follows:
Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Dorety, Williams and Zimmerman
Nays: None
Absent: Thompson and Howell
Then a motion from Ron Williams and second from Patti Bass was to
approve the requested 100% variance to Grapevine comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance 82 --73, Section 54's 70% masonry requirement and
landscape screening with red tip potinias for the State Highway 360
boundary the prevailing vote as follows:
Ayes: Giffin, Bass, Dorety, Williams and Zimmerman
Nays: None
Absent: Thompson and Howell
BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE BZA91- 27-PATRICIA TUNNEY
SCHYMANKIEWICZ
Next the Board of Zoning Adjustment was to consider BZA91 -27
submitted by Patricia Tunney /Schymankiewicz for 317 Church Street,
portions of Lot 23, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2 of the original Town
of Grapevine, located between church and Main Streets.
Chairman Giffin declared the public hearing open then Greg Wheeler
reported the .request was for a special exception to Grapevine
comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82 -73, Section 43.E.3 which allows
"remodeling or enlargement of a non- conforming use when such an
enlargement would not tend to prolong the life of the nonconforming
use" to allow a four foot (41) extension and enclosure of the
existing screened porch. Mr. Wheeler further advised the setback
would abe legal if the property was zoned R -7.5, Single Family;
however, since the city rezoned the property in 1984, to Townhouse
N
\� �
6 /\
I In
� /e
� \���� �«
. .. .. \ }.. .
c 9 a
� | |��� | \ \� :�l,T}� { { |){
T4 Utif" r"
KZA. ADO(TON
&Anv" &SW Sage
ftmmg
I