HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-06-10AGENDA
CITY OF GRAPEVINE
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING
TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 10, 1997, AT 6:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR
200 SOUTH MAIN STREET
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. NEW BUSINESS
A. BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING RELATIVE TO BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE
BBA97-01, SUBMITTED BY STEVE AMBROSE FOR 2937
CRESTLINE DRIVE AND CONSIDERATION OF SAME
B. BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING RELATIVE TO BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE
BBA97-04, SUBMITTED BY DOUG JOHNSON, INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENTS INTERNATIONAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
4051 STATE HIGHWAY 121 NORTH, SUITE #200, AND
CONSIDERATION OF SAME
C. BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING RELATIVE TO CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF
1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE AND 1994 UNIFORM
MECHANICAL CODE
III. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS AND/OR DISCUSSION
IV. MINUTES
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS TO CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE
MAY 13, 1997, MEETING
V. ADJOURNMENT'
IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THIS PUBLIC MEETING AND YOU HAVE A DISABILITY
THAT REQUIRES SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS AT THE MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT
THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OFFICES AT 817/251-2632. 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 BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS
MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 6TH DAY OF
JUNE, 1997, AT 5:00 P.M.
UI ING OFFICIAL
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF TARRANT
CITY OF GRAPEVINE
The Building Board of Appeals for the City of Grapevine, Texas, met in regular
session, Tuesday, June 10, 1997, at 6:00 P.M., in the Council Room, 200 South
Main Street, Grapevine, Texas with the following members present:
Joe Lipscomb
Chairman
Art Gordon
Member
Dennis Roberts
Member
Charles Bloomberg
Member
Russell Kidd
Member
constituting a quorum. Also present was Council Representative Roy Stewart and
the following City Staff:
Scott Williams Building Official
Tim Fleming Plans Examiner/Field Coordinator
Raj Sharma
Plans Examiner
Jim VanTreese
Building Inspector
Bill Thompson
Building Inspector
Bret Shipley
Building Inspector
Tracy Gross
Building Inspector
Jerry Cool
Building Inspector
Chairman Joe Lipscomb called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
The first item of new business was for the Building Board of Appeals to consider
Building Board of Appeals Case BBA97-01, submitted by Steve Ambrose for 2937
Crestline Drive, Lot 3, Block 6, Woodland Hills Addition. The request was to the
Grapevine Code of Ordinances, Section 7-126, Side Yard Requirements, which limits
the height of a fence to a maximum of eight (8) feet in any side yard or along any
side lot line, to allow a ten (10) foot high fence along the west property line as shown
on the plot plan.
Mr. Williams explained that this case was brought before the Board in April and was
tabled because no one was present to represent the case. Mr. Williams informed the
Board that Mr. Ambrose requested that the Building Board of Appeals consider the
case be withdrawn.
BBA MINUTES
6/10/97
With no one to speak concerning the case, Dennis Roberts made a motion to close
the public hearing. Russell Kidd seconded the motion which prevailed by the
following vote:
Ayes: Lipscomb, Gordon, Roberts, Bloomberg, Kidd
Nays: None
Absent: None
Charles Bloomberg then made a motion to withdraw Building Board of Appeals Case
BBA97-01, submitted by Steve Ambrose. Art Gordon seconded the motion which
prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Lipscomb, Gordon, Roberts, Bloomberg, Kidd
Nays: None
Absent: None
The next item of new business was for the Building Board of Appeals to consider
BBA97-04, submitted by Doug Johnson of Industrial Developments International for
4051 State Highway 121 North, Suite 200. The request was to City of Grapevine
Code of Ordinances 82-73, Chapter 7, Article IV, Fences:
Section 7-127, Front Yard Requirements which prohibits the erection of fences
exceeding 36 inches in height in a required or established front yard.
Mr. Williams explained that the request was to allow a fence to remain in the
established front yard as shown on the plot plan. Mr. Williams also explained that the
fence was erected without permit approval from the Building Inspection Department.
A permit application was submitted on January 30, 1997, and was denied by the
Building Department due to the fence being located in the established front yard. The
contractor was notified that the fence permit could not be approved and in March,
the Building Official observed that the fence had been installed.
John Linebaugh, Director of Leasing for Industrial Development International, thanked
the Board for hearing their case and explained that the fence was constructed prior
to a fence permit. Mr. Linebaugh explained that he was not aware a permit was
needed. Mr. Linebaugh further explained that the eight foot vinyl coated capped
fence was of high quality and intended for security. Mr. Linebaugh explained that it
was important for their night shift employees, who work at the back of the building,
to have security. Mr. Linebaugh also noted that the fence and the additional
landscaping would further screen the truck docks and aprons.
2
BBA MINUTES
6/10/97
Charles Bloomberg explained that he was concerned of similar requests being
requested in that area with fences all along the highway.
Joe Lipscomb expressed that fencing and landscaping could present a more desirable
situation than having the truck aprons visible.
Scott Williams added that IDI submitted revised landscaping plans to his office the
day the packets were mailed out, and therefore no comment had been included on
the staff memo concerning landscaping.
With no one else to speak either for or against the request, Art Gordon made a
motion to close the public hearing. Charles Bloomberg seconded the motion which
prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Lipscomb, Gordon, Roberts, Bloomberg, Kidd
Nays: None
Absent: None
Charles Bloomberg made a motion to allow the eight foot fence in the front yard as
required with conditions that landscaping shown on plans be installed within one
month of issuance of the fence permit. Dennis Roberts seconded the motion which
prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Lipscomb, Roberts, Bloomberg, Kidd
Nays: None
Abstain: Gordon
Absent: None
Mr. Williams discussed with the Board proposed code amendments for handrails in
residential and commercial facilities and noted that he would try to have a copy of the
proposed amendment at their next meeting.
Mr. Williams also discussed the possibility for elimination of handicap requirements
entirely; that City reviewed inspections of handicap requirements were redundant with
State and Federal Law.
Mr. Williams provided a memo from Tim Denihan with Drees Homes requesting that
the Board approve the adoption of the 1994 U.B.C. and for the Board to consider
increasing the acceptable size of handrails in residences. He also passed out a letter
from the Tarrant County Builders Association requesting larger handrails in
residences.
3
BBA MINUTES
6/10/97
Mr. Williams passed around different sizes of handrails for the Board to examine. Mr.
Williams noted that 1 1/2" to 2" diameter rails comply with the code. Mr. Williams
noted that the builders typically desire larger rails for appearance, and that most
adults like the feel of a larger size.
Mr. Williams stated that the Board might consider allowing larger rails in single family
and two family residences only, perhaps 1 1/2" to 2 1/2" diameter. Mr. Williams next
addressed handrail sizes for occupancies other than single and two family residences.
He stated that the Building Code currently allows 1 1/2" - 2" diameter rails. The
Texas Accessibility Standards require 1 1/4" to 1 1/2". The 1997 Building Code
would allow 1 1/4" to 2". Mr. Williams stated that in order to make the 1997 U.B.C.
consistent with the T.A.S., an amendment should be considered requiring handrails
to be 1 1/4" to 1 1/2" in diameter.
There was question from the Board concerning the term "nominal diameter"
regarding handrail sizes in the T.A.S.
Mr. Williams stated that he would contact the State for an interpretation prior to the
next meeting. Mr. Williams also noted that he would try to have a draft ordinance
adopting and amending the 1997 U.B.C.
With no further discussion, Charles Bloomberg made a motion to close the public
hearing. Art Gordon seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Lipscomb, Gordon, Roberts, Bloomberg, Kidd
Nays: None
Absent: None
Next the Building Board of Appeals considered the minutes of the May 13, 1997,
meeting.
Charles Bloomberg made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 13, 1997,
meeting. Dennis Roberts seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
Ayes: Lipscomb, Gordon, Roberts, Bloomberg, Kidd
Nays: None
Absent: None
With no further business, Dennis Roberts made a motion to adjourn. Russell Kidd
seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote:
0
BBA MINUTES
6/10/97
Ayes: Lipscomb, Gordon, Roberts, Bloomberg, Kidd
Nays: None
Absent: None
The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 P.M.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THE Li DAY OF 1997.
61
5
CHAIRMAN`)