Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 1981-06-11 Minutes . CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF MAY 14, 1981 . NEW BUSINESS BA 81-7 . MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, JUNE 11, 1981 The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, H. B. Helton, at 7:02 P. M. PRESENT: CHAIRMAN SECRETARY MEMBER ALTERNATE COUNCILMAN BUILDING OFFICIAL p & Z COORDINATOR ABSENT: H. B. Helton Jack Roseberry Jesse Range Martin Erck Jim Ramsey Bill Rice Wanda Calvert Dr. E. K. Hahn Marie Hinkle Mr. Roseberry stated that on page 4, next to the last paragraph, it should read lilt is not the intent of the Board to create a non-conforming use. II Mr. Roseberry moved, seconded by Mr. Erck, to approve the minutes with this correction. This motion carried 4-0 with the following vote recorded: Roseberry, yea, E~ck, yea, Range, yea, and Helton, yea. Request of St. John the Apostle Day School to vary from the Zoning Ordinance #179 on a portion of Tract 9H, Abstract 1606, W. w. Wallace Survey, to be allowed to use two mobfle homes for specialt,y class rooms. This property is located at 7421 Glenview Dr. Richard Gallager, 4908 Woodcrest, came forward to represent St. John's. He stated they were here a month ago requesting a variance to allow them to put up two temporary buildings on their property. Mr. Gallager stated they needed this variance not to exceed 3 years. Mr. Gallager said there was some questions in regards to the constructión and fire codes. He said the buildings, as designed, would Page 2 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . meet these requirements, and they agree to meet these requirements. Mr. Rice said he and the Fire Marshall went over and inspected these buildings and they have written down the requirements that would have to be made. . Mr. Roseberry asked, regarding the statement from the City Attorney, if he was instructing the Board to approve this request. Mrs. Calvert said he was just stating the Board had the right to grant this variance. Mr. Roseberry said the way it reads seems he is telling the Board to approve this request. Mr. Range said he did not see the 3 year in the request. Mr. Gallager said the Board asked them last month to find out how long they would need to use the temporary buildings. He said they feel they will be able to construct their new building within 3 years. Mr. Erck asked where these buildings would be located. Mr. Gallager said they were not sure, but they would be somewhere between the play- ground and the church. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. Pete Stahl, 4800 Eldorado, came forward. He said he went with Mr. Rice and the Fire Marshall to Lake Dallas to inspect these buildings. Mr. Stahl said he was in favor of allowing St. Johns to use these temp~rary buildings. . Councilman Jim Ramsey, 4604 Lariat, came forward. He said he would like to clarify the statement from the City Attorney. Mr. Ramsey said that there had been some question last month as to whether the Zoning Board of Adjustment had the right to act on this Page 3 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . request or if it should be heard by the City Council. Councilman Ramsey said the intent of the City Attorney was to inform the Board that they could act on this request. Mr. Roseberry said he understood, now. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in opposition to this request to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. BA 81-7 APPROVED Mr. Roseberry moved to approve BA 81-7 with the stipulation that the buildings be brought up to the city codes as requested and also a time limit of 3 years for their use. . This motion was seconded by Mr. Range and the motion carried 4-0 with the following vote recorded: Roseberry, yea, Range, yea, Erck, yea, and Helton, yea. BA 81-10 Request of Jim Turner to vary from the Zoning Ordinance #179 on Lot 3, Block 2, Holiday Hills Addition, to be allowed to build an accessory building 6 inches inside the 5 ft. utility easement instead of the required 5 ft. setback beyond the 5 ft. easement. This property is located at 4609 Shady Lake Dr. Jim Turner, 4609 Shady Lake Drive, came forward. He stated that approximately two years ago, while not being aware of a 5 ft. easement, he poured a slab of concrete. He said this slab extends 6 inches into this 5 ft. easement. Mr. Turner said he wants to get a variance so he can build an accessory building on this slab. . Mr. Range asked if he planned to build it or did he plan to buy one and set on this slab. Mr. Turner said he planned to build it himself. He said he plans to leave the back 3~ ft. of Pa ge 4 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . the slab to stack wood on. Mr. Range said if Mr. Turner did that, he would not need a variance because you can have a slab to the property line. Mr. Roseberry stated Mr. Turner would need a variance because the Ordinance states he must be 5 ft. beyond the easement. Mr. Helton said the reason for requiring the 5 ft. set-back from the easement was if they had to dig up or replace any lines, they might need the extra room for the machinery. Mr. Roseberry asked Mr. Turner what type of structure he plans to build, would it be 8 ft. walls with an overhang. Mr. Turner said it would have 8 ft. walls and would probably have metal siding and a roof with a 3 ft. overhang. . Mr. Roseberry said if Mr. Turner would set the building 5 ft. from the property line, just move it back 6 inches, the building could be outside the easement. Mr. Turner said he only plans to build a 10 X 12 ft. building. Mr. Range read on page 78, Section III, item e of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the 10 ft. set back fnom the property line. Mr. Range said if Mr. Turner had submitted his plans to the utility companies, he did not see how the utility companies could object. Mr. Turner said he had no intention of build- ing the accessory building within the ease- ment, just the slab would be inside the easement. Mr. Roseberry said T.E.S.C.O.'s reason for objecting was if Mr. Turner ever sold his property, he might have to cut off 6 inches of the foundat~on. . The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this request to please come forward. Page 5 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Mr. Range asked about the side yard. Mr. Turner said his fence sets inside his property line 6 inches so he is 5 feet from his property line. BA 81-10 APPROVED Mr. Range moved to approve BA 81-10 with the stipulation that he not construct the accessory building closer than 5 feet from the back property line. The motion was seconded by Mr. Roseberry. The motion carried 4-0 and the following vote was recorded: Range, yea, Roseberry, yea, Erck, yea, and Helton, yea. BA 81-11 Request of Don Vandiver to vary from the Zoning Ordinance #179 on Lot 1, Block 8, Richland Heights Addition, to be allowed to build a patio cover and deck within the 10 ft. utility easement instead of the required set back of 5 ft. beyond the 10 ft. utility easement. This property is located at 4309 Ashmore. . Don Vandiver, 4309 Ashmore Dr., came forward. He stated that Mr. Rice came by and put a red tag on his property. Mr. Vandiver said he put in a swimming pool and then put up a wooden deck with no foundation. Mr. Vandiver showed the Board pictures of his property and also submitted letters from adjoining property owners who were in favor of his request. Mr. Erck asked where these property owner's property were located. Mr. Vandiver said they were in back of him, on the side, and one across the street. . Mr. Vandiver said after he built his pool, the ground was unlevel and he debated on how to fix it so he fell on this idea. He said he has no foundation, but has it bolted to the posts. Page 6 Z B A ~1inutes June 11, 1981 . Mr. Helton asked Mr. Rice why Mr. Vandiver needed the variance. Mr. Rice said this was over a sewer and power easement. Mr. Erck said as in Mr. Turner's case, two utility companies have opposed this request and the city sewer is in that easement. Mr. Vandiver said the sewer line is under the posts. Mr. Helton asked if there were anyrnanholes there. Mr. Vandiver said there was a manhole across the street. Mr. Roseberry said he wasn't sure if the utility companî'es could legally object. . Mr. E~ck said it is very attractive, and asked Mr. Vandiver how much money he would lose if it had to be torn down. Mr. Vandiver said he had this about 8 months and it cost over $2,000 plus his labor. Mr. Erck said the Board was here to see if it was a hardship. Mr. Vandiver said he did not want an eyesore, he tried to fix it attractive for the neighborhood. Mr. Rice said with the manholes, there would not be very many times they would have to come in there, but there are times when the lines collapse.. He said if this happens, it would have to be torn down. Mr. Vandiver said he could tear it down as easily as he could a fence. Mr. Erck asked Mr. Rice about Mr. Forester's letter. . Mr. Rice said Mr. Forester, Director of Public Works & Utility, felt it should not Page 7 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . be over the utility easement since the city's sewer line is located there. Mr. Vandiver said he was not aware of the easement at the time he built it, but he bolted it together so it could be taken down easily. Mr. Erck asked if at anytime he plans to put a cover on it. Mr. Vandiver said he did not. Mr. Erck asked how long had it been up. Mr. Vandiver said 8 months. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this request to please come forward. . There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Mr. Roseberry asked Mr. Vandiver if he would be willing to sign a hold harmless agreement. Mr. Vandiver said he would, but he would hope they would give him time to tear it down if they had to do any digging. He said he would also agree to move or tear it down if he ever sold the property. Mr. Erck moved to approve BA 81-11 with the stipulation that he takes the. responsibility of taking down the structure should the need arise. Mr. Range said he felt the motion needed to include the request for a hold harmless agreement. BA 81-11 APPROVED Mr. Erck said he would reword his motion. . Mr. Erck moved to approve BA 81-11 with a stipulation that Mr. Vandiver sigh a hold harmless agreement to the utility companies. This motion was seconded by Mr. Range. The motion carried 4-0 and the following vote Page 8 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . was recorded: Erck, yea, Range, yea, Roseberry, yea, and Helton, yea. BA 81-12 Request of William J. Recker to vary from the Zoning Ordinance #179 on Lot 13, Block 4, Northridge Addition, to be allowed to erect a privacy fence beyond the side building line. This fence would be on the property line which is 10 ft. from the curb instead of the required set back of 25 ft. from the curb. This property is located at 5352 Colorado Ct. William J. Recker, 5352 Colorado Ct., came forward. He said he was wanting to build a privacy fence in the back yard and 10 ft. from the side curb which has a 25 ft. build- ing line. Mr. Recker said if he didn't set the side fence within 10 ft. of the curb, he would lose 750 ft. of back yard. He said this is a corner lot. Mr. Recker said he had a letter from J. B. Sandlin who is the only owner around him and he has no objections. . Mr. Roseberry asked what street runs down the side of him. Mr. Recker said it was Lynda Lane. He said his house sets 95 ft. from the corner. Mr. Helton asked if he would be blocking any view. Mr. Recker said he didn't feel he would. He said he would have 10 ft. for the car. Mr. Helton asked what kind of fence he planned to build. Mr. Recker said it would be a 6 ft. stockade. Mr. Recker said the front entrance to his subdivision at Harwood Road and Colorado Blvd. there is a 10 ft. brick fence. . Mr. Roseberry said he still could not figure out how this happens. He said there are several over the city that builders have put u~. Page 9 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . Mr. Recker said he knows the Ordinance says none beyond the building line, but he did not feel he would be blocking that much view. Mr. Roseberry said if the fence is in 10 ft. of the curb, that is not enough room for view. Mr. Recker said the traffic would not be coming from this area. He said he would have 25 ft. of viewing space for on coming traffic. Mr. Erck asked Mr. Recker-how he would feel to just move it back another 5 ft. Mr. Recker said he would rather have it 10 ft. from the curb. Mr. Roseberry asked Mr. Recker if he knew he would have this set back when he bought the house. Mr. Recker said he did not. . Mr. Range said the Board had approved variances like this, but it was for a chain link, not a sight barring fence. Mr. Recker asked why was the 10 ft. brick wall allowed on Harwood Road. Mr. Roseberry asked Mr. Rice to stop allowing this to happen and to cite the violators. Mr. Recker said this 10 ft. brick wall runs within 10 ft. of Harwood Road. Mr. Rice said it is hard to enforce because the builders never come in for a permit and we don't know about it till it is already up. He said that he is going to keep a closer watch on this from now on. Mr. Recker said he felt he would have wasted yard if he couldn't fence it in. Mr. Erck asked what he planned to do with this area. . Mr. Recker said he doesn't plan to do any- thing with it, but he would like to enclose Page 10 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . it with a privacy fence so he could let his little daughter out to play without the worry of someone taking her. He said a chain link would do no good. Mr. Range asked if the 15 ft. building line shown on the p1at was correct. Mr. Rice said it was, but if the house faced Lynda Lane, it would have been a 25 ft. building line. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this request to please come forward. . There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Mr. Roseberry said he didn't feel they should change the building line as Mr. Recker had requested on his application. He said if they did, he could build a building. Mr. Recker said he only wanted to build the fence. Mrs. Calvert said she re-worded it for him stating he wanted to build the fence 10 ft. from the curb instead of the required 25 ft. set back. Mr. Range said Mr. Recker had a nice back yard and he did not feel he would suffer any economic problems, but he would feel bad if the Board turned him down. Mr. Range said that since Mr. Recker would not be endangering anyone1s life, except his, he would recommend approval of SA 81-12 to build a fence within 10 ft. of the curb. Mr. Range withdrew his motion for lack of a second. Mr. Roseberry said if Mr. Recker would get back 15 ft. from the curb, he would feel better about it. . Mr. Recker said he would agree to this. ~ Page 11 Z B A Minutes June 11, 1981 . Mr. Range moved to approve BA 81-12 to allow the fence no closer than 15 ft. from the curb line on the side yard. BA 81-12 APPROVED This motion was seconded by Mr. Erck. The motion carried 4-0 with the following vote recorded: Range, yea, Erck, yea, Roseberry, yea, and Helton, yea. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:15 P. M. . .