Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 2005-09-22 MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Leslie Jauregui at 7:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Present Acting Chairman Leslie Jauregui Fonda Kunkel Jeny Henry Alternate Jim Kemp Altemate Roy Sculley Absent Chairman Tom Duer Beth Davis City Staff Chief Planner Dave Green Building Official Dave Pendley Planning Assistant Carolyn Huggins Recording Secretary Holly Blake 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FROM AUGUST 25, 2005 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. APPROVED Jim Kemp, seconded by Jerry Henry, motioned to approve the minutes from August 25, 2005 with corrections. The motion was carried unanimously (5-0). Page 1 of 4 9/22/05 Zi3A Minutes ACTING CHAIRMAN JAUREGUI EXPLAINED THE VOTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ANY REQUEST THAT GOES BEFORE THIS BOARD MUST RECEIVE A SUPER MAJORITY (75%). THIS BOARD IS A 5 MEMBER VOTING BOARD. FOR ANY VARIANCE TO PASS IT MUST RECEIVE 4 AFFIRMATIVE VOTES. 4. BA 2005-05 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM GENE SHIRE FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR AN ARBOR ERECTED WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT AT 6829 MOSS LANE. APPROVED Dave Green presented the case. A contractor had been hired to do a number of items around the house. One of those projects was to build an arbor in the back yard on one side of an existing swimming pool. There is a medical reason for the arbor and it was also based on the fact that there was an existing tree that died. That tree provided some shade in the pool area. When the building inspections department was made aware of the particular situation there were five different items that were in violation: 1) the supporting columns are not masonry; 2 & 3) the support columns are encroached into the side and rear yard setbacks; 4) there is no engineering provided in order to determine the adequacy or safeness of the structure since there was no permit; and 5) the posts must be 3-ft. off the property line with a one hour ftre resistive rating. Dave Pendley has worked with the property owners and the contractors to address some of these issues. The applicants have agreed to brick the columns should the variance be approved. They will provide the engineering for the structure and move the supporting posts 3-ft. off the property line. That leaves the Board with two variance requests: the encroachment into the 6-ft. side yard setback and the 10-ft. rear yard setback. Jim Kemp asked how far the columns would be. Mr. Green answered that it wasn't specifically detailed. Acting Chairman Jauregui opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward. Gene Shire, 6829 Moss Lane, came forward. Mr. Shire stated that the description given by Mr. Green was accurate. The modifications that can be made will be done. If the variance for the setbacks is denied, the arbor will have to be dismantled as it will not serve the purpose for which it was intended. Mr. Shire stated that he has been granted joint use for the rear utility easement. He stated that his neighbors have not expressed any concern about the arbor. He explained that the situation was not self-inflicted. The error was not made to purposely violate any restrictions. The error was signing a contract with a Page 2 of 4 9122/05 ZBA Minutes contractor that didn't get a permit or the proper inspections. The structure doesn't affect the adjoining properties nor does it injure the permitted use of the adjacent conforming properties. Ms. Jauregui asked the applicant how far into the setbacks the structure encroaches. Mr. Shire responded 3-ft. The variance is for 3-ft. and posts on the west side will have to be moved due to fire issues. Ms. Jauregui asked about the rear setback. Mr. Shire stated that a 7-ft. variance is needed for the rear setback and that is in the utility easement. Mr. Henry asked if the applicant is talking about the posts that are shown on exhibit 7-2C. Mr. Shire confirmed that was the post. Mr. Henry asked if the post in the same exhibit towards the rear would be moved and if so in what direction. Mr. Shire explained that it would be moved toward the pool 3-ft. from the property line. Phil Norris, 6825 Moss Lane, came forward. He stated that it was his understanding that the arbor was built for medical purposes in order to help Mr. Shire's wife. He feels it is a cosmetic addition to their home. Mr. Norris is in favor of the variance. Joyce Bumside, 6824 Hickory Hollow Lane, came forward. Ms. Bumside stated that she lives behind and to the side of Mr. Shire's property. The arbor is very attractive. Ms. Burnside is in favor of the variance. The Acting Chairman asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak in regards to BA 2005-05. Being none, the Acting Chairman closed the public hearing. Ms. Jauregui asked Mr. Shire if trees were planted all the way across the fence. Mr. Shire stated no. Those are bushes. The only other tree is in the northeast comer. Mr. Henry asked Dave Pendley about the engineering that will be done. Will the columns meet engineering standards for the overhang? Mr. Pendley answered yes. Mr. Henry wondered if it had been considered to engineer a beam crossing allowing lateral support. That would also allow that column to be moved all the way to the 6-ft. line. Not only would a variance not be needed for the side yard setback but it would be structurally sound. Mr. Pendley confirmed that it would be possible. Mr. Henry asked Mr. Pendley about where the posts are in the back that is encroaching. Mr. Pendley showed Mr. Henry that one of the posts is up against Page 3 of 4 9122/05 ZBA Minutes the house and the other is in the back toward an angle. The reason that they are not in line is because of the deck. Mr. Henry asked if that post has the strapping issue also. Mr. Pendley stated that both posts need to be fixed. Mr. Henry confirmed that the post in the north comer can't be moved in because of the existing concrete. Mr. Kemp asked if the applicant did as Mr. Henry suggested would it still provide the necessary shade. Mr. Pendley answered that one thing on the cantilever, if the column on the northeast end is moved in, that would end up in the decking. Mr. Henry stated that if one is cantilevered then the other would need to be cantilevered too. They both need to be the same. Ms. Jauregui verified that because of the strapping of the posts it would have to be reengineered when it's moved. Mr. Pendley stated that there are provable fasteners that wouldn't require engineering for the actual connection. Acting Chairman Jauregui asked if there were any more questions or discussion. Ms. Jauregui called for a motion. Jim Kemp, seconded by Fonda Kunkel, motioned to approve BA 2005-05. The motion was carried unanimously (5-0). Variance granted for 3-ft. encroachment in side yard setback and 7-ft. encroachment in rear yard setback. 5. ADJOURNMENT Dave Green stated that Staff intends to call a meeting for this Board for the purpose of discussion. Staff will contact the Board in regard to a time and date. Having no additional business to conduct, the meeting adjourned at 7:39 p.m. Acting Chairman lie Jauregui Page 4 of 4 9/22/05 ZBA Minutes