Loading...
Minutes P&Z 02/04/2010 TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 4, 2010 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Trophy Club, Texas met on February 4, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, and Texas 76262. COMMISSIONERS ATTENDANCE: Chairman Hill Present Vice Chairman Stephens Present Commissioner Reed Present Commissioner Sheridan Present Commissioner Forest Present Commissioner Ashby Present Commissioner Davidson Present STAFF AND GUESTS PRESENT: Carolyn Huggins Planning & Zoning Manager Greg Lamont President, The Lakes, HOA CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM. Chairman Hill called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with a quorum present. 1 REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 3, 2009 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. Commissioner Reed motioned to approve the minutes for the December 3, 2009, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ashby. Ayes: Hill, Reed, Sheridan, Ashby, Forest, Stephens, Davidson Nays: None Action: 7-0, Approved 2 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO PD-PLANNNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 15, KNOWN AS “THE LAKES OF TROPHY CLUB”, ORDINANCE NO. 96-07B, BY AMENDING EXHIBIT “C” – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, ITEM H. FENCES/WALLS TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 8-FT. FOR SIDE OR REAR YARD FENCING. APPLICANT: HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR THE LAKES OF TROPHY CLUB. (PD AMD-10-033) Chairman Hill opened the public hearing. There were none wishing to speak and the public hearing was closed. 3 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO PD-PLANNNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 15, KNOWN AS “THE LAKES OF TROPHY CLUB”, ORDINANCE NO. 96-07B, BY AMENDING EXHIBIT “C” – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, ITEM H. FENCES/WALLS TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 8-FT. FOR SIDE OR REAR YARD FENCING. APPLICANT: HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR THE LAKES OF TROPHY CLUB. (PD AMD-10-033) Greg Lamont, President, Homeowners Association, The Lakes of Trophy Club, came forward and stated that the covenants for The Lakes restrict the fencing to 6-ft. The fencing for the Town is allowed to be a maximum of 8-ft. Mr. Lamont stated that the Board felt that the subdivision regulations should be brought into compliance with the Town; otherwise somewhere along the line there will be problems. He stated that they have already had a few things slip through the cracks where a couple of homeowners built 8-ft. fences without notifying the HOA. He stated that they feel this change would be in the best interest of the HOA. Mr. Lamont stated that there will be some boundary restrictions, for instance, along Trophy Club Drive, the masonry (brick) wall will remain at 6-ft. Also, perimeter fencing of particular homeowners must remain as regulated in the PD. Mr. Lamont stated that the lots that back up to the pond will remain at 4-ft. and the fencing along the lake will remain at 6-ft. He stated that there are two or three lots along Durango that must stay at 6-ft. Chairman Hill polled the Commissioners for other comments or questions. Commissioner Forest: “None for the applicant.” Commissioner Sheridan asked for a clarification. Mr. Lamont used the word “covenants” in his introduction and Mr. Sheridan stated that zoning doesn’t enforce covenants. Ms. Huggins agreed with Commissioner Sheridan and stated that “covenants” is not the correct term for what is being considered this evening. She stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission is considering a change to the Planned Development or “PD” document which is regulated by the Town. If covenants were being considered, that would involve deed restrictions, which are not enforced by the Town. Commissioner Sheridan stated to Mr. Lamont that if a change is made to the PD they should follow up with a change to the covenants. Mr. Lamont agreed. Vice Chairman Stephens: “No questions.” Commissioner Reed: “I have no questions.” Commissioner Ashby: “I get it.” Commissioner Davidson: “Ok here.” Chairman Hill asked Ms. Huggins for staff comments. Ms. Huggins: “As Mr. Lamont mentioned, The Lakes Homeowners Association is asking to revise the fence height for side and rear yard fencing from the current maximum of 6-ft. in height to a maximum of 8-ft. in height. The Lakes is a Planned Development, No.15, and PD-15 is a large subdivision. There are 339 homes in 5 different neighborhoods or villages and it covers 145 acres in the Town of Trophy Club. In the Commissioners packet, on pages 20 through 28, is Exhibit C, which are the Development Standards for this PD and Section H specifically refers to “fences”. As outlined in Section H – this request is for side and rear yard fencing only that is not restricted by other regulations outlined in Section H – for instance any homes that have a rear yard fencing along Trophy Club Drive must keep that fencing at 6-ft., and also any perimeter fencing – fencing between Trophy Club and Roanoke, for instance, must remain as already regulated in Section H. As required by Ordinance, a notice of Public Hearing was published in the newspaper and all 339 property owners were notified of this by U.S. Mail. Six notices were returned as undeliverable – the reasons ranged from “no forwarding order on file” to “no mail receptacle”. Two emails were received. One in opposition to this request and that email is shown on page 42 of your packet. The other email was received after the packet was sent out and a copy was given to each of you this evening. That homeowner is in support of this request. Staff encouraged the HOA to bring forward this request so that The Lakes PD height allowance for most side and rear yard fencing in The Lakes would match the Town regulations. Staff recommends approval. Chairman Hill asked if the Homeowners Association has voted to approve this request. Mr. Lamont responded that they have. Chairman Hill stated: “In the General Purpose Standards section of your Exhibit C you have a Consistent Identity clause that “All design elements are planned and coordinated to provide a visually consistent and superior project”. Do you and your association feel that is what you are providing here?” Mr. Lamont responded, “Yes, and we also ran it by our management company and then we, of course, ran it by our attorney.” Chairman Hill polled the Commissioners for further comments. Commissioner Davidson: “Will homeowners who already installed an 8-ft. fence be ‘grandfathered in’?” Mr. Lamont responded: “Yes”. [The two fences that were already built to 8-ft. will be in compliance if the new ordinance is passed. “Grandfathering” (legal non-conforming use) does not apply in this case.] Mr. Lamont stated that there are two fences that were recently installed to 8-ft. in violation of the current PD – one that was permitted; one that wasn’t. He stated that it would have been more of a nightmare scenario to tell somebody to take it down. Commissioner Davidson asked if both fences meet the standards otherwise. Mr. Lamont responded that they are well built but violate the height requirement. Commissioner Ashby: “On Parkview there is a house that has a huge barbeque built into the fence line. Where did that come from?” Mr. Lamont responded that it appeared one day. Mr. Ashby stated that it is a lot taller than 6-ft. or 8-ft. Mr. Lamont responded that the homeowner did not come to the HOA for approval. It is a fireplace and was very expensive and it would have been difficult to make him take it down. Mr. Ashby stated that he is feeling that homeowners should be required to remove structures built without permits or outside the boundaries of the Town regulations. Ms. Huggins added that the homeowner did not come to the Town for a permit, but after receiving calls about it, staff did take a look at the fireplace from the public right-of-way. The fireplace was built in-line with the fence which, in Ms. Huggins opinion, makes it look very odd. Ms. Huggins stated that the placement, however, was ok because the property line is actually another 10-ft. or so closer to the street. The homeowner could have put his fence closer to the street and enclosed the fireplace in his backyard, which is what staff would have preferred. Commissioner Ashby stated that he was more concerned about the height restriction than the location because the fireplace is set back from the street. Is there a restriction that can be added here to avoid allowing others to duplicate what this homeowner built? Ms. Huggins responded that the Building Inspections Department, Planning Department and Code Enforcement work together and have stepped up efforts in the past year to try to catch un-permitted work and immediately ask the builder or homeowner to stop work until Staff can discuss the job with them and determine if a permit is needed. Staff’s efforts are not intended to make Trophy Club an uncomfortable place to live or build, but to notice and inform builders and homeowners of the regulations. Ms. Huggins stated that Mr. Lamont mentioned that the fireplace “appeared one day” and, unfortunately, Staff finds that occurs often -- structures built over a weekend when staff inspectors aren’t prevalent throughout the neighborhoods. Commissioner Ashby stated that he is fine with this change to the PD, but he is concerned about situations such as this one where one day a big chimney appeared in a fence line. Commissioner Reed: “I have no objection. It seems logical to me. When the PD was approved for 6-ft. fences that’s what the Town regulations were. The Town regulations have now gone to 8-ft. so it makes sense to change this development’s regulations to match. I’m perfectly fine with the change.” Vice Chairman Stephens: “I’m satisfied.” Commissioner Sheridan: “None.” Commissioner Forest: “I have no problem with it.” Chairman Hill called for a motion. Commissioner Ashby motioned to recommend approval to the Town Council to amend PD-15 to allow side and rear yard fencing to be a maximum of 8-ft. in height as defined in “H”. Fences/Walls of Exhibit “C” – Development Standards of PD-15. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Reed. Ayes: Hill, Reed, Sheridan, Ashby, Forest, Stephens, Davidson Nays: None Action: 7-0, Approved This item will be heard by the Town Council on Monday, February 15, 2010. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting at 7:17 p.m.