Loading...
Minutes ZBA 07/30/2012r iu Entities 100 Municipal Drive ` Trophy Club, Texas 76262 Meeting Minutes i'' i ii ! • i �,i s i Monday, July 30, 2012 4:00 PM Svore Municipal Building Boardroom Cali To Order and announce a quorum. Chairman Downey called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and announced that a quorum (five members) was present. He explained the order of the meeting to those present, including a request to turn off cell phones, to fill out a `request to speak' card to speak to the Board, and the requirement that in order to grant a variance there must be four affirmative votes. BOARD MEMBERS: Present: 5 - Board Member Bob Radder, Board Member Elisabeth Kaylor, Board Member Kevin Barry, Chairman Bob Downey, and Alternate Bob Fair Excused: 1 - Alternate Danny Mayer Absent: 3 - Board Member Patia Boomsma, Alternate Shali de Souza, and Alternate Jarrod Tallman STAFF AND GUESTS PRESENT. Carolyn Huggins, Community Development Director Jennifer McKnight, MUD Manager 2012-316-T Public Hearing regarding a request far , a variance to the Town of Trophy Club fence height regulations. Applicant: Municipal Utility District No. 1 Chairman Downey announced the case, opened the public hearing, and asked for a staff report. Ms. Huggins stated that this request is from the Municipal Utility District No. 1 which is the government entity that provides water and wastewater services to the Town, which is a separate entity from the Town government. Unlike other cities where water and wastewater services are a department of City government here in Trophy Club these are two separate government entities so it is the Municipal Utility District asking for a variance from Town regulations. This request is for a variance to the fence regulations. The MUD is asking to construct a 10 -ft. fence which is not allowed by Town regulations. The maximum allowed is 8 -ft. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 1 of 5 Meeting Date: July 30, 2012 Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) Meeting Minutes July 30, 2012 Ms. Huggins pointed out the location on a map projected in the Council chambers. As stated in the Staff Report, the Summit Cove property was platted in 1981. The water storage plant facility was already in existence at that time. Summit Cove has always existed beside the water storage tanks. The Town incorporated in 1985. The water storage facility property is zoned governmental use (GU). During the past year the tanks were raised to 37 -ft. in height which is within the acceptable height allowed in GU zoning, which is a maximum of 40 -ft. The tanks at 37 -ft. are in compliance with current zoning regulations. The setbacks for this property are 15 -ft. front, rear and sides. This property meets those requirements except for the east tank which is 14 -ft. from the property line. There is a one (1) foot encroachment that has existed since prior to the Town's incorporation which makes this a legal, non -conforming use. The closest building to the Summit Cove properties is a storage building that is 16 -ft. away from the nearest property line. Equipment can be located anywhere on the lot; but code enforcement regulations generally require a minimum of 6 -ft. distance from the property line for any equipment that could potentially be seen over a 6 -ft. tall fence. The MUD has been asked to abide by that distance in the future and they have indicated that they will. On the date that the property was inspected for this request, the only equipment parked along the fence was a generator and a pile of scrap and both of those items have been removed away from the fence. Staff has not found any 10 -ft. fencing in the Town other than sound walls used along Highway 114 as a sound buffer by TXDOT, and a small area of fencing around some cell tower equipment along Highway 114. The Town regulations require a fence between two differing uses to be a continuous wall or fence of at least 8 -ft. in height, made of brick, stone, iron or wood. The existing fence is 8 -ft. wood fencing. In support of denial of this request, these two uses have been co -existing for over 30 -years. They are both legal, non -conforming uses and any improvements done on the water storage site since the Town incorporated has met the Town's current regulations. The existing fence dividing the property lines meets the Town's regulations. There is not a hardship in this case. The situation was created by differing uses being placed next to each other 30 years ago. However, if this type of development were brought before the Town today, at the very least some sort of buffer would be required. These properties were built very close to each other with very small yards — 15 -ft. on both properties — so there isn't room to create a horizontal distance buffer. Since additional horizontal buffering isn't possible, the MUD is requesting a compromise of vertical buffering and requests an additional 2 -ft. in fence height. Staff could support approval due to the unique location and by that we mean there is no visibility from a public right-of-way or a public access to the back of these properties. This would be rear residential to a water storage site which does not allow any public viewing of this type of fence. it would not be a 10 -ft. wall or barrier created on a public right-of-way or a public access such as a park, for instance. Staff will fully support your decision of denial or approval of this request. Jennifer McKnight, MUD Manager, stated that she started working for the MUD in March 2012 and at that time the MUD was in the process of raising the height of the ground storage tanks so that they could gain an additional one million gallons of water storage in each of those tanks. The residents were coming to the MUD meetings and were fairly upset over the lights at the tops of the tanks that were shining over into their backyards. There is a TCEQ requirement that the area around the tanks must be lighted but the lights do not have to be located at the tops of the tanks so those lights were removed. At one of those meetings, Ms. McKnight also stated that there was a TCEQ requirement that they have a 10 -ft. fence around the facility. That was not correct. The requirement used to call for a 10 -ft. fence, but now only requires an 8 -ft. fence. But, the residents want a 10 -ft. fence. The Board Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 of 5 Meeting Date: July 30, 2012 Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) Meeting Minutes July 30, 2012 heard what their customers had to say and they asked Ms. McKnight to see if she could find the funding for the fence. The funds were found and the project was recently bid and came in at $30,475 for the 570 linear feet of fencing. The existing fence will need to be replaced at some point. There are some boards that were missing that have been patched and repaired, but another problem with the fence is there is a large gate between the storage facility and a back yard and that gate needs to be removed and replaced with fencing. Since the fence needs to be replaced, the MUD would like to install a 10 -ft. fence at this time. Jim Thomas, MUD Board, spoke for 6 minutes. [13:45-19:55 recorder] Chairman Downey recognized Councilman Rose in the audience and asked if he wished to speak. He declined. Chairman Downey closed the public hearing. REGULAR SESSION 2. 2012-317-T Discuss and take appropriate action regarding a request for a variance to the Town of Trophy Club fence height regulations. Applicant: Municipal Utility District No. 1 (ZBA-12-08) Chairman Downey opened the regular session for discussion of this item and asked for a reminder of the resolution on the fire station fence which was also a height situation. Ms. Huggins responded that ZBA denied the MUD's request for a variance for an encroachment into a setback. The fence was a separate negotiation between the MUD and the residents. The fence is 8 -ft. in height but sits on top of a retaining wall, which is allowed by Town regulations. Jim Thomas spoke about the Fire Station fence for approximately 2 minutes. [21:45-23:45 recorder] Ms. Huggins stated that the retaining wall was part of the building permit for the Fire Station. The retaining wall is a critical function of the site because of the slope of the site. Mr. Thomas made several comments about the slope of the fire station site. Board Member Elisabeth Kaylor asked for the ordinance regarding height of fences. Ms. Huggins read the following: "8 -ft. is the maximum height allowed for front, side and rear yards except as otherwise provided in Section C. Location 4(A) and 5(A)': She stated that 4A and 5A refer to golf course lots and public park lots. She asked if there is an integrity issue with the fence. Ms. McKnight stated that there are some areas along the fence that would need to be repaired and the gate needs to be removed and replaced with fencing. it is a public water supply and the gate represents a break in the security of the area. The gate is chained closed, but the MUD would prefer to replace it with fencing. She stated that she is not sure what year the fence was put up but it was probably the early 90s so it has had a good life. Board Member Kaylor stated that this is not an urgency issue where the fence is literally falling down? Ms. McKnight responded that it is not. Board Member Kaylor asked about the concrete base. Will it be maintained along the fence line so that it does not encroach onto the Summit Cove properties? Ms. McKnight responded that it will not encroach. It will be along the property line. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 of 5 Meeting Date: July 30, 2012 Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) Meeting Minutes July 30, 2012 Jim Thomas asked if he could make some clarification remarks. He stated that the concrete by the fire department fence extends two to three inches on either side of the fence. There will be two to three inches of concrete on both sides of the fence — homeowners side as well as the MUD side of the fence. The purpose for the pad is it adds additional strength to the fence. All of the posts will be replaced and the new posts will need to be put in pretty solid concrete down in the ground so that they will withstand heavy wind. Ten (10) feet is more susceptible to wind than 8 -ft. Board Member Bob Radder did not have any questions. Board Member Bob Fair asked Jennifer if the residents on Summit Cove were surveyed and did any object. Ms. McKnight responded that the MUD did not speak to every resident. Lots have come to the MUD meetings. They walked down the street to observe the drainage and they spoke to any residents out on the street. Everyone they spoke to was supportive. The Town sent out notifications of this hearing. Ms. Huggins stated that everyone within 200 -ft. of the fence line was notified of this hearing, which included everyone in the Summit Cove neighborhood except the property at 130 Summit Cove which fell just outside the 200 -ft. distance. Ms. Huggins explained that she must follow the requirements for notification of public hearings and thus could not notify 130 Summit Cove. Of those notified, three (3) emails were received in support of this request. Not were received against this request. Mr. Fair stated that it could be assumed that if they didn't reply in any way then they acquiesce with the request. Ms. Huggins stated that typically if someone is strongly against a request, they usually call or email. Board Member Fair asked Ms. McKnight if there are any homes that have a patio or something up against the fence. Ms. McKnight responded, no" Mr. Thomas responded that there is grass, no structures. Ms. McKnight stated that there is one resident who has trees close to the fence line but they have already trimmed the branches down that could impact a new fence. Board Member Kevin Barry asked if there has been a request from anyone in the Town to build a 10 -ft. high fence. Ms. Huggins responded that she is not aware of any. Board Member Radder mentioned the cell tower. Ms. Huggins stated that cell towers are a conditional use permit that requires going before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Town Council and those bodies have the right to allow fencing greater in height than allowed by the Town regulations as a part of the conditional use permit. Mr. Barry stated that then essentially ZBA has not dealt with a request such as this. He then asked if this is granted then does it open the door for everyone else to ask for 10 -ft. He stated that it seems to him that this is a unique situation. He does not know of any other place in the Town that there are 37 -ft. high water tanks. Can other requests be denied because of the uniqueness of this situation? Ms. Huggins responded that she had a discussion with the Town Attorney and the Town Attorney indicated that the uniqueness of the situation should be a part of the motion so that if other 10 -ft. fence requests came forward the Board would have the right to deny those requests (if the Board felt a denial would be appropriate) and not be hindered by the directive that the Board cannot deny a privilege granted to another. Chairman Downey also added that there are the unique uses — government use next to residential use — that come into consideration for this case. Board Member Radder also added that this situation is unique in that the request is being granted to a government entity. Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 of 5 Meeting Date: July 30, 2012 Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) Meeting Minutes July 30, 2012 Adjourn Board Member Radder made a motion to approve the request from MUD to erect a 10 -ft. fence as petitioned in this special circumstance and the unique circumstance that the Board would be granting this variance to another municipal entity. Chairman Downey seconded the motion. The Board Members discussed the wording and intent of whether or not this is meant to be issued only to a government entity or is it meant to be issued only in this unique location, taking into account the small setbacks and the creation of the properties prior to incorporation. The Board discussed several options for motions and then the original motion and second was withdrawn by Board Member Radder and Chairman Downey. Board Member Radder then made a motion to approve the variance as petitioned by MUD to cover the special situation and circumstances to provide a visual barrier for the residents of Trophy Club, who requested the 10 -ft. fence to provide a visual barrier to the recent elevation change of the water towers owned by the Municipal Water District and this variance would be specific to the municipal agency that is requesting it. It died for lack of a second. Board Member Radder suggested an executive session to work out the details of the motion and then come back into regular session. Ms. Huggins stated that an executive session is not part of the agenda, but she suggested a 10 -minute break so that she could confer with the Town Attorney regarding the wording of the motion. At 4:50 p.m., the Board took a break. At 5:00 p.m., the Board resumed the meeting. Board Member Bob Radder made the following motion: 'Based upon the co -existence of legal non -conforming uses present in this case with residential located adjacent to a water storage facility, with the resulting minimum setbacks between those uses and given that the fence is not visible from public right-of-way or other public property, 1 move to approve the MUD1 request for a variance to allow a 10 -ft. fence." Board Member Kevin Barry seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous 5-0. Aye: 5 - Board Member Radder, Board Member Kaylor, Board Member Barry, Chairman Downey, and Alternate Fair Excused: 1 - Alternate Mayer Meeting Adjourned at 5:02 p.m. Bob Downey, Chairman f Carolyn Huggins, Community Dei opnt Director V Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 5 of 5 Meeting Date: July 30, 2012