Loading...
Minutes P&Z 07/17/2008 MINUTES OF A REGULAR SESSION FOR THE TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 17, 2008 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Trophy Club, Texas met in a Regular Session on July 17, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Public Services Conference Room, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, Texas 76262. COMMISSIONERS ATTENDANCE: Chairman Hill Absent Vice Chairman Stephens Present Commissioner Reed Present Commissioner Sheridan Present Commissioner Forest Present Commissioner Ashby Present Commissioner Sanchez resigned effective May 12, 2008. Vacancy will remain until applications are accepted in August to fill this position and other positions up for reappointment. STAFF AND GUESTS PRESENT: Carolyn Huggins Planning & Zoning Coordinator Chris King Building Inspector Todd Price Southwest Downs L.P. Michelle Brown F&R Adams Luxury Homes, L.L.C. A.1 CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM. Vice Chairman Stephens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with a quorum present. B.1 REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 19, 2008 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. Commissioner Ashby asked for a correction of the voting for Item C.2. Commissioner Ashby was absent at the June 19 meeting and therefore could not have voted as shown in the minutes. Ms. Huggins will correct the item. Commission Forest motioned to approve the minutes of the June 19, 2008, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting as corrected. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ashby. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 1 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes Ayes: Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Ashby Nays: None Action: 5-0, Approved C.1 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR REPLAT OF LOTS 1-8, BLOCK A, AND LOTS 1-27, BLOCK B, CHURCHILL DOWNS SUBDIVISION. APPLICANTS: TODD PRICE, SOUTHWEST DOWNS, AND MICHELLE BROWN, F&R ADAMS LUXURY HOMES, OWNERS. (RP-08-014) Vice Chairman Stephens announced the case, opened the public hearing, and asked the applicants to bring the Commission up-to-date on the changes to the replat. Todd Price, Owner, stated that the replat shows the new setbacks and the dedication of the streets as private. He stated that the majority of the replat is the same as the original plat. He stated that he also has grading information with him [as requested by the Planning & Zoning Commissioners at the last meeting when a zoning change for this property was approved], which is part of the construction plans for the subdivision and the construction plans, including grading, do not change with this replat. Ms. Huggins confirmed that the Town engineer reviewed the grading plans that are part of the construction plans for this subdivision and those plans are not changed by this replat. As there were none in attendance wishing to speak during the Public Hearing portion of this case, Vice Chairman Stephens closed the public hearing. C.2 DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR REPLAT OF LOTS 1-8, BLOCK A, AND LOTS 1-27, BLOCK B, CHURCHILL DOWNS SUBDIVISION. APPLICANTS: TODD PRICE, SOUTHWEST DOWNS, AND MICHELLE BROWN, F&R ADAMS LUXURY HOMES, OWNERS. (RP-08-014) Vice Chairman Stephens asked for discussion by the Commission. Commissioner Sheridan asked if this is for P&Z approval or for recommendation to the City Council. Ms. Huggins replied that the Commission is considering this item for recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Sheridan asked if there are any other Town ordinances that would be changed or altered (such as no parking of vehicles overnight on the streets) when this subdivision becomes private, beyond what is put in the notes which references the utilities and easements. Ms. Huggins responded that the part of the plat that is going private (the streets) is no longer subject to Town regulations except as outlined on the plat. By State Law under the Transportation Code, using as an example overnight parking as mentioned by Commissioner Sheridan, 25% of the homeowners of the subdivision would have to petition the Town in order to make those regulations part of that private subdivision. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 2 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes Commissioner Sheridan asked if code enforcement, such as maintaining yards and fences, would not be affected by this subdivision becoming private. Ms. Huggins responded, “That’s correct”. Ms. Huggins stated that Town regulations apply to all items in the subdivision other than the street regulations, once the streets become private. Commissioner Sheridan recommended that a boxed note be added to the replat stating that the replat voids all previous plats. Ms. Huggins added that this replat automatically voids the previous final plat, however, after checking with other staff members, including the Town Attorney, staff agrees with Mr. Sheridan that a note of explanation should be added to the replat and that note will be shown on the copies that Council will receive for review on August 4, 2008. Vice Chairman Stephens asked that the date be updated on the replat. Commissioner Ashby stated that he does not want to see the setbacks of the rear yards changed, especially on those homes backing up to Marshall Creek Rd. After discussion with the applicant, staff and other Commissioners, Mr. Ashby withdrew his comments since the setbacks were approved with the zoning change request of Churchill Downs which was recommended for approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission on June 19, 2008 and approved by the Town Council on July 7, 2008. This replat reflects the setbacks approved with the Churchill Downs subdivision zoning change from R-15 to PD-29. Mr. Ashby stated that he would have liked to see the setbacks remain at 20-ft. and would have voted that way had he been present at the previous Planning & Zoning Commission meeting when the rezoning request was considered. As there was no further discussion, Vice Chairman Stephens called for a motion. Commissioner Sheridan made a motion recommending approval to the Town Council with the following stipulations: 1) a boxed note added to the replat stating the purpose of the replat and that this replat voids all previous plats; 2) current date placed on the replat. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Reed. Ayes: Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Ashby Nays: None Action: 5-0, Approved Planning & Zoning Commission Page 3 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes C.3 PUBLIC HEARING FOR A TEXTUAL CHANGE TO THE TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 13-ZONING, ARTICLE V-SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 5.03 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND USES, SUBSECTION “D” LOCATION, TO ALLOW DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO BE BUILT CLOSER THAN TEN (10) FEET TO PRIMARY DWELLING. (ADM-08-029) Vice Chairman Stephens opened the Public Hearing and asked Chris King, Building Inspector, for a staff report. Mr. King stated that the current ordinance does not allow a detached structure such as an arbor, pergola, or outdoor kitchen to be closer than 10-ft. to the existing dwelling. Staff runs into problems with this ordinance because very large homes are being built on lots and pushing an arbor, pergola, etc., 10-ft. away from the house causes encroachment into setbacks as well as utility or drainage easements, creating more harm than good in Staff’s opinion. Staff is asking that the homeowner be allowed to be closer than 10-ft. to stay within setback boundaries without having to attach to the primary dwelling. Vice Chairman Stephens asked if anyone else wished to speak. Jill Setzer, 4 Cricket Ct., stated that she and her husband would like to see this pass because their house is situated on a cul-de-sac such that if they put a structure outside it would literally be in the middle of the yard and they would have to tear down a tree which wouldn’t be aesthetically pleasing to anyone. If this passed, they could place a shed in the location where they wished and have it aesthetically pleasing to everyone. She stated that they also wish to have an 8-ft. shed and the ordinance limits sheds to 6-ft., but they were told by Ron [Powell, Permit Department Technician], “that’s a typographical error; it should say 8-ft.” Mike Davidson, 201 Ridge View Lane, Eagles Ridge area, would like to see this change occur. He has a patio that extends off the furthest back-facing part of the house, facing south, with brick on the house, a concrete patio and it drops off 4-ft. from there, so it is very awkward to do anything with that space. Mr. Davidson would like to add a cover to block the sun a little bit without going 10-ft. away from the structure. Gilbert Rabbe, 2 Ridgewood Dr., is also in favor of this change. He would like to install an entertainment area in his backyard. He wishes to have four arbors that sit in a rectangular pattern, creating an open air area with no walls or roof. If he moves it away from the house 10- ft, then he violates the easements on the back side. As there were no others wishing to speak, Vice Chairman Stephens closed the public hearing. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 4 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes C.4 DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A TEXTUAL CHANGE TO THE TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 13-ZONING, ARTICLE V- SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 5.03 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND USES, SUBSECTION “D” LOCATION, TO ALLOW DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO BE BUILT CLOSER THAN TEN (10) FEET TO PRIMARY DWELLING. (ADM-08-029) Commissioner Reed asked if the typographical correction could be part of the motion. Ms. Huggins stated that it could not as advertising of this case was for Subsection “D” only. The typographical error is in a different part of Section 5.03. Vice Chairman Stephens asked if other staff had comments regarding this request. Ms. Huggins reported that the Fire Chief reviewed the changes requested by staff and the Fire Chief supports the changes. The Fire Chief approves of the request that the addition be fire sprinkled if the entire structure exceeds 7,500 sq. ft. Commissioner Ashby asked if the note in Subsection “D” makes it clear that only the addition must be sprinkled rather the entire structure. Commissioner Sheridan pointed out that the wording is “entire accessory structure” must be sprinkled. Commissioner Reed asked if the entire main dwelling and accessory structure would be required to be sprinkled on new construction. Chris King, Building Inspector, stated that the entire structure of any new construction over 6,000 sq. ft. in size must be sprinkled. Commissioner Ashby asked if there is a minimum for the 10-ft. rule. Staff is requesting “less than 10-ft.” but what is the minimum? 5-ft.? 2-ft.? Building Inspector, Chris King, responded that if the structure is as little as 6-inches apart from the main dwelling, it is considered detached. The building code is not going to specify a distance. Commissioner Ashby stated that there is nothing saying that a pergola, cabana, or whatever, couldn’t have a 4-ft. wainscot around it which would prevent a firefighter from running through and around the columns to access that building. “That’s my concern. This change will take accessibility and eliminate it.” Vice Chairman Stephens responded that it hasn’t been eliminated. Commissioner Ashby responded that it has been hampered. Commissioner Sheridan stated that in a massive commercial construction he would agree. But, this is housing. A 20x20 pergola wouldn’t be tough to get around and with this change the structure would be inside the building pad. So he doesn’t feel that a specific distance from the house is necessary. Commissioner Forest, citing the pergola in his backyard as an example of a structure that could easily be gotten around if a fire occurred, agreed with Commissioner Sheridan. Vice Chairman Stephens stated that he sees some limitations for design and space constraints. He stated that the Chief Building Inspector has indicated that we are already constrained by space in most cases on most lots. Commissioner Ashby stated that there are larger lots coming forward with the new development and who is to say that someone won’t come in with a 100x100 pergola. That just multiples the firefighters efforts tenfold. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 5 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes Commissioner Sheridan asked the Building Inspector if the older parts of Town have percentage of lot coverage outside deed restrictions. Mr. King responded that the older parts of Town do have lot coverage; not all, but most. [Straight zoning such as R-12, R-10, etc., have 35% lot coverage requirements; other zoning such as R-FV (Fairway Village) (which are 3,000 sq. ft. lots with zero lot lines) and R-TT (Avenue Twenty) do not have a lot coverage requirement.] Mr. King stated that for a lot that is subject to lot coverage, an accessory structure would count toward that lot coverage. If the homeowner wants to pull a permit for an accessory structure, staff looks at the footprint on the site plan and adds the accessory structure to it. If it exceeds the allowed lot coverage, the applicant must shrink it down to the allowed percentage. Commissioner Sheridan asked if this affects commercial property. Mr. King responded that it does not affect commercial property. Commissioner Sheridan asked if there is a defined term for outdoor kitchen, arbors, pergolas, etc. Mr. King responded that there are defined terms. A pergola, for instance, is “an arbor or passageway of columns for growing plants”. Commissioner Sheridan asked if that is from the IRC (International Residential Code) and Mr. King responded that it is from the IRC. Commissioner Sheridan asked if there is a height restriction for pergolas. Mr. King responded that Town regulations do not allow accessory structures to exceed one story in height. Commissioner Sheridan asked how Staff chose 7,500 sq. ft. versus the Fire Code that says 6,000 sq. ft. when the Town is under the Fire Code regulations, and it is Mr. Sheridan’s understanding that when someone alters the building and brings the entire building in excess of 6,000, the whole thing must be sprinkled (retrofitted). Mr. King responded that when the Fire Code states “altered”, it can refer to an addition, repair, or expansion of the main building. Mr. King called neighboring cities, Colleyville, Keller, Southlake, Ft. Worth, and although we are putting in our ordinance that we are considering it to be attached and to be sprinkled, it is not technically attached. It doesn’t share a common roof or attic under roof that defines it as attached. It is still an accessory structure and we wish to stay uniform with the North Central Texas Council of Government cities. Those cities have chosen the 7,500 sq. ft. number for main dwelling and accessory structures and we would like to stay uniform with our neighboring towns and adopt that number. Fire Chief Thomas and Mr. King have discussed retrofitting and concluded that requiring retrofitting would not be practical. Commissioner Ashby asked if that coincides with the National Building Code and National Fire Code. Have we made amendments to our codes to include these requirements? Mr. King responded that amendments are not needed because the Town follows the 2003 International Codes, including Fire Code, and the Town cannot make anything less restrictive than what the Code allows. This change proposed by staff would be in compliance with the 2003 International Codes. Commissioner Sheridan asked for the addition of “new” to the verbiage in red in Subsection D. He also asked that (at a future meeting) changes be made to Section F. Design Criteria, to include arbors, outdoor kitchens, etc., to bring that section up-to-date. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 6 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes Commissioner Sheridan asked if there is any accessory structure that should not go against the house. Does this open Pandora’s Box to something that we don’t want in Town? Mr. King responded that he doesn’t see footage stipulations from a structural or safety aspect. There isn’t a structural issue. However, staff did put in requirements that if excavating for a pool, which is considered an accessory structure as well, and the design requires digging closer than 6-ft. to the house, the slab must stay intact. Commissioner Ashby asked if that verbiage could be changed to any accessory structure that is excavated for foundation footing that is closer than 6-ft. or less from the main dwelling, must be engineered and stamped by a structural engineer. Mr. King responded that he would agree that is a good idea. Commissioner Sheridan stated that he would like to include in the recommendation to Council that any existing accessory structure that is out of compliance with the current ordinance, but would be in compliance under the revised ordinance, be grandfathered in, permitted or not. Vice Chairman Stephens stated that he would like to remind the Commission members that the Fire Marshall has reviewed this and he is in favor of this change, which addresses life safety issues through his eyes as he is our life safety expert on City staff. Vice Chairman Stephens called for a motion. Commissioner Ashby asked that in the motion his request for “stamped plans by a structural engineer” be changed to “all applicable engineers”. Commissioner Sheridan made a motion recommending approval of this textual change request with the following stipulations: • Add the word “new” to the following sentence in Subsection D: “If the total square feet under roof (including said accessory structures) exceed 7500 sq/ft then the entire new accessory structure must be protected with a sprinkler system. • Add “or any accessory structure” and other changes requested by Commissioner Ashby to the following sentence in Subsection D: “If the waters edge of a swimming pool, or any accessory structure that is excavated for foundation footing is located six (6) feet or closer to the primary dwelling, an engineer’s letter, stamped by all applicable engineers, stating the excavation will not in any way harm the structural integrity of the primary dwelling, will be required at the time of plan submittal.” • Any existing accessory structure that is out of compliance with the current ordinance, but would be in compliance under the revised ordinance, is grandfathered in, permitted or not. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Reed. Ayes: Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Ashby Nays: None Action: 5-0, Approved Planning & Zoning Commission Page 7 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission Page 8 of 8 July 17, 2008 Minutes C.5 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TEXTUAL CHANGES TO THE TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 13-ZONING, ARTICLE VII- DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS, SECTION 7.03 LANDSCAPING REGULATIONS. Staff requests that this item be removed from the agenda. Staff will bring this item back to the Planning and Zoning Commission at a future date, after appropriate notification of Public Hearing. Vice Chairman Stephens noted that there are no residents in attendance wishing to address this item. The Planning & Zoning Commission, by consensus, removed this item from the agenda. D.1 ADJOURNMENT. Vice Chairman Stephens adjourned the meeting at 7:59 p.m.