Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutZBA Minutes 2006-01-17CITY CITY OF RICHLAND H[LLS, TEXAS 817) 299-1870 • 3200 DIANA DRIVE •RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS • 761 18 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGULAR MEETING MINUTES CITY OF RICHLAND HILLS ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 17, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Brantley called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Regular members present: William Fey, Al Hamilton, and Chairman Malvin Brantley. Alternate member present: Mike Logan. Regular members absent: Joe Moore and Eddie Leon Nelson. Staff members present: Director of Community Development Howard Gregory and Recording Secretary Linda Cowart. 2. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 18, 2005 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Motion: A motion was made by Member Fey, and seconded by Member Hamilton, Approve the minutes as presented. Vote on Motion: The motion carried 4 to 0. Applicant Chris Hindo was not present to represent Case no. 01-06, therefore Case no. 02-06, was presented first to give Mr. Hindo time to arrive. 4. CASE N0.02-06 REQUEST FOR VARIANCE UNDER SECTION 90-52 (3) OF THE CITY OF RICHLAND HILLS ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW OWNER TO VARY FROM THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 90, SECTION 90-238 (11) (B) GREEN BELT REQUIREMENT, SECTION 90-293 (A) DECORATIVE MASONRY REQUIREMENT, AND SECTION 90-281 (1) PARKING REQUIREMENTS, Printed on Recycled Paper Zoning Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2006, Page 2 IN THE C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6542 BAKER BOULEVARD, ABSTRACT 30, TRACTS 2B & 2C, GEORGE AKERS SURVEY, AND BLOCK 8, LOT B, RICHLAND HILLS SOUTH ADDITION, RICHLAND HILLS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS (REQUEST BYROBERT STIMSON) Robert Simson, 707 Tenna Loma Court, Dallas, Texas, was sworn in: The applicant passed out building and site plans for review by the Board. Mr. Stimson stated that a few months ago he and his partners purchased the property at 6542 Baker Boulevard with the intention of renovating it back to its original character, a small office complex built around a small courtyard, for both office and retail space. In so doing, Howard Gregory, Director of Community Development, told them that they are not in compliance with some of the ordinances, one of which is the masonry wall requirement, and the other the twenty foot setback requirement. They requested a variance from both requirements. If they met the requirements, they would lose eleven of the required fifty parking spaces, and they only have forty six spaces currently. Alternate Member Logan inquired of Mr. Gregory if only the south property line is affected. Mr. Gregory replied that is correct. Member Fey wanted to know how many letters were sent out to surrounding property owners. Mr. Gregory stated that there were twelve letters sent out, with one response from the neighbor behind the south property line inquiring about the variance. Alternate Member Logan recalled that this property has been there since 1967. Member Hamilton inquired if they would be loading anything on the back side of the building. Mr. Stimson replied that there will be a tenant there, and there will be some loading and unloading in that area. Member Hamilton asked the hours of operation. Mr. Stimson stated that the hours would probably be eight to five. Alternate Member Logan wanted to know what type of business it would be. Zoning Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2006, Page 3 Mr. Stimson answered that it will be the sale of ATM machines and supplies. Alternate Member Logan inquired as to other prospective tenants. Mr. Stimson replied that they are having discussions currently with a group currently, which is a church based dance group that has a dance studio, but haven't heard back from them yet. Alternate Member Logan assumed that there would be some remodeling. Mr. Stimson stated that there would be a lot of remodeling. Alternate Member Logan asked if the spaces are individually metered. Mr. Stimson said they are. Alternate Member Logan asked what other plans they have for the property. Mr. Stimson informed the Board that they are working on a name for the building right now, and there would be a multi-tenant monument sign titled "The Courtyard on Baker", to utilize the courtyard feature. They may do additional finish out for the extra facilities. At this point it is somewhat speculative. Alternate Member Logan inquired if the zoning would remain C-2. Mr. Gregory replied that it would remain C-2. Alternate Member Logan wondered if there would be room for the monument sign. Mr. Stimson advised that the sign company contacted the office, so they will provide a survey of the property with location where they intend they sign to go. Alternate Member Logan stated that the Board may see them again for setbacks, and that from his perspective it would be almost impossible to maintain the parking and still meet the sideyard on the south. Chairman Brantley inquired as to work hours. Mr. Stimson stated that that would be tenant driven; by anticipation it would be an eight to five operation for all the office uses. On the front side they are trying to attract some retail users, and it certainly wouldn't be late night. Zoning Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2006, Page 4 Member Hamilton inquired as to where the dance class would be located. Mr. Stimson responded that they are looking at the three side units. They will be teaching elementary and middle age school kids. He can't imagine that they would stav open very late. Alternate Member Logan asked how much property abuts residential property. Mr. Stimson stated that the south side back up to the side of a house. Heather Street, 3175 Gerome, was sworn in. *She declared that she was against the variance. The old Lestek building abuts her home, and had concerns about the fence, the gate, the dumpster, noise, and parking, and added that anything can do to improve the property would be a plus. She explained that she was unsure about the variance, but after Mr. Stimson's presentation, and after asking questions, Ms. Street stated that granting the request would meet with her approval.) Mr. Gregory advised that the City Code addresses the noise and talks about trash pick up. They are not allowed to pick up trash or make noise before seven in the morning. Member Hamilton questioned if Mr. Stimson had plans to provide security lighting in the back of the property. Mr. Stimson replied that they haven't talked about it, but it is a good idea. Alternate Member Logan stated that the lighting has been a problem in the past. Mr. Stimson answered that the flood lights would face downward and not at residential. Member Hamilton referred to Section 90-293, and advised that with consideration to the location of the property, the required height of a masonry fence would need to be reduced for the visibility triangle. There were no more questions from the Board. There was no one else to speak for or against the request. Motion: A motion was made by Member Fey, and seconded by Alternate Member Logan, to approve the request as stated. Vote on Motion: The motion carried by a vote of 4 to 0. Zoning Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2006, Page 5 3. CASE NO.O1-06 REQUEST FOR VARIANCE UNDER SECTION 90-52 (3) OF THE CITY OF RICHLAND HILLS ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW OWNER TO VARY FROM THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 90, SECTION 90-238 (11) (B) GREEN BELT REQUIREMENT AND SECTION 90-293 (A) DECORATIVE MASONRY WALL REQUIREMENT, IN THE C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7200 GLENVIEW DRIVE, BLOCK 19, LOT 6, RICHLAND HILLS ADDITION, RICHLAND HILLS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS (REQUEST BYCHRIS HINDO) Mr. Chris Hido, applicant for 7200 Glenview Drive had not yet arrived. Director of Community Development Howard Gregory was sworn in to represent Mr. Hindo in his absence. He advised that Wireless Toyz purchased the property at 7200 Glenview Drive, had provided an asbestos assessment and abatement, are requesting a variance from the twenty foot buffer yard requirement and the masonry wall requirement. The entire area is concrete now and would have to be jack hammered to remove; the masonry wall would be seen by no one. Member Fey suggested that they be required to fix the fence that is there now if they are not required to put up a masonry wall. Sixteen letters sent, and there were no responses. There was no one to speak either for or against the request. Motion: A motion was made by Member Fey, and seconded by Member Hamilton to approve the request as stated. Vote on Motion: The motion carried by a vote of 3 to 1, with Chairman Brantley voting in opposition. After review by ZBA, it was determined that the motion failed by a vote of 3 affirmative to 1 in opposition, as approval of the case required 4 affirmative votes.) 5. PERSONAL APPEARANCES (CITIZEN PARTICIPATION REGARDING NON-SCHEDULED ITEMS AFFECTING THE ZONING AFFAIRS OF THE CITY) There were none. 6. ADJOURNMENT Zoning Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2006, Page 6 There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Brantley adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. r J ~' 1 O ~~V~ ~ Linda Cow ; Recor ing Secretary 6./-3 ~ ~ T V ~ alvin Brantley, Chairman