Loading...
BOA 06-01-2009 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES June 1,2009 The Schertz Board of Adjustment convened on June 1,2009 at 6:00 p.m. at the Municipal Complex, Council Chambers, 1400 Schertz Parkway Building #4, Schertz, Texas. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Earl Hartzog, Chairman Van Adams Rebekah Inmon Frank McElroy CITY STAFF Michelle Sanchez, Director of Development Services Lesa Wood, Planner I Misty Nichols, Senior Planner BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Darlene Price, Vice Chairman Donald McQueen Norman Slocum OTHERS PRESENT Robert Brockman, 1000 Elbel Lydell Toye, US Signs Khan Pham, 7125 Nottingshire 1. CALL TO ORDERlROLL CALL Mr. Hartzog called the meeting to order at 6:01 P.M. 2. HEARING OF RESIDENTS No citizen comments. 3. Consider and act upon the Board of Adjustment minutes for April 27, 2009. Following reading of the agenda item, Mr. Adams moved to approve the item. Mr. McElroy seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous. Motion carried. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. BOA 2009 - 003 7125 Nottingshire Hold a public hearing, consider a variance to the Unified Development Code (UDC), Article 9, Sec. 21.9.8 A.I to allow installation of a six foot (6') wrought iron fence on the property line within the front yard at 7125 Nottingshire (1.03 acres, Lot II R, Block 2, Schertz Forest Subdivision) when fences in front yards are limited to four foot (4') by this section. Public hearing opened at 6:04 pm. Ms. Sanchez gave the short presentation on the request to place a six (6') wrought iron fence just three feet (3') inside the property line and stated applicant is present for questions. She advised the Board of the requirements of the UDC in regards to fences in front yard and that Ms. Pham had started the work before applying for a permit. A stop work order was issued. Work ceased and she started the variance process. 16 property owners within 200 feet were notified with the following response: I - favor, 0 - objections or neutral responses. Ms. Sanchez stated that staff is recommending approval for the following reasons: City created hardship due to the restrictiveness of the UDC on the RA zoning for fences, the fence will serve a purpose, it is aesthetically pleasing and will not have an adverse effect on the property values. Staff will be considering a revision of UDC to this section that specifically pertains to fences in the RA zoning district. Staff requests that if the Board chooses to approve the variance that Ms. Ph am provides a letter from the Schertz Forest Architectural Review Committee with their authorization as a condition of approval. Mr. Hartzog stated that we normally do not get involved with the Architectural Review Committee to Minutes Board of Adjustment June I, 2009 Page 1 of 4 approved variances. Ms. Sanchez advised the Board that the letter is required by the UDC and the City tries to work with the Developer to provide consistent design standards. Mr. McElroy asked ifthe application is considered complete without the letter from the Committee. Ms. Sanchez stated yes. Mr. Hartzog recognized the following: . Ms. Pham, 7125 Nottingshire, stated that the deed restrictions allow the fence. She agreed to provide the letter. . Mr. Dixon, 5418 Chestnut View Dr., recently purchased the property at Lot lOR adjacent to this property. He stated he opposed the fence because ofthe recent codification of the UDC and its requirements. He stated that if we allow people to break away from the restrictions of the UDC and allow this 6' fence then what about the next person and the next person. By allowing a 6' fence it takes away from the natural beauty of the scenery in the area as well as the house itself. He understands the concerns on the protection of the property and said there are other methods of security. He requested that the Board go by the UDC and refrain from approving the request. . Mr. Brockman, 1000 Elbel, asked if there are sidewalks in that subdivision and expressed the concern with the location of the fence and he feels that the fences need consistency. . Mr. Hartzog advised Mr. Brockman that after consulting with the staff that sidewalks are not required in this subdivision. . Mr. Montgomery, 12470 Ware Seguin, stated he has concerns with the safety of his children in regards to the wild animals in the area. He stated he was in favor of the fence. There being no one else to speak the Public hearing closed at 6: 19 pm. Ms. Sanchez answered Mr. Brockman by stating that the City will make every effort to encourage consistency on fences. Mr. Adams asked for some clarification on the requirements of the UDC in regards to the front setback and the height of the fence. Ms. Sanchez stated that the UDC will allow a 4' fence in the front yard behind the setback; however, a six foot fence is not allowed in the front yard and has to stay behind the building line. Ms. Sanchez gave some background on the fence in regards to information provided to Ms. Pham and to decisions made by Staff and Management. Ms. Inmon asked if she could still fence the entire backyard. Ms. Sanchez said yes. Mr. McElroy asked if the applicant set the poles in reliance of the misinformation given to her by staff. Ms. Sanchez said no because if the poles were set with the information provided by staff they would have been on the 25' building setback line. Mr. McElroy asked if the poles were set after the conversation with the City on that subject. Ms. Sanchez stated she was not certain of the time table. She stated when she made a site visit on April 27, 2009 they were already set. Mr. Pham stated that she came in to fill out the permit application spoke with an Inspector and he told her that he did not see a problem with a 6' fence. Mr. Adams asked if fences require a permit. Ms. Sanchez stated yes. Mr. Adams stated that the permit was not obtained before the fence was started. Ms. Sanchez confirmed the statement with a yes. After a short discussion, Mr. Adams moved to disapprove the variance. Mr. McElroy seconded the motion. Mr. Hartzog wanted to clarifY and address the security. Mr. Adams stated that she is allowed to place a 6' fence in her back yard the same as other residents. Just not beyond the front of her house. Ms. Sanchez advised the Board that the vote requires a three fourths vote. Three fourths of the members have to be present to have a quorum which is 4 out of 5. Since only 4 members are present when the vote is presented you have to have 100% or unanimous vote one way or the other. Minutes Board of Adjustment June 1,2009 Page 2 of 4 Mr. Hartzog asked if the request does not get a unanimous vote tonight then what happens. Ms. Sanchez stated that it dies for lack of proper action. Vote Aye: Mr. Adams, Ms. Inmon, and Mr. McElroy. Vote Nay: Mr. Hartzog. Motion disapproved. 5. ITEMS FOR ACTION: A. BOA 2009-001 2765 FM 3009 Act on a variance to Article 11 of the Unified Development Code (UDC), Sec. 21.11.11, relating to the maximum height, maximum area and minimum setback of a permitted monument sign for Pet's Barn Store # 11 located at 2765 FM 3009 (Lot 43, Block I of the Horseshoe Oaks subdivision). 1. Variance to the maximum height of a monument sign. 2. Variance to the maximum area of a monument sign. 3. Variance to the minimum setback of a monument sign. Ms. Sanchez gave the reason why the Board was hearing this item for a second time. She stated that on April 27, 2009 the Board did not have the 4 of 5 concurring votes required by the UDC and Local Government Code. The vote was 3/2 and all actions require 4 votes. When the Board made a 3/2 vote staff believed that the Board thought that they had passed the variance as the motion was made and they did not. Ms. Sanchez reviewed the variance requests. Mr. Adams moved to approve the variance to the maximum height of a monument sign. Ms. Inmon seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous. Motion carried. Mr. Adams moved to approve the variance to the maximum area of a monument sign. Ms. Inmon seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous. Motion carried. Mr. Adams moved to approve the variance to the minimum setback of a monument sign. Mr. McElroy seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous. Motion carried. 6. REQUESTS AND ANNOUNCEMENT: A. Request by Members to place items on a future Board of Adjustment Agenda. No requests. B Announcements by Members and Council. . City and community events attended and to be attended . Liaison Assignments . Continuing educations events attended and to be attended No announcements by members. C Announcements by City Staff . City and community events attended and to be attended . Voting procedures (M. Sanchez) . Records retention of agendas (M. Sanchez) Ms. Sanchez advised the Board of the following: . Special Meeting and Workshop is scheduled for July 6th at 6:00 pm and will be a training session Minutes Board of Adjustment June 1, 2009 Page 3 of 4 for the Board. . Advised the Board of the voting procedures as written in the UDC as was discussed earlier in the meeting. . Advised the Board of the records retention period and destruction requirements. The City and State has a retention period of 2 years on agendas and it is strongly suggested that the schedule be followed. If members would like to return Agendas the City will be happy to destroy them. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:45 P.M. h Ll/L U-..)~ Recording Secretary, City of Schertz Minutes Board of Adjustment June I, 2009 Page 4 of 4