Loading...
BOA 04-30-2007 DEVELOPMENT SERVlCES DEPARTMENT INSPECTION DIVISION 1400 SCHERTZ PARKWAY SCHERTZ, TEXAS 78154-1634 (210) 658-7477, FAX (210) 658-9627 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MONDAY~ APRIL 30~ 2007 MlNUTES The Schertz Board of Adjustment convened a public hearing on Monday, April 30, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. in the Municipal Complex Council Chambers, Building #4, 1400 Schertz Parkway, Schertz, Texas. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Earl Hartzog, Chairman Ted Duigon, Vice Chairman James C Harden Jr. Joe Potempa Leonard Weinand, Jr. Alternate David Richmond, P&Z Commissioner CI1Y STAFF Debbie Perrone, Administrative Assistant MEMBERS ABSENT Donald McQueen, Alternate Norman Slocum Leonard Truitt, Director of Development Services OTHERS PRESENT :Mr. Trey Marsh, Centex Homes, 1354 No Loop 1604 E., SA, TX 78232 1. CALL TO "ORDER: Mr. Hartzot! called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm. 2. CITIZEN COMMENTS: Citizen comments on items other than those listed on this agenda. None 3. Consider and act upon approval of the minutes for March 26~ 2007 Mr. Potempa motioned to approve the minutes for March 26, 2007. Mr. Harden seconded the motion. Mr. Weinand Jr. abstained. Motion carried. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Mr. Hartzog read staff comments ~'AlI ten variance requests for April 30, 2007 agenda are being filed by Centex Homes who is requesting to be allowed to encroach into the rear yard setback as shown in each application. These lots located in Kensington Ranch Estates are irregularly shaped making it difficult to place the size product being sold. Staff has reviewed each request and finds this to be a common problem with cull-d-sac lots, therefore recommends approval." No letters were sent out to the surrounding neighbors because Centex owns all property. Mr. Richmond said concerns we always have had in Planning and Zoning on these encroachment issues have been that most developers have a pretty good idea of how they will develop their property before we (planning & Zoning) see the master plan,:they also haye an idea who their builders are going to be. We (Planning & Zoning) took the position that we had a very difficult time understanding why not with standing with the irregularly of cull-d-sac lots, etc., and other irregularities of lots we never understood how builders could not position smaller size homes on the lots in question and prevent the encroachment. And the main reason for our concern was that on many occasions after the home was built if an encroachment variance was approved the neXt person we saw was the homeowner asking for an additional encroachment because now it is time to add a room, deck a pool whatever pretty soon we found that the encroachment in the back yard was ending up at the back fence. Staff suggested that there are many products in the builder's inventory that can range from smaller homes to larger homes. If they wanted to build a larger home then they should ask for larger lots to handle that footprint. If the builder wants to mix which they generally they do, and we encourage this, then there should be a smaller footprint home that will go on a smaller lots. It doesn't force an encroachment issues up front. We had at least three houses that were- built into the encroachment and it wasn't discovered until at the final stages of the house and a variance was asked for at that timeo Centex is a large enough operation that they have enough foot prints that would fit on irregular lots, so we suggest to the BOA that they try to avoid approving variances and encourage larger lots or smaller homes. Mr. Marsh said that the points given by the Planning and Zoning Chairman were all very valid and shared a little history on this project which was subject to a PUD zoning ordinance, in which the developer was addressing number of issues that weren't necessarily covered under standard code. We were writing our own code that didn't differ from that of the City of Schertz code and we were concentrating on such as street width, density, architect elements a number of things and to be frank with you we (Centex) made a mistake and did not catch the rear yard set back on the cuU-d-sac lot and it has created a problem for us. We (Centex) have one plan that will that fits these irregular lots and that's our fault and certainly not City of Schertz and this does two things it limits the selection that our buyers have and an other things it does is creates a bunch of common homes Qn the cull-d~sac across the street from each other. Generally ifwe were in San Antonio, this is Schertz, I realize that one of the reason for our mistake is that you are allowed a IS-foot average rear yard set back in your lots and-that is kind of the flexibility we are asking for with the request tonight. We have a number of exhibits with different floor. plans that we can offer our customers. We are trying to provide flexibility to our buyers and break: up these streets from looking so sterile. - What we are willing to do is impose a stricter rear yard set back. Mr. Hartzo2 closed -the public h~ng at 6:30 pm. A B0A2007-006 LOT 8 BLOCK 12 WOODLAWN FARMS Public Hearing on a request to encroach 2 feet 5 inches into the 20-foot rear-building setback because of the .irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 8, Block 12 Woodlawn Farms in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: Centex Homes. *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. B BOA2oo7-007 LOT 9 BLOCK 12 WOODLAWN FARMS Public Hearing on a request to encroach 10 feet into the 20-foot rear building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 9, Block 12 Woodlawn Farms in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. C B0A2007-008 LOT 1 BLOCK 16 WOODLAWN FARMS Public Hearing 0 to encroach 9 feet 4 inches into the 20-foot rear-building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 1, Block 16 Woodlawn Farms in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. D B0A2007-009 LOT 3 BLOCK 16 ROUND CREEK Public Hearing on a'request to encroach 9 feet 5 inches into the 20-foot rear-building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 3,Block 16 Round Creek in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivisiono Applicant setback to construct a larger home cant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No; letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. E B0A2007-010 LOT 4 BLOCK 16 ROUND CREEK . Public Hearing on a request to encroach 3 feet 6 inches into the 20-foot rear-building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 4, Block 16 Round Creek in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivisiono Applicant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. F B0A2007-011 LOT 7 BLOCK 16 ROUND CREEK Public Hearing on a.request to.encroach 8 (eeHO inches into the 20-foot rear building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 8,.Block 16 Round Creek in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. G B0A2007-012 LOT 11 BLOCK 16 CIRCLE STAR ROAD Public Hearing on a request to encroach 4 feet 4 inches into the 20-foot rear-building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located onLot 11, Block 16 Circle Star Road in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. F BOA2007-013 LOT 13 BLOCK 16 CIRCLE STAR ROAD Public Hearing on a request to encroach 7 feet 8 inches into the 20-foot rew;-building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 13, Block 16 Circle Star Road in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. G BOA2007-014 LOT 15 BLOCK 16 CIRCLE STAR ROAD Public Hearing on.a request to encroach 3 feet 7 inches into the 20-foot rear-building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 15, Block 16 Circle Star Road in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: CentexlHomes:, ' ,.'. *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. H BOA2007-015 LOT 16 BLOCK 16 CIRCLE STAR ROAD Public Hearing on a request to encroach 10 feet into the 20-foot rear-building setback because of the irregular shape of this lot located on Lot 16, Block 16 Circle Star Road in Kensington Ranch Estate Subdivision. Applicant: Centex Homes *NOTE: No letters were sent out since Centex owns all the property around property mentioned above. Mr. Duit!OD said his question has to do with the irregularity of the lotso Who lays out the plat, which creates the shape of the lots, which in this ~ is the purchaser, developer of the property, which in this case is the owner Centex Homes. Our ordinance specifying variances lists the hardship to the property owner, which in this case is Centex Homes, but we all know that the hardship would fall on whoever becomes the first resident of these homes. If the rest of the homes that will have to share the back yard and it looks like all of them do except for the two backing up to the drainage area, I would say if we could orchestrate this to say that there should be forty-feet between the nearest part of one house's foundation to another home's foundation then I could be convinced to vote in favor to these as a blanket group of variances. Mr. Hartzot! wanted confirmation that is the flood plains behind these homes. If these homes would be moved back into the rear set back would these homes be in the flood plains? Mr. Marsh said that none of the properties are inside the flood plain. Mr. Potempa asked if this is the first development that C,entex has built in Schertz and or have they built in the City of Schertz before and if we go ahead and approve this would we have to do this for every developer who comes in? I agreed this should be done on an individual bases and that the homeowner comes in and ask to put in a deck, etc. This should have been thought out before they (builders) come out before they start laying out concrete. Mr. Harden asked if they (Centex) are offering to move houses back to get the required amount offeet to reach the forty-foot distance between tw~ slabs? Who could sets these and change that? Would this require a different variance meeting to have these houses to be changed? Mr. Bartzot! said Ted Duigon brought up a good point that this could be set as a requirement that they have to be forty feet apart. You could make your motion in such a way to approve these encroachments into rear yard set backs provided that there is a forty-foot distance Mr. Harden we will probably see every one of these homes here again for a home variance. Mr. Richmond Planning and Zoning would not have approved the plat if it were in the flood plain. Centex has a good product and the reason we have the PUD ordinance is because it allows unique things and that is the reason for Kensington Ranch asking for the PUD 0 It was because the land in there was unique. They had to deal with the bridge coming across and the roadway coming in there and they had some unique situations to deal witho The opportunity for uniqueness does not over come the restrictions that are already in the UDC like front yard set back, side yard set backs and rear yard set backs and those are still working perimeters After a very lengthy discussion of the 'variance applications a vote was called for. Mr. Hartzot! called for a motion. Mr. Duit!on made a motion to approve all these B0A2007-007 through B0A2007-015 variances with the stipulation that none of these variances will result in two adjacent homes being less than forty feet apart. Mr. Duis!:Ou amended his motion to exclude B0A2007-009 so it would be a motion for B0A2007-006 through B0A2007-008 and B0A2007-OlO through B0A2007-015 variances with the stipulation that none of these variances will result in two adjacent homes being less than forty feet apart. Mr. Hartzot! called for a second. Mr. Weinand seconded motion. Vote was called for In Favor Mr. Duigon, Mr. Weinand Opposed Mr. Potempa, Mr. Harden, Mr. Hartzog Motion failed. Mr. Duit!on made a motion that B0A2007-009 be approved with the stipulation that the house behind ensures that there is at least 40 feet between houses. No second motion failed. Mr. Weinand made a motion to accept the variance request for B0A2007-006 and B0A2007-007. Mr. Dui20n seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous, motion carried. Mr. Hartz02 called for a motion for B0A2007-008 through B0A2007-015. Mr. Harden made a motion to disapprove B0A22007-008 through B0A2007-015 for a rear set backs. Mr. Potempa seconded the motion Opposed were Mr. Weinand and Mr. Duigon. In favor were Mr. Hartzog, Mr. Harden and Mr. Potempa Motion carries Requests denied. 5. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERA nON: There were no individual items for consideration. 6. ITEMS FOR DISCUSION by Board of Adjustment: BOA Bylaws place on the next agenda. City Staff-None 7. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Hartzot! adjourned the meeting at 7:15 pm. ?:--! ~~. Chauman, artzog JJ~ {J ~ Recording Secretary