Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12191996 ZBA Minutes~ ~ ~ ' ~~'~~ ~~?<. - ~ .3 ~CD. ~ ~ ~ ' ~ • ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ~~ MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 19, 1996 The Zoning Board of Adjustment came to order at 7:30 p.m. with the following members present: Chairperson Sterling Minor, ~ce-Chairperson Sue Porretto, Frank Billings and Michael Neal. Present from the City were Building Inspector David Allen, Fire Chief Terry Stevenson, Urban Forester Neslihan Tesno and Building Secretary Susan Thom. The first item on the agenda was the hearing of the residents. No one was present. Notices were read and participants were sworn in. Frank Billings made a motion to approve the notices as posted, with Sue Porretto seconding the motion. Voting for: Minor, Porretto, Billings and Nea(. • Voting against: None The motion carried. i The second item on the agenda was Docket No. 96-12, conceming property located at 4110 Oberlin, Lot 11, Block 28, Colonial Terrace Addition. This was a request for a special exception to allow a driveway a driveway to be located differently from the driveway pattem rule in order to conserve two large qualified trees. This request was filed by Robert Adams, Jr. President of Georgetown Properties, Inc. Mr. Adams gave the following as the reason for his request: Mr. Adams stated "I wish to locate the driveway on the opposite side of the property to avoid damaging a large 32" diameter american elm and a 13" diameter pecan tree located on the opposite of the lot." Mr. Adams provided two drawings whicfi, show the confirguration of the driveway, one if the special exception were to granted and second if the request for special exception were denied. ~ , Mr. Adams stated "It was my understanding when I purchased the lot in 1989 that he could put the driveway back in the same location as it was previously. I already have plans drawn, which are awaiting the granting of the special exception to be finalized." ~ One letter was received in favor of the special exception from James Sanders, resident of 4102 Oberlin. T • David Allen, Building Inspector presented Chief Building Official Dennis Holm's Staff recommendations: Mr. Holm stated in his recommendations the following: " The owner, Mr. Robert T. Admas Jr., President of Georgetown Properties, Inc., is asking for a Special Exception for the above ntoe property in placing the new driveway on the west side of the property and not the east as required by Zoning Ordinance No. 1493, Article 10, Parking Areas, Driveways and Loading Areas, Section 10-101. Additional regulations., (b) SF Sites,(8) the driveway route, altemating driveways" requirement. The reason for this request is to provide for the saving of two "qualified" trees located on this property. The listing of qualified trees and protection of same is found in Chapter 22 Urban Forest Preservation and Enhancement Ordiance from the City of West University Place, Texas Codes of Ordiances. (b) SF Sites: The following regulations apply to all premises used for single family (detached) use. (8) Driveway route. One narrow sites where altemate side yard areas apply, the following special restrictions also apply; (A) there must be a driveway located as nearly as practicable to one following special restrictions also apply; (A) there must be a driveway pattem Neslihan Tesno, Urban Forester for the City of West University stated the following "I made an inspection of the two trees. The pecan is in good health, however the elm is not in the best of health. If a driveway is located on the root zone would more • than likely casue it to go into stress and eventually cause its death." Sterling Minor asked "if the driveway was located on the opposite side would it effect the tree." Ms. Tesno stated "There would be less stress to the tree because the critical root zone would still be under a portion of the driveway, but the driveway would be further away from the trunk of the tree and the major part of the roots." Sterling Minor asked "Was the difference significant?" Ms. Tesno stated "The difference would be significant. The driveway would be on the major root system." Michael neal asked "Can you estimate the expected life of the trees in the difference of the location of the driveway?" Ms. Tesno replied "It would be hard to estimate the expected life of any tree." Sue Porretto asked Ms. Tesno "Is it then in your professional opinion if the driveway were placed next to the tree it would clearly deterimental to the tree?" Ms. Tesno stated "Yes It would." C. P. Falls a resident of 4114 Oberlin spoke in opposition: "I live immediately adjacent to the west of the property and 1 am strongly opposed to the granting of the Special Exception." Mr. Falls read from a letter he had presented to the Board. Sterling Minor asked "Are. you concerned the trees are a hazard and would you prefer the trees to be removed and replaced with somethin more suitable?" Karen Falls of 4114 Oberlin spoke in opposition. • David Andrews, a resident of 4109 Oberlin s oke in o osition. P PP • Frank Billings asked Mr. Andrews "What is the driveway pattem on your side of the street?" David Andrews stated "On my side of the street there is no predominant driveway pattem." Sue Porretto made a motion to close the eviditiary portion of the hearing. This motion was seconded by Michael Neal. Voting for: Sterling Minor, Sue Porretto, Frank Billings and Michael Neal. Voting against: None The motion carried unanimously. The third item on the agenda was Docket No. 96-13, conceming property located at 5914 Kirby Drive, Lot 9, Block 9, Preston Place Addition. This was a request for a special exception to authorize the construction of two single family townhomes with one zero width side yard attached by a common wall. Additionally a variance was requested to have two hour fire rating instead of the four hour fire rating for the • common wall. This request was filed by William A. Blum of The Princeton Group, Inc. Frank Billings made a motion to approve the notices as posted. This motion was seconded by Michael Neal. Voting for: Sterling Minor, Sue Porretto, Frank Billings and Michael Neal. Voting against: None The motion carried unanimously. Bill Blum, President of The Princeton Group, Inc. explained his request "I wish to build two townhouses with a common wall. The Zoning Ordinance requires a Special Exception from the Zoning Board of Adjustment in order to do so. Additionally I request a variance to reduce the four hour firewall to a two hour firewall as described in Section 704.4.2 of the Standard Building Code." Sue Porretto asked Mr. Blum "What is your reason for the request to have a two hour firewalt instead of the four hour firewall?" Bill Blum stated "The difference in price and time and effort required to construct a four hour fire wall versus the cost of a two hour firewall." • David Allen, Building Inspector presented Chief Building Official Dennis Holm's Staff • recommendations: Mr. Holm stated in his recommendations the following: "The pending owner, The Princeton group, Inc. represented by Mr. Bill Blum, President, is asking for a special exception: Zoning Ordiance 1493, Article 7, District-Specific Regulations, Section 7- 101, Regulations, Tables, Etc. (a) in general: Every use, building site and structure must comply with the regulations set out in the following tables: Table 7-2 Yards (or 'setbacks'). Note 4. Common Walls, In the TH GR-2 and C District, the ZBA may issue a special exception is conditioned upon the construction and maintenance of a common wall or continuously-abutting separate walls (in either case with a four-hour fire rating or bettwer) along the property line. The applicant is asking for a special exception to the above noted requirement. Instead is asking for approval of the granting of a Specail Exception to the Zoning Ordinance No. 1493 and meet requirements of the: The Standard Building Code 1994 Edtion requirements allow for a 2 hour fire resistance rating for this separation instead of the four-hour fire rated wall as written in the zoning ordinance. Fire Chief Terry Stevenson stated "I am opposed to granting of a variance on a life • safety issue. There are differences in requirements for a two hour or four hour file wall.•' No correspondence was received in favor or in opposition of the request. Frank Billings made a motion to close the evidentiary portion of the hearing. This motion was seconded by Sue Porretto. After a brief discussion of Docket 96-12, Frank Billings made a motion to grant the Special Exception to allow the driveway to be located differently from the driveway pattem rule in order to conserve the two trees. This motion was seconded by Sue Porretto. Voting in favor: Minor, Billings, Porretto and Neal. Voting against: None. The motion camed unanimously. During the discussion of Docket 96-13, Frank Billings stated in this case he felt the applicant did not meet the requirements for the granting of a variance. Frank Billings made a motion to grant the Special Exception to allow the two townhouses • to have a common wall, but denied the request for variance to allow the two hour rated firewall instead of a four hour firewall. • • Voting in favor: Minor, Billings, Porretto and Neal. Voting against: None. The motion carried unanimously. Frank Billings made a motion to approve the minutes from October 18, 1996. This motion was seconded by Sue Porretto. Voting in favor: Minor, Billings, Porretto and Neal. Voting against: None. The motion carried unanimously. Michael Neal made a motion to adjoum the meeting, with Sue Porretto seconding. Voting in favor: Minor, Billings, Porretto and Neal. Voting against: None. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjoumed at 8:45 p.m. ~P HAIRPERSON ATTEST: ~ SECRETARY •