Loading...
Item 6 - ZBA23-0010 - Staff ReportCase No. ZBA23-0010 S T A F F R E P O R T May 19, 2023 CASE NO: ZBA23-0010 PROJECT: 1201 Scenic Drive - Variance to Screening Requirements EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Dwayne Myers is requesting approval of a variance to Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 39.5(c)(4) requiring a wood fence to have masonry columns along a collector road, on a property described as Lot 12, Block 2, Continental Park Estates Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, and located at 1201 Scenic Drive, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a Variance to Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 39.5(c)(4), which outlines the requirements of residential fencing adjacent to collector or arterial roads. The applicant is proposing to construct a new board on board fence without the required masonry columns. The ordinance states the following: “… All other fences provided or required along arterials or collectors as designated on the Master Thoroughfare Plan shall meet the following requirements: 1) The fence shall be constructed of one of the following: • masonry, • ornamental metal or wrought iron, • stained cedar board-on-board with cap and masonry columns with a maximum of 14 feet from column center to column center, or • some combination of the above, if approved by the Administrative Official.” The applicant’s intent was to build a 7’ fence that did not require a permit from the City of Southlake. The applicant was unaware of the masonry requirement, and other nonconforming wood fences currently exist along Continental Blvd. Code Enforcement noted the fence under construction, and it was at this time that the applicant was notified of the masonry requirements and that the 7’ fence was subject to the standards provided above. The fence is partially constructed at this time. The property in consideration has approximately 305’ of roadway frontage along Continental Boulevard, a collector road per the Master Thoroughfare Plan. With 14’ separation requirement for the columns, the fence would require approximately 20 columns. The applicant contends that a fence is needed for privacy, as the home is viewable from three roadways. Though the applicant can build a fence without masonry Department of Planning & Development Services Case No. ZBA23-0010 columns along Scenic Drive and Oakhurst Drive, the applicant contends that the masonry columns along Continental Blvd. is cost prohibitive. No fence along the Continental Park Estates frontage has masonry of any kind; all fences are either of wood or chain link construction. The applicant contends that requiring a single home to have such columns would not be in character with the neighborhood. ACTION NEEDED: 1) Conduct a public hearing. 2) Consider approval of the requested Variance. ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Variance Application (D) Support Information (E) Surrounding Property Owners Map and Responses STAFF CONTACT: Reagan Rothenberger (817) 748-8602 Jennifer Crosby (817) 748-8195 Case No. Attachment A ZBA23-0010 Page 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER/APPLICANT: Dwayne Myers PROPERTY SITUATION: 1201 Scenic Drive LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 12, Block 2, Continental Park Estates Addition LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential CURRENT ZONING: “SF-20B” – Single Family Residential District HISTORY: - The property was annexed into the City in 1975. - A Final Plat for Continental Estates Addition was filed in May of 1976. - The current “SF-20B” Single Family Residential District zoning was placed on the property with the adoption of Ordinance No. 480 in 1989. STAFF COMMENTS: The Board may grant a variance from the literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance: a. Where the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done; b. Where the Board finds that granting the variance will not be contrary to the public interest, and; c. Where, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance would result in “unnecessary hardship.” A hardship is considered “unnecessary” where the applicant demonstrates: 1. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; 2. That the literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance deprives the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district; 3. That the special conditions and circumstances that exist are not the result of the actions of the applicant; 4. That the granting of this variance does not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by the zoning ordinance to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; 5. That the reasons stated in the application justify granting the variance and that the variance will be the minimum necessary to make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure, and 6. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Case No. Attachment B ZBA23-0010 Page 1 Case No. Attachment C ZBA23-0010 Page 1 VARIANCE APPLICATION Z.§Q% SOUTHLAKE PLANNING& DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION 1400 Main Street, Suite 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: (817) 748-8069 Email: PlanningSubmittal@Ci.South lake.Tx.Us ZBA CASE NO. FILING FEE: $305.00 Location of Application: (address/legal description) {�0 Owner: Applicant (if different than owner): D)W(tyn{ (V\t Address: I �-o1 Sctw1c fir+ Address: �II --- 1 Telephone: L3� - Telephone: Email: hcir ad A IrOr-k �v+Ak%1.rov%,, Email: State the SPECIFIC PROVISION of the zoning ordinance for which you are requesting a variance. (You may give the Section number and paragraph, OR you may DESCRIBE the REGULATION 1 REQUIREMENT.) 5 ..A'1'rt�tit .......................................................... .... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... .................................................................................................. .................................................................................................... i Describe EXACTLY HOW, and TO WHAT EXTENT your request will DIFFER from the REQUIREMENTS of the ordinance, as described ABOVE. (Use REVERSE, or additional sheets if necessary.) . . . .I..............5. .. rr rte ?']........................................................... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... In order for your request to be granted, the concurring vote of four(4) members of the Board of Adjustment voting in favor of the request shall be necessary. In order for the Board members to vote in support of your application, you must prove several things by your application. Your application must clearly show that your property has UNIQUE CONDITIONS and CIRCUMSTANCES which separate it from other typical properties with the same zoning; and explain how these unique conditions and circumstances make it UNREASONABLE or UNFAIR to apply the STANDARD ordinance requirements to YOUR property, unlike the way they are applied to all other properties. Describe the CONDITIONS and CIRCUMSTANCES which are UNIQUE to your property and situation: ....................................... ....... ....... ................................................................................... . .... . . . ..... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ... ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... Explain why these unique conditions and circumstances make it UNREASONABLE or UNFAIR to apply the STANDARD ordinance requirements to your property: ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................. ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................ ................................................. ............................................... Additionally, in order for the Board members to vote in support of your application it must be shown that the unique conditions and circumstances which you have described are NOT the result of your own actions. (Actions taken by previous owners and actions taken by your agents can be construed as "Your actions.") Can you explain how the unique conditions and circumstances affecting your property came to be, AND SHOW that they ARE NOT the result of YOUR OWN ACTIONS: ...........5�.!..! .. .111�1......... ............................ ............................. ......................................................................... ....................... ............................................................................ ....................... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... .....................................................................................I...I......... ................................................................................................. . . Furthermore, the Board must be satisfied that the variance you are requesting is the MINIMUM deviation from the terms of the ordinance NECESSARY to OVERCOME the unique conditions and circumstances which you have described. Explain how your proposal is the MINIMUM manner by which the unique conditions and circumstances described can be overcome: .............5 ....ft 1�`�k 'f�......... .....................................I................. 3 ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ...I....I................................................................................I....... . . ................................................................................................... ....I.............................................................................................. ............................................................................................... .... Also, the Board must be convinced that granting such a variance would not constitute an UNFAIR GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE to you, granting privileges that are otherwise denied by the ordinance. In other words, why would granting this variance be ONLY FAIR, and NOT MORE THAN FAIR, to you, since others are prevented from doing what you are requesting: ............� ... ........... ...................................................... ................................................................................................... .............................................................. .................................... ................................. ................................................................. ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... .................................................................................................. ................................ . . . .....I I................. . . . . ... .......... ....................... Finally, the Board must be certain your request is in harmony with the public welfare, and will not in any way be injurious or detrimental to your neighbors and their property rights. EXPIRATION OF GRANTED REQUEST. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES OF PROCEDURE, Section 7,1 Any special exception or variance granted or authorized by the Board shall authorize the issuance of a building permit and/or a Certificate of Occupancy, as the case may be, for a period of one year from the date of the favorable action of the Board unless said Board shall have in its action approved a different period of time and has so shown such specific period of time in the minutes of its action. If the building permit and/or Certificate of Occupancy shall not have been applied for within said one year period or such extended period as the Board may have specifically granted, then the special exception or variance shall be deemed to have been waived and all rights thereunder terminated. All applications for a request which have been denied shall be deemed to be denied with prejudice unless stated otherwise in the Board's written decision. YOUR RIGHTS TO APPEAL THE BOARD'S DECISION. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, Section 211.011 Any of the following persons may present to a court of record a verified petition stating that the decision of the board of adjustment is illegal in whole or in part and specifying the grounds of the illegality: (1) a person aggrieved by a decision of the board; (2) a taxpayer; or (3) an officer, department, board, or bureau of the municipality. The petition must be presented within ten days after the date the decision is filed in the board's office. Signature of Owner or Authorized Agent: l� a� Date: 5-1- 2"-) 5 PROPERTY OWNER ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Notarized signature of all owners is mandatory. Use additional sheets if necessary_ Property Ownership Acknowledgement:As owner of the property described in this application, I understand that my property is being considered for a Variance.Va 4e Signature of Owner ` I L� Date—1 - 25 Owner's Name(Typed or Printed)_ DWk"I1.JE- K10 g Notary Acknowledgement Before me,the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared7LW0LLjn1&_Al(1fS known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the above and foregoing instrument,and knowledge tJ me that ha he executed the same for the purposes and consideration expressed and in the capacity therein stated. Given under my hand and seal of office on this the _._ day of 20 ` •,•w,� V •• % do 16 --yb � Notary Public In and For Texas My commission expires the day of 20 /�ti, r �,_? ► ti ♦'10 iirric����• Agent Authorization (if applicable) Agent Authorization:I, owner of the aforementioned property do hereby certify that I have given my permission to - to act as my agent for this variance request. Signature of Owner_ Date Owners Name(Typed or Printed) Notary Acknowledgement:Before me,the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the above and foregoing instrument,and knowledge to me that he/she executed the same for the purposes and consideration expressed and in the capacity therein stated. Given under my hand and seal of office on this the day of 20 Notary Public In and For Texas My commission expires the_ day of 20 6 Attached to Variance Application for: 1201 Scenic Drive Southlake, TX 76092 Dwayne Myers State the SPECIFIC PROVISION of the zoning ordinance for which you are requesting a variance. (You may give the Section number and paragraph, OR you may DESCRIBE the REGULATION/REQUIREMENT) I am requesting a variance to build a stained cedar, board-on-board fence with top rail, without the "masonry columns" required by the code regarding Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 39.6(f). Describe EXACTLY HOW, and TO WHAT EXTENT your request will DIFFER from the REQUIREMENTS of the ordinance, as described ABOVE. (Use REVERSE, or additional sheets if necessary.) The proposed fence will differ from the requirements of the ordinance by not having masonry columns. Your application must clearly show that your property has UNIQUE CONDITIONS and CIRCUMSTANCES which separate it from other typical properties with the same zoning; and explain how these unique conditions and circumstances make it UNREASONABLE or UNFAIR to apply the STANDARD ordinance requirements to YOUR property, unlike the way they are applied to all other properties. Describe the CONDITIONS and CIRCUMSTANCES which are UNIQUE to your property and situation: Frontage: My lot has 3 sides of road frontage. The unique shape of this lot has over 305' that borders W Continental Blvd. 100 feet on Oakhurst, and 167 feet on Scenic Drive. This is a unique condition, and I could not find another similar example anywhere. Most of the other lots with the same zoning have about 100 feet of frontage on one road that does not require masonry columns. The sheer number of feet and resulting required number of Masonry Columns of appropriate spacing and height are PROHIBITIVELY expensive simply based on how many are being required. (Example: Per engineer: Each of the 22 required masonry columns need to have commercial style augers to drill and install rebar and concrete into the ground approximately 12 feet per pillar, not even counting the engineering and actual construction costs) Lot Topography and House proximity to the public sidewalk: Additionally, my lot was constructed in 1975 so that the sidewalk that parallels Continental is about 4 feet higher than my bedroom window. The window is about 30 feet away from the sidewalk. This unique and undesirable circumstance allows pedestrians and people driving on Continental Ave to easily look directly in my bedroom window, and my children's bedroom windows. This unique condition makes it necessary to build a taller privacy fence, board on board style. The vast majority of lots with this zoning do not have to deal with this. I could not find another similar example. Explain why these unique conditions and circumstances make it UNREASONABLE or UNFAIR to apply the STANDARD ordinance requirements to your property Extreme financial burden to a single-family residential lot and homeowner: It would be unfair to apply the standard of requiring masonry columns because my lot has substantially more road frontage than typical lots within Continental Estates that border Continental Blvd. This would cause me unreasonable hardship because of how prohibitively expensive it would be to create 305' worth of masonry columns requiring commercial-style augers and industrial construction practices. Also, it's important to note that this is not a new subdivision. None of the lots in my subdivision, Continental Estates platted in 1975, include masonry pillars along W Continental Blvd. Virtually ALL of my neighbors are allowed to maintain and build/rebuild in perpetuity, cedar fences that do not have masonry columns. It is therefore unreasonable and unfair to require me to build extremely expensive and odd looking masonry columns that directly conflicts with what my neighbors already have and can continue to enjoy forever. Additionally, in order for the Board members to vote in support of your application it must be shown that the unique conditions and circumstances which you have described are NOT the result of your own actions. (Actions taken by previous owners and actions taken by your agents can be construed as "Your actions.") Can you explain how the unique conditions and circumstances affecting your property came to be, AND SHOW that they ARE NOT the result of YOUR OWN A C T1ONS: My lot was created in March 1975 and annexed into the city later in July 1975. Neither I nor the previous owners or agents have had anything to do with the lot design, layout, topography, shape or zoning of the lot. I also had nothing to do with the adoption of the current code or any previous codes, adopted in 2008. Furthermore, the Board must be satisfied that the variance you are requesting is the MINIMUM deviation from the terms of the ordinance NECESSARY to OVERCOME the unique conditions and circumstances which you have described. Explain how your proposal is the MINIMUM manner by which the unique conditions and circumstances described can be overcome Granting a variance that will not require me to build the masonry columns is the absolute MINIMUM deviation from the terms of the ordinance and is NECESSARY to OVERCOME these unique conditions and circumstances. My request is simply to remove the current requirement to construct masonry columns, with no other changes. I would still like to build a board-on-board stained cedar fence with a top rail. All other parts of the code remain in effect. Also, the Board must be convinced that granting such a variance would not constitute an UNFAIR GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE to you, granting privileges that are otherwise denied by the ordinance. In other words, why would granting this variance be ONLY FAIR, and NOT MORE THAN FAIR, to you. since others are prevented from doing what you are requesting: I don't believe that my right to privacy is an UNFAIR GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE. I don't believe that privacy is a privilege at all, or that that ordinance was intended to deny this right me. I believe I have the right to protect my family and pets with a privacy fence. In fact, I believe I am currently at a significant disadvantage by being required to have masonry pillars if I want to exercise my rights to protect my pets and family with a privacy fence. Granting a variance for me to build a privacy fence of comparable construction, design, aesthetics, and expense as everyone else in my neighborhood would be FAIR, not MORE than FAIR. Finally, the Board must be certain your request is in harmony with the public welfare, and will not in any way be injurious or detrimental to your neighbors and their property rights. Granting this request would be in harmony with public welfare because a cedar privacy fence in no way threatens to harm my neighbors nor their property rights. In fact, a stained cedar board-on-board fence would likely increase property values and increase street appeal. It will allow me the basic rights of protection over family, animals, and property while making no infringements on anyone else's rights. A fence that is required to have masonry columns, on the other hand, would be out of place, ugly, and unfair, and crazy expensive. Case No. ZBA23-0010 Attachment D Page 1 SUPPORTING INFORMATION Case No. ZBA23-0010 Attachment E Page 1 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response SPO # Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response 1 CURB, BILLY JON RE5 1660 W CONTINENTAL BLVD 1.462719606 NR 2 CURB, BILLY JON RE5 1640 W CONTINENTAL BLVD 0.12965301 NR 3 SPITSBERG, TIMOTHY SF20A 1410 CHIMNEY WORKS DR 0.271184612 NR 4 HURST, LEE TODD SF20A 1408 CHIMNEY WORKS DR 0.235417774 NR 5 CARROLL, ISD CS 1705 W CONTINENTAL BLVD 0.105547014 NR 6 BENBOW, ANNETTE SF20B 1202 SCENIC DR 0.526530948 NR 7 GREGORY, GAY SF20B 1201 OAKHURST DR 0.322228319 NR 8 BARROWS, LESLIE SF20B 1203 OAKHURST DR 0.395381286 NR 9 ASPRION, RENE A SF20B 1304 OAKHURST DR 0.827965406 NR 10 MYERS, DWAYNE SF20B 0.169266285 NR 11 LEE, DON E SF20B 1203 SCENIC DR 0.46287634 NR 12 AURZADA, ANDREW SF20B 1204 SCENIC DR 0.297343857 NR 13 OGLETREE, SHAWNA C SF20B 1308 OAKHURST DR 0.075760533 NR 14 KOOGLER, KIRK J SF20A 1015 S PEYTONVILLE AVE 0.767128506 NR 15 GERHARD, KIMBERLY SF20A 1406 CHIMNEY WORKS DR 0.677866808 NR 16 ALAM, REHNUMA SF20B 1204 OAKHURST CT 0.58581535 NR 17 MURAWSKI, DIANE SF20B 1206 OAKHURST CT 0.695788609 NR Case No. ZBA23-0010 Attachment E Page 2 18 DAUPHINOT, JOSEPH SF20B 1305 OAKHURST DR 0.463392132 NR 19 ABELSON, MARK D SF20B 1310 OAKHURST DR 0.660314189 NR 20 MOEHNKE, MATTHEW P SF20B 1206 SCENIC DR 0.48214812 NR 1000 MYERS, DWAYNE SF20B 1201 SCENIC DR 0.717232999 NR Notices Sent: Twenty-one (21) Responses Received: None (0)