Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_ZBA_04.20.2010Minutes of the Meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, April 20, 2010 The Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Tuesday , April 20, 2010. Members Present: Leo Wood, Chair, Dustin Elliott, Ellen Davis, Ercel Brashear Members Absent: Tom Crawford Staff Present: Elizabeth Cook, Community Development Director; Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner; Robbie Wyler, Historic District Planner; Candice McDonald, Recording Secretary; Stephanie McNickle, Planning Specialist Minutes Regular Meeting Call to order: 6:00 p.m. (The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the Director or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act , Texas Government Code Chapter 551.) 1.Action from Executive Session. There was no executive Session. 2.Consideration and possible action on the Minutes of the regular Board of Adjustment meeting on December 15, 2009. Motion by Elliott to approve the December 15, 2009 minutes. Second by Davis. Brashear abstained. Approved (3-0, 1 abstained) 3.Consideration and possible action to elect a Vice Chair and Secretary for the 2010-2011 Zoning Board of Adjustments Commission. Motion by Brashear to nominate Crawford as Vice-Chair and Secretary for the 2010-2011 Zoning Board of Adjustments Commission. Second by Davis. Approved (4-0) 4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Special Exception for Setback Modification to allow a detached carport to be constructed within the required setback for Clamp’s Addition Revised, Block B (sw/pt), 0.14 acres, located at 601 E. 8 th Street. SE-2010-001 (RW) Staff report given by Robbie Wyler. The applicant is requesting Special Exception to build a detached carport within the required setback, where a detached garage once stood. The carport, now nearly completed, measures 10.3 feet wide by 28.4 feet long and stands 13 feet tall. The new concrete foundation and structure have the same dimensions as the original structure and are being constructed in the same location. The structure is being rebuilt up to the property line. The reason for maintaining the encroachment into the setback is to maintain the residential backyard and to continue the use in the same location. Moving the structure 10 feet from the rear property line, as required by the Unified Development Code (UDC) for RS-Residential Single-Family zoned properties, would place it very close to the main house due to the property’s layout and dimensions. An access easement/rear alley provides additional space between the carport and the property directly to the north. The applicant has stated that they prefer to maintain the look and layout of the residential property by keeping the parking structure in the same location. They also feel that the structure complements the main house and neighborhood. In early February, 2010, the agent came into the Permitting and Planning offices and discussed procedures for either demolishing or renovating a detached garage in Old Town that was in extremely poor condition. Soon after, the applicant obtained a roofing permit and proceeded with remodeling the structure and states that due to inclement weather and poor structural conditions, the structure collapsed. Concerned with the deteriorated materials blocking an alley driveway, the owner and agent proceeded with removing the materials and reconstructing the structure with as much of the original material as possible. The agent states that due to poor conditions, not much of the original materials could be reused on the new structure. A few days after the collapse, Code Enforcement put a stop work order on the project stating all required permits and approvals were not obtained prior to commencing work. By the time Code Enforcement noticed the demolition and reconstruction, the new detached carport was nearly finished. Code Enforcement and Planning allowed the carport to be completed to a point where it would not be affected by weather and due to safety reasons. Subsequently, the City required the applicant to receive approval from the Historic and Architectural Review Commission (HARC) for the demolition of the original structure, approval from the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) for the reconstruction of the structure up to the property line, within setbacks, and to obtain all required permits, before the project could recommence , to ensure full compliance with City regulations. The applicant is set to go to HARC on Thursday, April 22, 2010. Staff will update HARC on the ZBA’s decision at that meeting. All other required permits either have been or are being obtained. Per UDC Section 4.09.040.B, Review Criteria for Special Exception for Setback Modification, the Zoning Board of Adjustment (Board) shall base a decision to allow setback modification on review of the factors included in this Section as well as the site’s specific circumstances. Staff recommends approval of the Special Exception for setback modification to allow the reconstruction of the carport on the property line where a detached garage once stood. The new structure has been built within the same footprint and has the same dimensions as the original and does not negatively impact the property or surrounding properties. Staff considers there to be no items under the review criteria that suggest this request is inappropriate. Further, staff wants to remind the Board that they should consider both UDC Section 4.09.040.B, noted above, and the intent of the applicant when determining whether or not to grant the Special Exception. Commissioner Davis questioned Wyler why this case was coming to this commission before going to the Historical and Architectural Review Committee (HARC). Wyler explained that there are two independent approvals for this application. One approval is required of HARC and the other is required of ZBA. Davis also inquired about the age of the garage that was demolished. Wyler stated in his research that the age of the garage could not be determined. Davis also inquired to know if code enforcement has cited this property before for deposition before the applicant came into the office . Wyler stated that he was not sure if there were any citations issued. Wood stated that the structure’s foundation is being rebuilt where the old structure was located. Brashear stated that he has concerns that the structure is in tract 2, which is subject to the City’s right to lay water and sewer lines and right to install infrastructure. When a non-conforming structure, due to no fault of its own, finds itself in a catastrophic position we want that structure moved under the current UDC requirements so that it becomes conforming. Brashear also noted that by moving the structure to where it becomes conforming the City is preserving its right to tract 2. The purpose of setback lines is to set standards all property owners surrounding the property can rely on. If the garage is moved out of Tract 2 and put it where it should be according to UDC, it would be beneficial to other property owners. Kreger stated that the UDC process is set up so that once this nonconforming structure has been removed it needs ZBA approval to be replaced . Wood stated that the structure is nearly rebuilt. Brashear said that it was rebuilt inside the area it is not supposed to be in and impedes the City’s right to lay infrastructure. If the city wants to lay infrastructure where is the City’s right to come in and build. If the city wants to build then they will have to condemn the structure. Elliott would like to know when this was originally platted. The easement is critical to where the current structure is being built. Chair Wood opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Wood closed the public hearing. Chair Wood invited the applicant to speak. The applicant was not available, but had an agent to represent them. Patty Wittie with Westview Homes spoke on behalf of the applicant. Wittie stated that the applicant purchased the property 6-8 years ago and has been using the property as rental. The owner contacted Westview homes a few years ago and Wittie had the job bid, but the owner did not have funds to fix the structure . The roof of the structure collapsed and Code Enforcement came out and told the owner that the structure had to be fixed at that time. Code Enforcement said that the roof and the support of the structure at that time was sitting on the easement. The owner has not been able to determine the ownership of the access easement. The carport is being built instead of a garage because when the original structure collapsed the agent was going to salvage materials and limit new materials. The construction crew put together what they could and the owner’s main concern was to have some storage. Commissioners discussed if HARC did not approve the demolition then the ZBA commission did not want to approve the building of the structure. Motion by Brashear to table to the May 18 th ZBA meeting with a request that the city be approached about vacating the easement or granting a license to encroach and to be informed of HARC’s recommendation. Second by Davis. Approved (4-0) 5.Adjourn. Motion to adjourn at 6:29.