03-10-1997 (Zoning Board of Adjustment) Minutes Minutes of the Zoning Board of Adjustments
The Zoning Board of Adjustments met in a Called Business Meeting on March 10, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers of the Wylie Municipal Complex,located at 2000 Highway 78 North, Wylie,Texas 75098.
A quorum was present and a notice was posted in the time and manner required by law.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Gerald Clark,Ray Capley,Emily Hartwig,Marilyn
Herrera and Mark Clark(new member).
ABSENT: None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Kelley Shaw-Planner, Mike Phillips-Building Official and Rebecca
Rogers- Secretary.
ACTION ITEMS
ITEM NO. 1: Consider approval of the Minutes of the November 11, 1996 Called Business Meeting. A
motion was made by Marilyn Herrera, seconded by Emily Hartwig to accept the minutes as presented. Motion
carried,all in favor(5).
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM NO. 1: Consider an appeal from William S. Orban/Barbara A. Clement for a variance(s)from the
Zoning Ordinance,Accessory Building regulations which require a maximum square footage of 600 sq. ft. for
any accessory building and a minimum of 5 feet separation between the accessory building and the main
building. The applicant(s)are requesting to be allowed to have a 1,680 sq. ft.Accessory building and less than
5 feet separation between the accessory building and the main building. This property is located at 2815 W.FM
544. Chairman Clark opened the Public Hearing. William Orban,2815 W.FM 544, Wylie,Texas was present
to speak on his behalf. Mr. Orban explained that the State would be taking approximately''Y2 of his front yard
and the City of Wylie would possibly be taking an additional 15 feet of the remaining from yard for utility
easements. He currently manufactures and sell yard art from his property and has a small storage shed which
he has outgrown. Mr. Orban's intent is to tear down the old storage building(15 x 25)and build a bigger one
(1,680 sqft)to accommodate his equipment,personal vehicles(4)and merchandise. He no longer be able to park
his vehicles in his front drive due to the widening of FM 544. Mr.Orban is planning on having parking on the
rear of the property and new building will be to the left to facilitate the use of his property. The new building
will meet all building requirements.
There is 33 feet from the house to the side property line,the building is 28 feet wide and would be placed 5 feet
from the property line and connected to the house. Questions were raised regarding the difference in size from
the present storage building to the proposed building, possible location of new building to the rear of the
property instead of the side, and placement of the building on the property line with the 5 ft.requirement being
met between the buildings. Mr.Orban stated that he wants to utilize as much of the property as possible and
doesn't want to have the space between the buildings where people could walk through, he wanted a more
uniform look. He intends to put the driveway on the east side and having parking in the rear and doesn't feel
that parking on the side with the building on the rear of the property would be attractive nor would it be safe for
the customers coming from 544 due to the shortness of the drive,etc. Mr. Shaw interjected that Mr. Orban's
new building would be required to meet all fire and safety requirements, along with all building codes. Side yard
1
setback in B-2 zoning can be built to the property line.No notifications were returned.
A motion to grant the variance for the 5 foot separation was made by Marilyn Herrera, seconded by Emily
Hartwig. Motion denied, 3 in favor(Marilyn Herrera,Emily Hartwig,Gerald Clark), 2 opposed(Mark Clark
and Ray Capley).
A motion to grant a variance from the 600 sqft maximum for an accessory building and allowing for a 1,680 sgft
building was made by Mark Clark, seconded by Ray Capley. Motion carried, all in favor(5).
ITEM NO. 2: Consider an appeal from David and Jan Morgan for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance,Two
Family Residential regulations which require a minimum lot width of 80 feet. The applicant(s)are requesting
to be allowed to build a duplex on a corner lot where the lot width is 68 feet. This property is located at 102 S.
Fourth Street, Wylie,Texas. David Morgan, 306 Dogwood Court, Wylie,Texas,was present to speak on his
behalf. When the other duplexes were built in the area,the lot requirements were smaller. This is zoned Multi-
Family and with the approved variance will be zoned Two Family Residential District.The lot is 68 ft. in width,
the current requirement is 80 feet. The Morgans are interested in building another duplex similar to the one on
Fifth Street. It will meet all the requirements(sq. ft.,brick,etc.)With the exception of the lot width. There will
be one entrance facing Oak Street and the other entrance facing Fourth Street. Mr. Morgan provided the Board
with house plans to show what he was planning to build. It was questioned as to why the Zoning Ordinance was
changed from a width of 65 feet(1981)to 80 feet(1985). Kelley Shaw,Planner,replied that he assumed that
it was to encourage private ownership,not rentals,but he didn't know for sure. Existing fencing between this
property and the neighboring property will remain. A single family dwelling could not be built on this property
unless the zoning was changed. It is currently zoned Multi-Family with a zone change to Two Family if the
variance is granted. No notifications have been returned. Mr. Shaw did state that a notification from the P&Z
hearing for the zone change was returned in favor.
A motion was made by Mark Clark, seconded by Marilyn Herrera,to grant the variance on the minimum lot
width. Motion carried,all in favor(5).
ITEM NO. 3: Consider an appeal from Chris Trout for a variance(s) from the Zoning Ordinance, Sign
Regulations which require a 60 foot separation between another freestanding sign,requirement of a maximum
square footage of 100 sq.ft.on advertising and/or identification signs and the requirement of a 20 foot maximum
height for an advertising and/or identification sign. Mr.Trout is requesting to be allowed to place his sign within
12 feet of another freestanding sign,to have 121 sq. ft.available space on his advertising and/or identification
sign and a sign maximum height of 27 feet and 45 inches. Mr.Trout's property where the sign will be located
is 1950 Highway 78 North(CT's C-Store). Chris Trout,408 Kamber Lane, Wylie,Texas,was present to speak
on his behalf. The current sign (now torn down because of new gasoline tanks being placed) was a non-
conforming sign. Mr.Trout feels that placing the sign 60 ft. away from the other free standing sign located next
to his property would cause hazards to the public as it would be placed in entrance/exit drives. He is also
requesting a larger sign in height and square footage due to the location of the sign next to his business that
partially blocks his sign and that his business is located in a section of town where the speed limit is 60 mph,
not 40 mph like the majority of the city. Mr.Trout presented signs available to him from his new vendor. The
sign that Mr. Trout would like does not conform to current ordinances, but there is one available that is
conforming to current standards. Mr. Trout does not feel that an advertising or identification sign adequately
describes his type of sign and there isn't really a classification for a gas station sign with price changes. Staff
feels that Mr.Trout's sign is adequately described by an advertising sign because it allows for advertising of the
services on the property as well as providing for a changeable copy area for the price changes. Identification
signs are used more to describe areas like Century Business Park, shopping centers, etc. Discussion followed
2
regarding various signs that do not conform through out the city. One notification was returned in favor of the
variance.
No motion was made for the variance request for the 60 ft. setback. Variance denied due to lack of motion.
A motion to deny the height variance was made by Marilyn Herrera, seconded by Emily Hartwig. Motion
carried,4 in favor(Marilyn Herrera,Emily Hartwig,Ray Capley,Mark Clark), 1 opposed(Gerald Clark).
No motion was made for the variance request for the max. 100 sq. ft.. Variance denied due to lack of motion.
ITEM NO. 4: Consider an appeal from Richard Lane Custom Homes for a variance(s) from the Zoning
Ordinance, Single Family Residential regulations which require a rear yard set back of 25 feet. Richard Lane
Custom Homes is requesting to be allowed to have a rear yard setback of 18 ''A feet on property located at 507
Kreymer Lane, Lot 1, Block A of Wyndham Estates. Mike Phillips, Building Official stated that he was
requesting this variance on the behalf of Richard Lane Custom Homes due to an oversight by the Community
Development Dept.during plan review on this property. The rear yard setback of 18 '/2 feet was missed during
plan review. It should have been 25 feet. Form surveys are now required before inspections are performed.The
City Attorney has not been consulted for liability at this time. There was one notification returned against the
variance request. Deborah Krom, 505 Kreymer Lane, Wylie,Texas(returned the notification)was present to
speak against the variance. No one from the City contacted Ms. Krom with the exception of the notification
letter. Ms.Krom feels that allowing the variance would devalue her property,cause flood plain problems,ruin
the appearance of her property and invades her privacy. Ms. Krom also stated that the City should pay for an
independent appraiser and surveyor to come out and appraise her property and the property in question and have
an engineer evaluate the flood plain problems. Mr.Phillips stated that he didn't believe there were flood plain
problems in this area,but there is a drainage easement on the north side of the property. The final grade has not
yet been made on the property, but will occur before the final inspection and the drainage easement will be
maintained.
A motion was made by Ray Capley,seconded by Marilyn Herrera,to grant the variance. Motion carried,4 in
favor(Ray Capley,Marilyn Herrera, Mark Clark,Gerald Clark)and 1 opposed(Emily Hartwig).
DISCUSSION
ITEM NO. 5: Seeking an interpretation of regulation 25.5(2b)contained within the adopted City of Wylie
Zoning Ordinance which states:
A wall or fence, not less than six feet in height, with self-enclosing and self-latching gates at all
entrances,completely encloses either the pool area or the surrounding yard area.
Staff requested an interpretation of the above fencing requirement due to a request for a gate that closes across
a front entry driveway electronically. Because of the number of houses that exist and will be constructed with
front entry drives, it was felt that an interpretation should be made at this time. The self-closing, self-latching
gate in question would be closed electronically with a button much like a remote garage door opener,closing
across, not swinging in or out. The City of Plano interpretation required a 60 second delay that if the owner
forgot to close it,it would automatically close within 60 seconds. Staff feels that 60 seconds is too long,perhaps
30 or even 15 seconds would be sufficient enough time for the gate to close if the owner forgot to close it. There
are also loops that can be put in the concrete so when you drive up the gate opens and closes automatically.
Also,you don't want to be able to pull on the gate and have it open once it has closed. It needs to be secured.
3
The ordinance also states that the latching mechanism needs to be 36" above the grade and this device would
appear to meet this requirement. Discussion followed among the board regarding the length of time to close and
concerns with electrical failure and manual failure. It was questioned whether the National Spa&Pool Institute
made any recommendations with regard to this type of set up(unknown at this time).It would ultimately be the
owner's responsibility regardless of the type of closure,to make sure that the gate is closed. Ernest Lineberger,
Plano,Texas,is currently having a house and pool built in Wylie and is looking to have an electronic gate placed
across his driveway. Mr.Lineberger stated that the closing device would actually be an electronic eye,that would
open when it visualized the car and immediately start closing when it passed.
ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made by Ray Capley,seconded by Emily Hartwig,to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried,all in
favor(5).
Respectfully submitted,
4.Gt.i4ea a44/4_
Gerald Clark,Chairman Rebecca Rogers Secre
Minutes filed on 3/12/97 at 9:00 a.m.
4