Loading...
Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 10/16/1992M I N U T E S ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 16, 1991 PRESENT Ralph Perkins, Chairman Scott Cannaday Tom Hill Burrell Lacey Roger Murphy, Alternate Roger McKinney, Director of Planning Subir Mukerjee, Development Coordinator Bill Sullivan, Assistant City Attorney Donna Duncan, Recording Secretary R a OCT 1991 ; Pr- mcam r-- a 6� H P A ,0 Members City Staff ABSENT Syd Litteken * Member David Farabee * Councilor CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 1:35 p.m. by Scott Cannaday. Mr. Mukerjee pointed out that it takes four votes to pass an appeal by State Law from this board. The meeting recessed for 15 minutes to enable Ralph Perkins to attend the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 2:00 p.m. with Ralph Perkins as Chairman. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Tom Hill, seconded by Burrell Lacey, and carried unanimously that the August 21, 1991 Minutes be approved as written. 1 A-91-01. Administrative appeal of a ruling by staff that the accessory building at 2411 Dartmouth may not be used as an accessory dwelling. 49 Mr. Tom Allensworth, Attorney, representing Mr. & Mrs. Olsen 1920 W. Tarrant Rd. Apt. 13A, Grand Prairie Tx The issue is the administrative appeal of a ruling by the staff that the accessory building at 2411 Dartmouth may not be used as an accessory dwelling. He believes that the staff made an error in judgement when they determined that the accessory structure located at 2411 Dartmouth is not a dwelling unit. The city stated two grounds for determining that the accessory structure is not a dwelling unit: 1) never used as a dwelling unit, 2) alleged that the accessory structure was used as a cabana for the pool and was constructed as such when it was originally established. Item No. M�NL Page No. ► _ Mike and Julie Olsen, 2411 Dartmouth Mr. Olsen presented the commission with a video and also pictures. The accessory structure in question is a pier and beam L shaped No structure of 500 square feet with privacy fence, refrigerator, 220 connection, hot and cold water, full bathroom, space heater, closet, cable and phone connections, heating and cooling unit. The City Planning Director has stated this is just a question as whether or Im not this structure is a dwelling. Historically is has been used as such. Mr. Olsen can understand the neighbors fear of the neighborhoods integrity but can assure them he would never put anyone No in the structure that would harm his fa^-ily. Mr. Frank Parkinson Mr. Parkinson built the pool 30 years ago and the building was there. Dwelling was used for a maid or college student. Mr. Ralph Perkins inquired if the structure was a garage and Mr. wo Parkinson replied it was not a garage and it was enclosed. They did remodel as a guest house after the pool was put in. Pat and Hershel Walker, 2409 Dartmouth They stated they had no objection to using the structure as a dwelling. They lived there 2 years and no one has lived in the back dwelling. Lesley Reed, 2400 Dartmouth Shawn Scholl had lived in the back house for 2 years off and on. Mr. Scott Cannaday asked if he was a renter and Ms. Reed stated he was the son of the family residing in the main house. Mr. Tom Hill inquired if he ate his meals there and Ms. Reed stated he ate most of his meals inside with the family but did have a hot plate. Ron Wilson, 2401 Cambridge Mr. Wilson stated he has a rear structure that is rented behind his home. He bought the property four years ago and it was rented at that time. Mr. Perkins inquired to his personal knowledge did anyone live in the structure in question, and Mr. Wilson answered negative. Mr. Allensworth, Attorney The pool was established after the building was built. Shawn Scholl maintained a bedroom in the unit until the property sold in October 1984. The definition of a dwelling, is a permanent provision for living, sleeping, eating, and cooking. Evidence indicated such is the case. The commission had no questions at this time. Item No. MINI Page No. Z r7 E David Tate Attorney, representing some neighborhood home owners Mr. Tate referred to the narrow street and curve on Dartmouth. He said that the ordinance was adopted on April 23, 1985. A dwelling unit is a complete, independent, living facility for 1 family, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating and cooking. In a SF-2 zone, property development regulation, allow no more than 1 dwelling unit per 1 lot. The time the ordinance was passed is what is critical. This dwelling would not qualify for additional use because it is not 10,000 square feet. A letter from Mr. Medders states that he purchased the property in October 1984 and sold it in August 1987. He owned the property when the ordinance went into effect. He stated the cabana had no kitchen and served for laundry purposes, as the main house had no connections. A copy of the real estate multiple -listing when the Olsens bought the property was advertised as a pool cabana. Letters of opposition from residents in the immediate area were also presented. Dr. Mark Ray, 2410 Dartmouth Dr. Ray's main objection is the parking situation. Cindy Ashley, 2410 Ellingham (behind property in question) Ms. Ashley stated she has the same situation next to her. Renters give them parking problems, such as their cars being hit twice. If passed, you have no control over the renters in the future. Mr. Ralph Perkins questioned if Ms. Ashley had any knowledge of anyone living in the cabana. She stated that Shawn Scholl did live in the cabana. Mr. Seet-t Lacey asked if Shawn Scholl took his meals in the house with the family and she stated she couldn't answer that. Larry Smith 2414 Dartmouth Mr. Smith has lived at 2414 Dartmouth for 40 years. The cabana had only a roof, no windows and doors, reed matting, glass front. The parking is his concern and future renters. Mr. Burrell Lacey inquired as to what year he was describing about the cabana and Mr. Smith stated 1944-1950. Mr. Scott Cannaday asked if the cabana had fixed walls, windows, or doors, Mr. Smith said only on the side where the shower was, but did indicate it could have had walls behind the reed matting. Laurie Gibson Speedway and Dartmouth lot The traffic is the problem with the narrow streets. She doesn't want to see parking in the street on a permanent bases. Ms. Gibson stated that she wants it to stay as a single family dwelling zone because 40 you don't have any control over renters. Gwen Cowart, 2413 Ellington Ms. Cowart has resided for over 30 years at 2413 Ellington. She is io concerned about the property values. Also stated that she had no knowledge of the subject dwelling. Item No. ..,J!. Page No. 3 Sally Henschell, 2413 Dartmouth Ms. Henschell said they bought their house after the zoning ordinance was in effect purposely because they came from a neighborhood with a lot of rentals and they wanted to live in an area zoned for 1 family dwellings. They had checked with City Inspection, zoning maps and neighbors and was told it was a cabana. She physically went and looked at the cabana before they bought their house and it had a washer/dryer, and pool equipment in the one room. Ms. Olsen told her they were going to move a wall to put the washer/dryer in the main house so they could rent out the cabana. Ms. Henschell talked with the city and they sent out an inspector and was told it was a cabana. The city said it was built as maids quarters and need proof that it wasen't, she talked to neighbors, and owners. Ms Henschell said she could't find anyone that had lived there. She also said that she saw them move in a refrigerator this past Sunday. Doug Leach, 2402 Dartmouth Mr Leach is concerned about the future of the neighborhood. Developers did not allow multi -dwelling. When he had been in the cabana years ago, it had a glass front, sliding door, wet bar, 1/2 bath. Mr. Leach measured the street, which was 25' wide, and stated two cars can't pass if cars are parked in the street. He didn't know anyone that lived in the cabana. Don Henschell, 2413 Dartmouth They added a second floor to their home at a lot of expense. Renters would have to pass his back door and he would not have any privacy. Parking would be a problem also. David Tate, Attorney Mr. Tate went over the dwelling unit definition pointing out especially providing a COMPLETE, independent living quarters. Mr. Scott Cannaday asked Mr. Parkinson if when he built the pool was the building there, and also did it have fixed walls. Mr. Parkinson stated that the building was there and did have fixed walls. Mr.Ralph Perkins questioned if anyone lived there and Mr. Parkinson answered no. Mr. Hershel Walker Mr. Walker stated that he had looked at the property in the last 6-8 months. there was a refrigerator in the rear dwelling. The carpet movers moved the refrigerator out when the carpet was installed, and moved it back in later. Mr. Allensworth, Lawyer The testimony is irrelevant to the determination of the Commission. We are appealing an administrative determination not a variance. The cabana was not built in anticipation of a pool later on. The questic-- whether the cabana has complete provision for living, sleepir. , eating and cooking, the video shows that. Item No. Page No. 4 Commission Mr. McKinney reviewed non -conforming use, 6115, concerns the existing use of the property as it existed when the zoning ordinance went into effect; and we relied on the statement of the owner, Mr. Medders, that it was not used for that purpose. Mr. Lacey asked if there were AA any permits and Mr. Mukerjee stated not any that they could find. Mr. Cannaday asked does the zoning ordinance supersede lesser provisions than a title or deed restrictions. Mr. Sullivan replied that both would have to be satisfied. Mr.Burrell Lacey inquired about grandfathering. Mr. Mukerjee stated that the date of April 23, 1985 is the date when you establish non- conforming status. Once you establish non -conforming status you fall under Section 6000 of the zoning ordinance and you can continue using it, stop using it for a while and resume using it, but you have to establish it at that date. If you don't meet that criteria, and say that you used it in 1972, that does not establish non -conforming status. That's important. Mr. Scott Cannaday made a motion that the administrative appeal A-91- 01 be denied on the basis of the provisions of the zoning ordinance which require the grandfather use to be in effect at the time the zoning ordinance came into effect; and by the best evidence of the owner of the properties statement, that the accessory building was not used as a residence at that date and it does not qualify under the grandfather clause, it was seconded by Mr. Lacey and the motion was passed unanimously by a roll call vote of Perkins, Cannaday, Hill, Lacey, and Murphy. The meeVkfR1 adjourned at,* 3)1 p.m. �I %/FARlL airman Date Item No. ,,,s Page No. __S_