Board of Adjustment considers carport, new home setback

During its August 01, 2016 meeting, the Forney Board of Adjustments met and (this is a preliminary report, subject to revision):

  • Held a public hearing and discuss and consider a request for a carport to be constructed at 106 Bowie Street with variances to the side setback, rear setback, and the required distance from a main structure.
    Mr. Morgan said staff believes it should not approved as it fails requirements 1,2,5. Property owners were notified, 2 responses received were not against the variance. Ms. Milton asked technical questions about setback language - she verified if the carport just went as far back as the house, it would still require a variance. Mr. Henrichs asked about request letter amendments- Mr. Morgan said legal counsel said that would not affect the request. Ms. Milton asked the applicant about the existing 2 car garage - he explained how tight the driveway is, and how the builder flipped the house during construction. He also explained he wanted this protection for his disabled wife. Mr. Henrichs said he could see where this is an inconvenience, but not a hardship. Ms Milton asked about having the garage as covered parking - he explained the garage ceiling is too low for the mechanical lifts. She asked Mr. Morgan about awnings - they would still have to meet setback requirements. Mr. vanHoozer asked about a suspended awning - Mr. Morgan said it would require a permit, it might be approved. Mr. Hall said he had considered that, but felt it would still have to meet setback. Mr. Richter said they are struggling with the emotional aspect, but feels their hands are tied.

    Ms. Milton said it looks nice, and neighbors approved, but they can't see that all 5 conditions exist.
    The motion was denied unanimously.

  • Held a public hearing and discuss and consider a request for approval of a variance to the side setback requirement for the SF-6 District from the City of Forney Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. The request is being made for a new home to be constructed with a six foot (6’) side setback in place of the required fifteen foot (15’) setback for property located at the northwest corner of E. Aimee Street and Alexander Street in the City of Forney.
    Mr. Morgan explained the lot was platted before the current requirements, not allowing the variance would prevent building the house, which would deny use of the land. There is also 30' of ROW and there are no plans to widen the street. Notification was provided, one response was received, against the variance, he believes their reason was not ______. They do show a house size of 1250, current minimum is 1500, he believes they could do that. Ms. Milton asked about the setbacks. Mr. Morgan said if the lot had been platted under current zoning, it would be a self-imposed hardship. Mr. Richter asked if they would consider a variance for the smaller house, Mr. Morgan said probably not. Mr. Brown said the plans he obtained said 1,200 was the minimum; Mr. Morgan replied council had amended the minimums. Mr. Brown said he could turn the garage into living space; Mr. Morgan said he would still be required to have a garage.
    The variance was approved unanimously.
Monday, 2016, August 1