2014_05.16 BOA Minutes - UnsignedKENNEDALE
Board of Adjustment
www.cityofkenneda fe.com
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
May 6, 2014
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 405 MUNICIPAL DRIVE
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Adams called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
IL ROLL CALL
Ms. Roberts called roll.
Commissioner
Present
Absent
Rick Adams
x
Brian Cassady
x
Jeff Madrid
x
Patrick Vader
x
Martin Young
x
Alternates
Jeff Nevarez
x
Lana Sather
x
Richard West
x
A quorum was present.
Staff present: Rachel Roberts (planning director); Sandra Johnson (building inspector); Bob Hart (city
manager; present for the meeting before executive session)
III. SWEARING 1N OF SPEAKERS
Ms. Roberts swore in those who wished to speak.
IV. MINUTES APPROVAL
A. Review and consider approval of minutes from the March 4, 2014 regular meeting
Mr. Madrid made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 4t'' meeting, seconded by Mr. Vader.
The motion passed with all in favor.
V. VISITOR/CITIZENS FORUM
No one registered to speak.
VI. REGULAR ITEMS
Ms. Roberts told the Board that Mr. Bowerman, the applicant for Case BOA I4-05, had guests coming in
from out of town for a fundraiser and had asked if he could be considered first on the agenda. The Board
stated that the other cases were likely to need more time on the agenda and that it would be better to
hear Case 14-05 first.
D. Case # BOA 14-05 to hold a public hearing and consider a request by Bowerman Oil & Gas for a
Special Exception to the City Code Section 17-421 Schedule of uses and off-street parking
requirements, to allow for farm/ranch use (livestock) in "R-3" Single Family Residential at 1437
Swiney Hiett Rd, legal description of C. C. Swiney Subdivision, being a portion of Lot 8, being all
of a tract of land described in deed to Charles Blish, recorded in Vol. 8794 p. 2303, D.R.T.0
1. Staff Presentation
Ms. Roberts gave the staff presentation. She described staffs position on whether the applicant met the
six standards for a special exception. She recommended approval provided conditions are applied:
1. Only one livestock animal may be kept an the property, or one bull and one cow from time to time on
a temporary basis.
2. The property must be fenced so that the animal is kept to the back part of the property, as shown on
the illustration attached to the staff report. •
3. Fencing for the property shall be maintained in good repair.
4. The property should never be used for commercial agricultural purposes.
5. The property owner shall maintain the property in good condition to prevent erosion and to prevent
loss of grass cover, to prevent dust problems and to prevent an increase in storm water pollution.
6. The property owner shall clear animal waste from the property, as needed, to prohibit an increase in
storm water pollution. if the animal moves about the property, this may not be an issue, but the
condition is recommended to make sure the property owner is inspecting the property to make sure
waste isn't a problem.
7. If city inspection or code compliance staff determines that any of the above conditions have been
violated, the special exception shall be placed on the next agenda of the Board of Adjustment, and the
Board shall be authorized to revoke the special exception if it determines any of the conditions have
been violated.
2. Applicant Presentation
Bill Bowerman addressed the Board. He thanked the Board for letting him go first on the agenda. He said
the previous owner's daughter asked him to buy the property after the owner died. He said the property
used to be used for a slaughterhouse; the house was uninhabitable, so they tore it down. He referred to
the images he had submitted to the Board, mentioning where the fence lines are, where the buildings had
been, and where a neighbor's fence was falling down. He said the idea was to put the bull on the property
with a cow for breeding purposes.
Mr. Vader said Mr. Bowerman has 47 acres behind this property and runs cattle there. Mr. Bowerman
said he has four head and two horses. Mr. Vader asked why he didn't fence off part of the 47 acres
instead of requesting to put the use closer to the houses of people who are opposed to it. Mr. Bowerman
said he doesn't really have to do that; he'd like to run cattle on the Blish property, just a few, that it's either
run cattle or sell the property for someone else to develop. Mr. Adams said he understood what Mr.
Bowerman was saying, but he doesn't understand why if he has all that property, he says if he can't run a
few cattle on it, he's going to sell it. Mr. Bowerman said if he can't use it —Mr. Adams said he is using it,
and Mr. Bowerman said he isn't using the property now, he tore down the buildings. He said the property
to the west runs cattle and the property to the east has horses.
Mr. Vader asked if the city had received any complaints from neighbors. Ms. Roberts said she hadn't
heard any and checked with Ms. Johnson, who said she hadn't heard of any complaints. Mr. Vader asked
if the property was still zoned R-3, and Ms. Roberts said it was.
Mr. Young asked what would be the minimum number of livestock Mr. Bowerman would put on the
property. Mr. Bowerman said he was asking for four but would like to have two or three.
Mr. Vader asked how much land was necessary, one or two acres? Mr. Bowerman said the fence is 100
feet off the road, and he'd like to use everything back of that.
3. Public Hearing
Ms. Roberts said no one signed up to speak, but she had received a letter from one of the neighbors who
was opposed to granting the special exception, which she had distributed to the members of the Board.
4. Applicant Response
In response to comments in the letter, Mr. Adams asked why the fencing on the property was changed to
barb wire.
Marvin Lough, 7301 Briarwick Ct, Fort Worth, addressed the Board on behalf of Mr. Bowerman. He said
when they took over the property, the fence line was so grown up with trees that when they took down the
house, they decided to go ahead and clear the fence line and put in a new fence at the same time. He
said they cleaned up the area, and the neighbors were pleased. He said he hadn't heard anything except
from one person to the west; the person whose address the Board has, he had talked with that person,
who liked the fence they put up.
Mr. Cassady asked if it would be effective to fence off a smaller area to keep the cattle away from the
residents to the east. Mr. Lough said they can keep them completely, he said the fence they put up was
to their back yard, not the side of their house. Mr. Cassady said keeping the cattle to where the
slaughterhouse had been might be an alternative, and Mr. Lough said that was at the very back of the
property. Mr. Lough said they're not going to be up by the house.
Mr. Adams said the letter says to please have the owner remove the barb wire from the side of their home
and the side of their back yard. Mr. Lough said they ran the barb wire against the neighbor's existing
chain link fence and wooden stockade fence.
5. Staff Response and Summary
Ms. Roberts said staff believes a limited number of livestock in a controlled location would be compatible.
She said she thought originally Mr. Bowerman just wanted to keep a bull there, but if they want to use the
property for breeding, then one cow, maybe two, for short periods of time, with conditions about where
the animals would be kept should be compatible.
Mr. Vader said the city doesn't have enough staff to monitor whether the conditions were being followed.
He said it's an R-3 zoning district. They have objections from some of the citizens, Mr. Bowerman has 47
acres to keep cattle, and this case seemed a bit of a stretch and does impact the welfare of the
neighbors.
Mr. Cassady said one of the premises of the special exception is that it is not detrimental to health and
welfare people surrounding it, and he agreed with Mr. Vader, this case was a stretch.
6. Action by the Board of Adjustment
Mr. Vader made a motion to deny the request for a special exception, seconded by Mr. Madrid. The
motion passed unanimously.
A. Case # BOA 14-02 to receive comments and consider action on a request by Ron Sturgeon for a
Special Exception to the City Code Sectionl7-421 Schedule of uses and off-street parking
requirements, to allow an auto salvage yard in an "I" Industrial zoning district at 1206 and 1208 E
Kennedale Pkwy, more particularly described as Kennedale Business Park Block 1 Lot 1R1 and
Greenleaf Addition Block 1 Lot 1.
1. Staff Presentation
Ms. Roberts gave the staff presentation. She also said she would like to clarify that Ron Sturgeon is the
only applicant for this case. She then reviewed the background of the case and the standards for a
special exception, whether the applicant met the standards, as described in the staff report. The applicant
met some of the standards, and some standards the applicant met for now but may not meet aver the
long-term, given the city's vision for this area in the comprehensive land use plan. She recommended
granting a special exception for five years with conditions, with the special exception not to be renewed
after the five-year period.
1. The operator of the salvage yard shall be required to maintain the landscaping from the front of the
building to the curb. If the business were to close for any reason, the property owner shall be required
to maintain the landscaping.
2. Effective the first day after the special exception expires, the operator or the property owner shall
begin cleanup of the property in a reasonable manner that will provide for the complete removal of all
automobile parts, recycling products, scrap metal, junk, trash, debris, and other waste material, and
any storage materials used for storing parts or equipment outdoors, with the cleanup to be completed
within six months after the special exception expires. The property shall be left in a neat and
presentable condition and not in violation of any City ordinances.
Mr. Adams asked if the city had a history with businesses cleaning up salvage yards, so they could know
if six months was enough time. Ms. Roberts said the recycling facility that had agreed to close in 2017
expected to need that amount of time to remove materials on their property, so staff expected the salvage
yard would need a similar amount of time. She said the applicant could say how long he would expect
that to take.
2. Applicant Presentation
Ron Sturgeon, applicant, addressed the Board. He began by handing out a statement, which he read to
the Board, as well as a copy of a rezoning application submitted by Mr. Sturgeon to the city in 1995 to
request a change from residential to industrial zoning, and a letter from Mr. Sturgeon to the city in 1996
stating Mr. Sturgeon's understanding of the overlay district requirements in relation to his property [these
documents are on now file with the city]. He said the city annexed the property knowing the use and the
use should be grandfathered. He said he has never waived his right to be grandfathered. Mr. Sturgeon
requested a special exception for ten years with no mention of closing.
Mr. Adams said that Mr. Sturgeon had mentioned the billions of dollars LKQ has made across the
country, but how much taxes have they paid? Mr. Sturgeon said this is primarily a wholesale facility and
sells almost exclusively to body shops and garages, so it doesn't provide sales tax dollars. Mr. Adams
asked why he had given the money made by LKQ has a reason to keep this business open. Mr. Sturgeon
said because of the ad valorem taxes and the employment and the reasons in his presentation.
Mr. Adams said Mr. Sturgeon said he was grandfathered, but the document he gave them saying he was
grandfather was written by Mr. Sturgeon. Did he have anything from the city saying they agree with him?
Mr. Sturgeon said it was part of the minutes of the meeting and the city accepted his application as
tendered. Mr. Adams said he didn't see anything saying the city agreed with Mr. Sturgeon. Mr. Sturgeon
said it was arguable and he appreciated Mr. Adams' position.
Bob Riley, consultant for Mr. Sturgeon, addressed the Board. He handed out two documents, one being
an email exchange with Ms. Roberts regarding salvage yards that do not have special exceptions and the
other being a statement he read to the Board [documents are on file with the city].
Walt Leonard, attorney, 101 Summit Avenue, Suite 1010, addressed the Board. He said the property was
annexed in the 1990s and the salvage yard was a pre-existing use and was grandfathered because the
city knew it was an existing use when it annexed the property. He said that under Texas state law, if a city
annexes property, it can continue with an existing use. He argued there has to be a nexus between the
law and what the Board is asking. He argued that his client is willing to work with the city after ten years if
his special exception is granted, perhaps through using a planned development district.
Mr. Adams asked Mr. Leonard if he wouldn't agree that a special exception is for a certain term, and
there's no guarantee after that the special exception will be granted again. Mr. Leonard said it can be. Mr.
Madrid asked if the law guarantees a special exception will be granted. Mr. Leonard said there's no
requirement that it be granted, but if you can show compatibility with existing zoning, it should be granted.
Mr. Madrid asked if in the last twenty years, has Mr. Sturgeon ever raised the question that he doesn't
need to be under a special exception. Mr. Leonard said it was highlighted in the documents submitted to
the Board. Mr. Madrid said Mr. Leonard can agree with the Board's misgivings about documents they
don't know where they came from. Mr. Leonard said the Board has sworn testimony, and Mr. Madrid said
the Board asks the question, how do we know the factual basis of the documents, when it was written in
1995? Mr. Leonard argued that they had the testimony given to them.
Mr. Adams said to Mr. Leonard that he assumed his client would fight a change to light industrial zoning.
Mr. Leonard said if the city did it as light industrial.
Mr. Vader said Mr. Sturgeon says he's been operating under the auspices that he was grandfathered, yet
on two separate occasions, Mr. Sturgeon sought a specia! exception. Mr. Leonard said he was told he
had to apply for a special exception or there would be difficulty. Mr. Vader said the 1999 previous special
exception had been granted for ten years, with annual reviews by staff, and since this [documentation of
such] was in your packet, he assumes this was acceptable to Mr. Sturgeon. Mr. Leonard said it was with
the proviso already given. Mr. Vader said but there is nothing in the documentation that the city said it
was grandfathered, and Mr. Leonard said it was not necessary.
Mr. Sturgeon said that at the end of the ten years, the Board won't give him ten more years unless the
zoning hasn't been implemented and the development patterns have changed. He said this should be
before the Council, the amortization and the closing of businesses.
Mr. Vader asked if a special exception is required. Ms. Roberts said that a new salvage yard that wanted
to open would have to have a special exception. She said the Board had a copy of the zoning code that
includes the non -conforming standards. She said a use may be grandfathered until it receives a special
exception, at which time it. becomes a conforming use. The benefit of that is that a conforming use is not
subject to amortization. She explained that once a use loses its special exception, under the city code, it
becomes an illegal use. She said there's a plus and minus you have to weight when getting a special
exception. She said on one hand, you know you can work for so many years when you have the
exception without having to worry about amortization, but you have to weigh that against there being no
guarantee the special exception will be renewed. She said the way the code is written, a use with a
special exception is not a grandfathered use, and she can respond to the other points later after the
public hearing. She said she can't speak to what went on before, but an existing use that is grandfathered
is not required to have a special exception, but it may want to do so because there are a number of
benefits that come with that.
Mr. Adams asked Ms. Roberts if she agreed that Mr. Sturgeon's property was grandfathered. She said it
was not grandfathered, it was a conforming use. Mr. Adams said he didn't see anything about
grandfathering in the packet. Ms. Roberts said it's in the city code, which the Board had in its documents,
and staff hadn't mentioned grandfathering because the use is not grandfathered.
Mr. Adams said that he would like to go into executive session. Ms. Roberts said they would need to
make a motion.
Mr. Vader made a motion to adjourn into executive session, seconded by Mr. Madrid. The motion passed
unanimously.
The Board reconvened into its regular session at 9:26 P.M.
3. Public Hearing
James Pliska, 6828 Inwood Dr, North Richland Hills, 76182, registered to address the Board. Ms. Roberts
advised Mr. Pliska that the Board's policy for public hearings is to allow speakers three minutes to
address the Board. Mr. Pliska said he used to be director of planning and inspections for Haltom City. He
spoke in favor of the special exception and handed out a letter in support, which he read to the Board
[letter is on file with the city]. He said Haltom City had made salvage yards a non -conforming use, and the
salvage yards are still there but haven't been maintained, and it would be better to require salvage yards
to make improvements.
4. Applicant Response
Mr. Sturgeon addressed the Board and said that the Future Land Use Plan does not establish zoning. He
was annexed and requested zoning and wrote on his application he was grandfathered. He said no one
told him that he could have a special exception or be amortized, he was told to apply for a special
exception. He would like to know where the city code says you waive your grandfathered status. He said
the requirement for a special exception was passed after he was grandfathered.
Mr. Adams said they were told the laws were amended in 1999, and after that could still have their
grandfathered status if they didn't get a special exception. Mr. Sturgeon said he certainly wasn't told that
if he got a special exception he would lose his grandfathered status.
Mr. Adams said when you get a special exception, it's not guaranteed you'd get it again and again and
again. Mr. Sturgeon said he specifically said he wasn't waiving his right to be grandfathered. He said no
one told the properties annexed after 1999 they needed a special exception. Mr. Adams said they were
annexed after 1999 and didn't need a special exception. Ms. Roberts said she didn't know what Mr.
Sturgeon was told, but she could say what the regulations are now, and that is no one is required to have
a special exception if they're a grandfathered use, and she wanted to make that clear, since he'd said the
other yards aren't required to have a special exception. She said they aren't required to, but they have the
option, and then added that she would have to look at the code to be sure, but she thought they had the
option.
Mr. Vader said their decision is not to determine whether Mr. Sturgeon is grandfathered, but rather just to
determine whether to extend the special exception. Mr. Sturgeon said he didn't see where the special
exception code said they can close his business. Mr. Madrid said they can rnake conditions on the special
exception as they see fit, including saying they grant a special exception for twenty years and not grant
an extension after that. Mr. Sturgeon said there are questions they probably won't be able to resolve
tonight.
Mr. Leonard said Mr. Sturgeon never waived his grandfathered rights, and since the Mr. Sturgeon said he
wasn't waiving his rights, the, city either accepted that or didn't have the authority.
Mr. Madrid said they were not here to debate whether the grandfather clause is in place; they're here to
rule on whether or not to renew the special exception. Mr. Vader said you could have ignored the special
exception and fallen into non -conforming status. Mr. Leonard said Mr. Sturgeon wants to be cooperative.
5. Staff Response and Summary
Ms. Roberts said she would need to check with the attorney to make sure, but from what she
understands, the city is not obligated to accept Mr. Sturgeon's terms that he is grandfathered. Mr.
Sturgeon can assert that, but the city isn't obligated to accept it, but as Mr. Madrid said, that's not what
the Board was there to decide. She said to clarify Mr. Adams' point about annexing, anything annexed
prior to 1999 would probably benefit from getting a special exception because they would avoid what
some businesses would consider the negative effects of annexation.
Ms. Roberts said that Mr. Riley was right, the comprehensive plan is not zoning, but it is a guiding
document for land use decisions, which is why staff mentioned it.
She said she wanted to address some of the points that were brought up, such as Mr. Sturgeon's
comment in his statement about paper recycling. She said the comprehensive plan mentions recycling as
a possibility that could be used in a light industrial district. She said she was asked if paper recycling
might be an example, and she had said it might be, that they were looking for an enclosed facility. As to
Mr. Sturgeon's statement that the properties in the north end of town were now used after the businesses
were amortized, she said after the sexually oriented businesses were closed, the city attracted a QT, and
it's been a great business for the city, and they had engineering plans submitted and were expecting
building plans soon for the two properties to the south of QT for some fast food restaurants.
Ms. Roberts said this is a well -run business for this type of business, but she wanted to be clear that
she's saying it's well -run for this type of business. As for the statement about not using a crystal ball to
predict future land use, we have to look in to the future, that's part of land use planning. As part of
granting a special exception, you have to look at how a use fits what's there now as well as what's
permitted for future development. As the city is working toward implementing the comprehensive plan and
trying to attract some of the commercial and retail uses that are permitted there now, they're having a
hard time getting those uses because of some of the salvage yards that are there now. But at this time
the salvage yards do fit with uses that are there now, so staff recommends granting the special exception,
but they are hesitant about the time frame because of some of the issues they're having with
development and the long-term plans. Staff doesn't believe the use will be compatible over a long-term
period, but if the Board is not comfortable looking ahead, it has to make the decision its comfortable
making. Staff is comfortable recommending a short-term renewal.
6. Action by the Board of Adjustment
Mr. Madrid said that he found the use will meet the standards for a special exception with the addition of
conditions to secure compliance with the standards and requirements of Section 17-422 of the city code
and made a motion to approve the request for a special exception for a period of five years, with the
following condition:
1. The operator of the salvage yard shall be required to maintain the landscaping from the front of the
building to the curb. If the business were to close for any reason, the property owner shall be
required to maintain the landscaping.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Vader. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Case # BOA 14-03 to hold a public hearing and consider a request by Jose Jaime for a Special
Exception to the City Code Sectionl7-421 Schedule of uses and off-street parking requirements,
to allow an auto salvage yard in an "I" Industrial zoning district at 6940 E Kennedale Pkwy, more
particularly described as W H Hudson Addn Block Lot 1.
1. Staff Presentation
Ms. Roberts gave the staff presentation and reviewed the background of the case and the standards for a
special exception, and for each standard, she said whether the applicant met the standards, as described
in the staff report. She said that most of the conditions from the previous special exception had been met,
except one had not been met, which was that a hard surface parking topping material must be used for
parking and on the appropriate acreage for storage of vehicles.
Mr. Adams asked how long this property had had a special exception, since the last one was granted. Ms.
Roberts said they received one in 2002, and it was renewed in 2004 for two more years, and they can't
find a record of when it was renewed after that. Mr. Adams asked if the special exception granted in 2002
included the condition about the hard surface parking. Ms. Roberts said it was in 2004. Mr. Adams said
they had had ten years to provide the parking and hadn't done it. Ms. Roberts said she thinks what
happened is they provided it at first and then over time, the parking expanded into the non -paved areas.
She said Mr. Adams might want to confirm with the applicant if that is what happened.
Mr. Adams asked what use is behind this property, is it housing? Ms. Roberts said it was not.
Ms. Roberts recommended granting the special exception for one year with the following conditions:
1. The operator of the salvage yard shall be required to maintain the landscaping from the front of
the building to the curb. If the business were to close for any reason, the property owner shall be
required to maintain the landscaping.
2 The operator will submit to the City a copy of its storm water permit from the Texas Commission
on Environmental Quality and its storm water plan.
3. The special exception shall expire on May 31, 2015.
2. Applicant Presentation
Mr. Jaime, 819 Shady Creek, Kennedale, addressed the Board. He said they had gravel when they
applied for the last special exception. He said they can put out more gravel if they need to. He said he
didn't have his storm water permit with him, but he could bring it to the city.
Mr. Adams asked Mr. Jaime to clarify that whether there had been gravel there, and grass had just grown
up through the rocks. Mr. Jaime said in some cases, yes. Mr. Adams said you can see in the aerial
photos all the other salvage yards around it, where they put rock.
3. Public Hearing
No one registered to speak.
4. Applicant Response
Since no one spoke in the public hearing, so response was necessary.
5. Staff Response and Summary
Ms. Roberts said if Mr. Jaime will bring his storm water permit at the earliest possible time, staff will
consider the standard about necessary site improvements to be net. She said staff is still concerned
about the parking, so she recommends granting the special exception but just for one year so that staff
can monitor for compliance. Mr. Madrid asked about the requirement for a hard parking surface, did
gravel meet that requirement? Ms. Roberts said her understanding is that gravel would not meet the
standard. Mr. Adams asked if they needed clarification from staff, if Mr. Jaime didn't meet the requirement
last time, why would he keep getting a special exception. Ms. Roberts said if he didn't meet the
requirement this time, she would not recommend approval next time. Ms. Roberts said the current parking
lot standards require asphalt or concrete, and she wasn't there when the previous exception was granted,
but she assumes the city was trying to bring businesses into compliance. Mr. Madrid said he found it hard
to believe that in 2004 hard surface would have meant gravel, and Mr. Adams said the city didn't do
anything about it. Ms. Roberts said that the city not enforcing a regulation doesn't waive someone's
requirement to abide by it. Mr. Adams said he agreed.
6. Action by the Board of Adjustment
Mr. Vader made a motion to grant a special exception for one year, with the following conditions.
1. The property owner will maintain the landscaping from the front of the building to the curb as
required by city code.
2. The operator will submit to the City a copy of its storm water permit from the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality and its storm water plan.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Madrid. The motion passed with all in favor.
C. Case # BOA 14-04 to hold a public hearing and consider a request by Jerry Coyel for a Special
Exception to the City Code Section 17-421 Schedule of uses and off-street parking requirements,
to allow an auto salvage yard in an "I" Industrial zoning district at 7001, 7003 & 7015 E Kennedale
Pkwy, more particularly described as Wade H Hudson Survey A 716 Tr 3B03, 3B3, 3B3A, 3B04, &
3B05A.
1. Staff Presentation
Ms. Roberts reviewed the background of the case and said the comprehensive plan envisioned this area
as Urban Corridor, which is more commercial in nature, but it is zoned Industrial now. She said there are
a restaurant and some residences nearby. She said that in her staff report, they had received no
complaints about traffic, noise, etc., but since then, she had received a complaint letter, which she had
given to the Board. She then reviewed the standards for a special exception and whether the applicant
met the standards, as described in the staff report. The applicant met some of the standards, and some
standards the applicant met for now but may not meet over the long-term, given the city's vision for this
area in the comprehensive land use plan. Ms. Roberts also said they had received the storm water
permit, so the applicant now meets that requirement. She recommended granting a special exception for
five years with conditions.
1. The property owner shall be required to maintain the landscaping from the front of the building to
the curb, as required by city code for all properties.
2. The special exception should expire in three to five years.
3. The owner will patch or repair the parking lot and will add striping or some other way to mark off
the parking spaces.
Mr. Cassady said [from the aerial photograph] the vehicle storage area looks like gravel. Ms. Roberts said
the code compliance officer checked the area and said it met the requirement for parking.
2. Applicant Presentation
Glenn Gidel, Fort Worth, attorney representing Mr. Coyel, addressed the Board [Note: Mr. Gidel marked
speaker form to say he was against the request for a special exception; staff assumes the "against" box
was checked in error]. Mr. Gidel first asked for clarification from Ms. Roberts that the staff was not
recommending the special exception not be eligible for renewal. Ms. Roberts said they'd had clarification
that the Board is not obligated to renew the special exception when this one expires, so she didn't feel it
was necessary to add it to the recommendation.
Mr. Gidel said they agree with the staff report on why there should be an extension, and the only question
was the recommendation on three to five years. He said the previous one was for ten years, and they
don't see any reason not to extend it for ten years. Mr. Gidel said he didn't think the Board should be
concerned with shutting down a business, but should decide whether to allow a business to continue if it
meets the standards that have been set. He said it's been in business for over forty years, and the owner
used to own another salvage yard, but the city amortized it. He said the city then started the procedure to
amortize the other lot in the north end, but then the state changed the law and the city couldn't use the
amortization process, so now it's a non -conforming use. He added that there are some legal issues here
that no one here knows the answers to and will have to be decided at some time, and it's not the job of
the Board that night to resolve it, but one of the issues is unequal treatment. Mr. Coyel has a yard on the
north end of the town where he doesn't have to deal with the special exception and a yard on the south
end that does, and the two yards aren't getting the same treatment. He said he thinks that it's a legal
issue that will arise but isn't an issue that had to be decided that night. He then asked the Board not to
add any conditions about not renewing the special exception. He agreed that the Board has the power not
to renew it again after this special exception, if conditions have changed. He said if they need to stripe the
parking lot, as far as he knew that was the only part of the operation that wasn't in compliance.
Mr. Madrid asked Mr. Coyel about the traffic flow in and out of the yard, was it off Kennedale Parkway,
where does the inventory come from? Laura Hall, representing Mr. Coyel, said they have a pick-up truck
that brings in inventory maybe twice a week. Mr. Madrid asked if they come in from the Parkway and not
from Eden Road. Ms. Hall said they don't come in from Eden Rd. Mr. Madrid and Mr. Adams said there
had been a complaint about a lot of trucks going to the salvage yard and Hawk Steel. Ms. Hall said that
might have been more about Hawk Steel. Mr. Coyel said Hawk Steel sometimes has trucks backed up in
front of his salvage yard.
3. Public Hearing
Ms. Roberts mentioned the letter against granting the special exception she had received from Marshall &
Sharon Tuttle of 529 Eden Rd S. She had given copies of the letter to the Board at the start of the
meeting.
David Dickinson, 3850 S Eden Rd., registered to speak against granting the special exception. Ms.
Roberts advised him he would have three minutes to speak. He told the Board he owns five acres across
the street, and he was told when he bought his house that plans were in place to start closing salvage
yards within Kennedale. He said that with such long-term special exceptions as ten years, how will the
city ever get into doing planning? He said asked the Board for a maximum term of three to five years. He
also said there is a heavy amount of truck traffic and that part of Eden Rd is a "no box truck" route, and
the police department won't enforce it. He said there was no clean-up on the backside of the property.
He asked why the trash shouldn't be picked up by the property owner.
4. Applicant Response
Mr. Coyel said he has no entrance along Eden Rd. He said if anyone had brought the trash issue to his
attention, he would have done something about it and that in his opinion, what Mr. Dickinson said is not
true. He said that state police said his salvage yard is cleaner than Wal-Mart's parking lot. Mr. Dickinson
attempted to respond, and Mr. Adams told Mr. Dickinson that that he could not address comments to Mr.
Coyel. Mr. Coyel said sometimes there are lose panels, but when they find them, they fix them.
Mr. Adams said to make his best effort to check on it and keep the trash picked up.
5. Staff Response and Summary
Ms, Roberts said staff recommended renewal with the conditions she had already mentioned. She said
that because of the concerns expresses by the residents, they may be news to Mr. Coyel, but they are
heartfelt concerns of residents, so she recommended granting a maximum of five years.
Mr. Adams said, for the record, everyone was treated the same as far as the conditions to be stopped at
the same time.
6. Action by the Board of Adjustment
Mr. Madrid made a motion to approve the request for a special exception for a period of five years, with
the following conditions.
1. The special exception shall expire in five years.
2. The operator of the salvage yard shall be required to maintain the landscaping from the front of
the building to the curb as required by city code for all properties.
3. The operator shall make improvements to the customer parking area, with proper striping to
indicate parking areas and travel lanes.
4. The operator shall maintain the frontage on Eden Rd.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Young. The motion passed with all in favor.
VII. REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ms. Roberts said the Splash Pad is now open, and Bark in the Park was going to be May 17th, and the
city-wide garage sale would be May 30th and 3151. Mr. Cassady asked about the city-wide cleanup, and
Ms. Roberts said she would have to check on the date and let him know.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Madrid made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Cassady. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 10:35 P.M.
Rick Adams, Chair
Date
ATTEST:
Katherine Rountree, Board Secretary
Date