Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-02-02 BOA MINUTESBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA FEBRUARY 2,1981 7:00 P.M. In Attendance Joe Jessamine,Chairman Don Nesser,Vice Chairman Bill Vaughn Harvey Morrison Bill Furness Absent Pete Nunn (illness) Guests Melvin Martin John Bosell Mrs.Bosell Dale Burfiend 1.Chairman opened the meeting at 7:02 P.M.and requested that the Executive Secretary call the roll. 2.Mr.Newcomer called the roll and determined the members present as indicated above. 3.Chairman announced that a quorum was presentand that the firstAtem of business was consideration:of the "Minutes"from the meeting of January 5,1981. 4.Vaughn/Furness M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment . UT—the City of Apache Junction,Arizona,that the "Minutes"from the meeting of January 5,1981 be approved as written." The motion passed 4-0 with Mr.Jessamine abstaining- since he had not attended the meeting in question. 5.Chairman announced that the next item on the agenda was a public hearing on case BA -1-81,application submitted by a Mr.Martin for a Mr.Erlandson. He asked the Executive Secretary to brief the Board members on the case. 6.Mr.Newcomer located the property in question on the map for the Board members and explained that Mr.Erlandson wanted to split his lot in half,making each half 55'wide by 130'deep.He pointed out that the requirements for Trailer Homesite lots were that they must be a minimum of 8,000 square feet and have a mimimum width of 60'.The lot split would be less than the minimum in both square feet and width. 7.Chairman called on the applicant to present his case. 8.Mr.Martin explained that he was representing Mr.Erlandson. He added that the property owner was interested in having the lot split because the area was a large percentage inhabited by retirees and the smaller lots would be more suitable for sale to such people.He further explained that the lot size would still be suitable for double and triple wide mobile homes with all the necessary septic hook-ups as required by the City. 9.Mr.Nesser 10.Mr.Martin Asked i f the drawings for the property showed a right-of-way. explained that there were -no right-of-ways on Warner Drive that were dedicated to the City, but that they were going to do so. Page 2 -Board of Adjustment Minutes of February 2,1981 11.Mr.Newcomer 12.Chairman 13.Mr.Martin 14.Chairman 15.Mrs.Bosell 16.Chairman 17.Mr.Newcomer 18.Chairman 19.Mr.Martin 20.Mr.Furness 21.Mr.Martin 22.Chairman 23.Mr.Newcomer 24.Chairman 25.Mr.Furness 26.Chairman explained that the deed to the property excluded 30'for roadways and the right-of-way,but that nothing had been dedicated to the City yet. explained to Mr.Martin that -the minimum square foot requirement for the TH zone was 8,000 sq.ft. and that he was requesting ai-reduction by 900 sq.ft. replied that that was the reason for requesting:the- variance. asked if any one wished to speak either for or against the variance. told the Board that she was in favor of the lot split because she saw no reason not to do i t since there would: still be -enougb room for the septics'and -other City requirements. called for the staff recommendation. called the Board members'attention to the memo from the Zoning Administrator in their packets and read the memo aloud. added that other lot splits had occurred under the County,but that the County had not carried out the proper inspections. pointed out that some lot splits before the City took over had caused problems by making some lots inaccessable.He added that in this case the road would be dedicated to the City,making i t better for both the property owners and the City. pointed out that he considered the request to be a case of "spot zoning"which the City and the Board was not allowed to grant.He added that the Board could not allow this kind of lot split to occur in one place and yet deny i t in another. He added that he did not see any way in which the case could be handled since the Board was not per- mitted to grant the lot split in the first place. explained that be considered the -request to be ,a variance to the present zoning. pointed out that the Board of Adjustment was permitted to grant variances to setbacks and such.It was not in the jurisdiction of the Board to reduce the size of a lot.He recommended that Mr.Martin investigate having the Planning and Zoning Commission make an amendment to the lot size requirements. pointed out that a rezoning would not permit a lot split unless it was in accordance with the regula- tions of the particular zoning district.He added that there weren't any zones that allowed less than 8,000 sq.ft.for mobile homes. called for other comments.There being none,he closed the public hearing. requested that they take a short recess to discuss the case. announced a five-minute recess. Page 3 -Board of Adjustment Minutes of February 2,1981 27.Mr.Newcomer 28.Chairman 29.Nesser/Furness 30.Mr.Martin 31.Mr.Newcomer 32.Mr.Martin 33.Mr.Vaughn 34.Mr.Newcomer pointed out that one of the alternatives would be for Mr.Martin to go before the Planning and Zoning Commission and petition for a change in the wording of the Zoning Ordinance. explained that Mr.Martin could petition for a change in the minimum lot size for a mobile home to be 7,000 sq.ft. He then called for a motion on the case. M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of WE City of Apache Junction,Arizona: In the case of BA -1-81,an application for a variance to the provisions of Sections 2308,2003,2004,and 2005 of the City Zoning Ordinance submitted by Melvin Martin in behalf of Gordon Erlandson for the property legally described as: The South 159.07 feet of the West 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 30,Township 1 North,Range 8 East of the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian,except the South 30 feet and the West 25 feet for roads;except the East 110 feet,and except the West 110 feet of the South 159.07 feet of the West 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 30,Township 1 North,Range 8 East,of the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian,located in Apache Junction,Pinal County,Arizona. Hereby declining to hear and make a determination on this case. The Board bases its decision on the following find- ings of fact: 1.Section 2501 of the City Zoning Ordinance states that an application for any "permissible"variance of regulations may be made. 2.The applicant is requesting to split a parcel in a manner specifically prohibited by Section 2308 of the City Zoning Ordinance. 3.The application,as submitted,requests a variance which is not within the Board's power to grant." The motion passed 4-1 with Mr.Vaughn voting "no". requested copies of the sections of the Zoning Ordinance which applied to his case. informed Mr.Martin that this information was avail- able in the Planning Department Office. asked i f that information could be mailed to him as well as a copy of the Zoning Administrator's memo. explained that he had voted "no"not because he agreed with the lot split,but thought that it was within the Board's power to make a decision.He had objected to the motion itself. explained that the Board needed to consider a change in its procedures in order to bring them into com- pliance with the Arizona Revised Statutes.He pointed out that proposed Ordinance No.86 would extend the advertising date for the Board hearings and bring i t up to the required 15 days prior to the hearing. Page 4 -Board of Adjustment Minutes of February 2,1981 He added that this would then go the the Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council. 35.Mr.Vaughn asked i f it was necessary to have a time period of 56 days outlined in the Ordinance. 36.Mr.Newcomer explained that the 56 days may not be necessary but that a reasonable amount of time should be allowed. 37.Mr.Nesser 38.Mr.Vaughn 39.Chairman agreed that sufficient time should be allowed for the processing of the application. suggested that the wording be changed from 56 days to read "a reasonable amount of time". agreed with Mr.Vaughn. 40.Mr.Newcomer stated that he would revise the wording in the Ordinance. 41.Chairman 42.Vaughn/Jessamine 43.Chairman Respectfully submitted, asked i f there was any other business. M/S to adjourn the meeting. there being no objection,he adjourned the meeting at 7:50 P.M. 74(i Charles R.Newcomer Acting Executive Secretary Approved: §samine,Chairman