Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-04-05 BOA MINUTESPresent MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APRIL 5,1982 7:00 P.M. Absent Guests Mr.Berry Mrs.Luddy Mr.Burfiend Mr.Morrison Ms.Oberg Mr.VAughn,Vice Chairman Mr.Jessamine,Chairman Chuck Newcomer,Acting Executive Secretary Becky Breece,Recording Secretary Synopsis Approval of Minutes dated March 1,1982 Public Hearings:BA -3-82 (Tettley) BA -5-82 (Southard) 1.Chairman 2.Ms.Breece 3.Chairman 4.Vaughn/Oberg 5.Chairman 6.Acting Chairman 7.Mr.Newcomer Eleanor Tucker Albert Tucker Lois Broman Richard Broman Dorrene Hughes James F.Hughes Mary Warren Hugh Warren called the meeting to order and asked the Recording Secretary to call the roll. called the roll,determining six members were present and one absent,as indicated above. asked for a motion to approve the Minutes of March 1,1982. M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junction,Arizona,that the Minutes dated March 1,1982,be approved as written." The motion passed unanimously (6-0). relinquished the gavel to the vice chairman due to a potential conflict of interest with the public hearing next on the agenda. asked.staff to brief the Board on BA -3-82 (Tettley)which was continued from the March 1,regular meeting of the Board. explained the applicant is requesting a variance to all of the yard requirements and the minimum lot size requirements in the GR zoning district. Noting that the applicant did not appear to be present at the hearing,it was noted for the record that notification was sent to the applicant on March 2,1982. 8.Acting Chairman invited applicant or a representative to speak. There being no response,asked i f there was public comment in opposition to the application.The following people spoke: 9.Mr.Albert Tucker 564 North Cortez Road,Apache Junction,opposed the application due to the small lot size. Page 2 -Board of Adjustment Minutes of April 5,1982 10.Mr.Jim Hughes 11.Ms.Eleanor Tucker 12.Mr.Rich Broman 13.Mr.Hugh Warren 14.Acting Chairman 15.Mr.Newcomer 2344 East Scenic Street,Apache Junction,opposed the application due to the small lot size and a preference for low density. 564 North Cortez Road,Apache Junction,opposed the application due to apparent illegalities of the situation. 2160 East Scenic Street,Apache Junction,opposed the application due to extreme degree of variance from standards set by the zoning ordinance and due to surrounding property owners'evident dissent. 2145 East Cody Street,Apache Junction,opposed the application due to desire for one -acre minimum parcels. asked for public comment in favor of the appli- cation.There being none,staff recommendation was requested. noted the Zoning Administrator recommended denial of the application,(memorandum read into the record)as did the Development Coordinating Committee.(memorandum read into record). 16.Acting Chairman called for a motion,following Board discussion. 17.Morrison/Berry M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junciton,Arizona,that in case BA -3-82,the requested variance to yard and minimum lot area per dwelling unit require- ments of the General Rural zoning district,be and herby is denied. "The Board bases its decision on the following reasons:1)The creation and recording of the subject property (Tax Assessor's Parcel No.103- 03-33B)was done in violation of the minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirements of the Pinal County zoning regulations in effect at the time of the parcel's recording and,therefore,is not a legally created lot of record.2)Use of the subject property as a residential building site would require extreme variances to the minimum lot size and yard setback requirements of the GR zoning district regulations of the City of Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance.3)Numerous property owners in the neighborhood have submitted verbal and written statements opposing the re- quested variance.4)The applicant owns the lot contiguous to the subject property and the combined square footage of these two lots does not equal the minimum area per dwelling unit re- quirements of the zoning ordinance.Therefore, these two lots can be considered as one lot with no substantial infringement or denial of property rights.5)The Development Coordinating Committee (DCC)believes the Board of Adjustment would be exceeding its authority in approving the requested variance due to the inability of the applicant to show that the subject property is a legally created lot of record with regard to the zoning requirements in existence at the time of the lot's recording." The motion passed 5-0-1,with Mr.Jessamine having abstained. Page 3 -Board of Adjustment Minutes of April 5,1982 18.Chairman 19.Mr.Newcomer 20.Chairman 21.Vaughn/Oberg having regained the gavel,called for staff to brief the Board on BA -5-82 (Southard). explained that the applicant was called out of town and requests the hearing be postponed. called for a motion,there being no objection to the request. MIS "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junction,Arizona,that public hearing of case BA -5-82 (Southard)be continued to May 3,1982,at 7:30 P.M.,in these chambers." 22.Chairman asked if there was further business. 23.Mr.Newcomer acknowledged the direction by the Board to amend that portion of the Rules and Procedures con- cerning action following tie votes had been completed. 24.Chairman called for a motion to accept the amendment. 25.Oberg/Vaughn 26.Chairman Respectfully submitted, earq/e14ew a l l ( 4 1/4 /‘/' Acting Executive Secretary Approved: M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junction,Arizona,that the following wording amend the procedure dealing with tie votes: "Whenever a tie vote occurs,any of the following actions may be taken by the Board: a)The Chairman may request that another vote on the motion be taken; b)A new motion may be introduced,different from that which resulted in the tie vote; c)A motion may be introduced to table the matter at hand until the next regular or special meeting of the Board." The motion passed unanimously (6-0). there being no further business,adjourned the meeting by concensus.