Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-11-07 BOA MINUTESBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA NOVEMBER 7,1988 7:00 P.M. WORK SESSION ON AGENDA ITEMS AT 6:50 P.M. PRESENT ABSENT GUESTS Mrs.Blatterspiel None List in Mrs.Castro Planning Mrs.Kelley Office Mrs.Lynch Mr.Pfeifer Mr.Schaffer Mr.Sanchez,Chairman Mr.Dunn,Staff Mr.Nakagawa,Staff Mr.Newcomer,Executive Secretary Mrs.Pruitt,Recording Secretary SYNOPSIS: Agenda for November 7,1988 approved as presented. Minutes for September 12,1988 and October 12,1988 approved as submitted. BA -8-88 approved. BA -10-88 denied. 1.Roll Call seven members present. 2.Chairman asked for motion to accept the agenda as submitted. 3.Castro/Pfeifer M/S "I move that we approve the agenda as presented." Motion passed 7-0-0. 4.Chairman asked for motion to accept minutes as submitted. 5.Blatterspiel/Castro M/S "I make the motion to approve the minutes dated September 12,1988 and October 12,1988 as presented." Motion passed 6-0-1 with Mrs.Lynch voting "present." BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES NOVEMBER 7,1988 PAGE TWO 6.Chairman opened BA -8-88 and asked for staff briefing. 7.Mr.Nakagawa briefed Board on BA -8-88,an application of Gary Hatch and Graham Walker represented by Robert Folsom to have the Board of Adjustment,pursuant to Section 11.0103(b)of the Zoning Ordinance,to allow the extension of a zone where the boundary line divides a lot in one ownership at the time of enactment of this Ordinance.This had been postponed from the October 12,1988 meeting.He recommended that the height of development be limited to 30 feet. 8.Chairman asked i f the applicant were present and cared to address the Board. 9.Robert Folsom represented Gary Hatch and Graham Walker.He displayed two exhibits of the proposed development. He gave a history of the property and explained why the request was being made. 10.Chairman asked regarding the allowable tower height. 11.Robert Folsom said the tower height could go up to 34 feet. 12.Chairman asked Board i f they decided to approve the request, to include mention of the tower height in their recommendation. 13.Board 14.Robert Folsom 15.Chairman 16.Kelley/Schaffer asked for clarification regarding the 30"wall. explained the purpose of the 30"wall was to allow for good visibility for traffic flow. asked if others wished to speak in favor of the application.There were none. He asked if others wished to oppose the request. There were none.He closed the hearing to the public and asked the Board to make a recommendation. MIS "I move that case BA -8-88,an application of Gary S.Hatch and Graham A.Walker represented by Robert Folsom to have the Board of Adjustment, pursuant to Section 11.0103(b)of the Zoning Ordinance,allow the extension of the CB -2 zone into an area currently zoned GR where the boundary line thereof divides a lot in one ownership at the time of enactment of this Ordinance be approved for their property legally described as: The South 50 feet of Lot 3 and the North 16 feet of the West 16 feet of Lot 5,Grand View Place, according to Book 6 of Maps,Page 2,records of Pinal County,Arizona. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES NOVEMBER 7,1988 PAGE THREE We stipulate: 1.That the final site plan,elevations,and a landscaping plan for the project be approved by the Planning Department prior to submittal of the plans for approval by the Building Department. 2.That the necessary approvals for the disposal of sewage be obtained prior to final plan approval. 3.That the motel not be higher than 30 feet high and the tower not exceed 34 feet. 4.That the motel maintain a 20 -foot setback from the right-of-way of Grand Drive. 5.That a six-foot solid masonry wall with stucco finish be installed along the south boundary of this project;except that the height of the wall would not be higher than 30 inches within 20 feet from Delaware Drive and within 20 feet from Grand Drive. 6.That all driveway and parking area surfaces be improved with aggregate base and asphaltic concrete. 7.That the development of this property conform to the approved plans. 8.That non-compliance with any of these stipula- tions will be deemed to be a violation of the zoning ordinance. The Board makes its decision for the following reasons: 1.The setbacks between the proposed commercial uses and residential uses along Grand Drive will minimize the contrast and allow for insuring maximum aesthetic value. 2.That a buffer consisting of six foot solid wall with stucco finish will be installed on the south boundary of the project. 3.That the proposal for the height and driveway and parking area surfaces conform to approved plans as set out by P&Z or fall within the realm of acceptable variance." BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES 17.Chairman 18.Mr.Dunn 19.Chairman 20.Raymond Moen 21.Board 22.Raymond Moen 23.Chairman 24.Raymond Moen 25.Chairman 26.Ernie Sebastian NOVEMBER 7,1988 PAGE FOUR stated the request was approved. He opened BA -10-88 and asked for staff briefing. briefed Board on BA -10-88,an application of Raymond Moen requesting a variance to Section 15.0400 of the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance that would permit him to continue parking a commercial dump truck in the back yard of his residence located at 1589 South Cactus Road,Apache Junction. asked i f the applicant were present and cared to address the Board. said when he purchased the property he was led to believe he could park his vehicle there and was unaware of the 8,000 -pound weight restriction.He only drove the truck out in the morning and back in the evening.He commented his neighbors seemed to have no problem with his parking the truck in his rear yard. asked what kind of work he did with the truck,where he parked i t previously,and how long he had owned the property. explained how he used the truck;he previously lived in Mesa and parked i t in Gilbert.He had owned the property since May of this year. asked applicant i f he were aware that the Board did not have the authority to grant a permanent variance but could only grant a 9 -month temporary use permit, subject to conditions.He also asked i f the applicant planned to seek a more suitable place to park his vehicle. indicated this had been mentioned by staff.He said he would find another place to park,i f he had to. He asked who could grant a permanent variance. explained unless the ordinance were changed,no one could grant a permanent variance. He asked if others wished to speak in favor of the request. lived at 1045 East Kachina and said he had no objections to Mr.Moen's parking his truck in his rear yard. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES 27.Rosemarie Gollen NOVEMBER 7,1988 PAGE FIVE lived at 1701 South Cactus and said noise from the truck was no problem because it was quiet.She stated Mr.Moen was a quiet and safe driver. 28.Dorothy Yaekle lived at 1618 South Cactus and pointed out Mr.Moen was a careful,good driver.She contrasted Mr.Moen with another neighbor who kept several cars in his yard and worked on them. 29.C.J.Owens lived at 1075 East Hondo and also agreed the truck was very quiet.He identified himself as the one who works on antique cars,but stated they are all licensed and operable. 30.Chairman asked if any wished to speak opposing the request. There were none,so he asked for staff recommen- dation. 31.Mr.Dunn gave staff recommendation which was against granting the variance. 32.Board asked regarding the cost of an "Overweight Permit" and i f trucks delivering a load of gravel to an individual would have to get a permit. 33.Mr.Dunn did not have available the cost of an "Overweight Permit"and explained this type of truck would be exempt. 34.Board raised questions regarding the use of a Temporary Use Permit as opposed to a permanent variance. 35.Mr.Dunn clarified that the applicant was asking for a permanent variance. 35.Chairman asked if Mr.Moen wished to rebut staff's recommendation. 36.Mr.Moen said on the application he had asked for "special use or conditional use permit"to park his truck. 37.Chairman closed the case to the public and asked the Board to deliberate and make a motion. 38.Pfeifer/Castro M/S "I move that case BA -10-88,an application for a variance to Section 15.0400 of the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial dump truck to be parked in the rear yard of a single family home in a CR-3/PD district be denied. In denying this application the Board bases its decision on the following findings: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES 39.Chairman 40.Pfeifer/Schaffer Respectfully submitted, NOVEMBER 7,1988 PAGE SIX 1.There is nothing unique about the property that results in unnecessary hardship for the applicant.There are no special circumstances relating to the physical characteristics of the land.As stipulated in the page prior,the variance has to contain a uniqueness or a special circumstance.The land itself does not. 2.Parking a special vehicle such as this truck is not a permitted use in a CR-3/PD.This request for a use variance is not permitted by State law. 3.The rules and regulations regarding this particu- lar situation (regarding parking commercial vehicles)were in place and in effect when this request was made.In effect this hardship has been brought about by the applicant,self- imposed." Motion passed 7-0-0. informed the applicant the Board had denied the request and he had 30 days to comply. M/S to adjourn at 8:08 p.m. James A.Nakag -Swa,Actfligpecutive Secretary Ken SancKez.—Chairman