Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-03-11 BOA MINUTESBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEETING OF MARCH 11,2002 The regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of Apache Junction,Arizona was held on March 11,2002 at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers,pursuant to the notice required by law. SYNOPSIS Acceptance of Minutes dated December 10,2001. Approval of Case BA -1-02 -Variance for side yard setback for a detached storage shed. CALL TO ORDER Chairwoman Gardner called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Board Members Present:Chairwoman Mari Gardner Board Member Sandra Spelman Board Member Sherri McGahan Board Member Kent Slocum Board Member Dan Austin Staff Present:.Zoning Administrator Rudy Esquivias Development Services Director Dean Svoboda City Attorney R.Joel Stern Assistant Planner Steve Abraham Guests Present:Robert Shampine,1327 S.Idaho Road,Apache Junction George McMartin,1422 E.30th Avenue,Apache Junction ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA BOARD MEMBERS SLOCUM/SPELMAN M/S "I MOVE WE ACCEPT THE AGENDA DATED MARCH 11,2002.AS PRESENTED." VOTE:5-0 MOTION CARRIED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 -1- ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBERS AUSTIN/SPELMAN M/S "I MOVE WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES DATED DECEMBER 10,2001,AS PRESENTED." VOTE 5-0 MOTION CARRIED PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE BA -1-02 Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,presented Case BA -1-02.This is a variance request by Robert Shampine of 1327 S.Idaho Road to allow an existing accessory building,encroaching into the required 10'side yard setback,to remain in its current location.The accessory structure sets 5'6" from the east property line.The building is 120 square feet with a height of 9'6".An accessory building does not have to adhere to accessory building setbacks unless i t is over 8 feet high.This structure currently exceeds this height limitation by 1'6".Mr.Shampine did not obtain a building permit because he believed he did not need one.The information that Mr.Shampine asserts he was given over the phone by staff,was that if the structure was under 120 square feet it would not need a building permit.Information regarding the actual height of the building was not discussed.Mr.Shampine stated that from information received over the telephone from the staff,he placed the shed where i t is located now. Staff met recently with Mr.Shampine and discussed options to correct this violation.These options are as follows: 1.move the structure to conform with applicable codes; 2.reduce the height of the structure to 8 feet or under,therefore i t could remain in its current location;or 3.seek a variance. Staff recommends denial of this request and respectfully asks the Board to consider two things when evaluating this request: 1.Take the data supplied in the Staff Report and compare i t to the criteria required by law. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - 2 - 2.Does this structure present a hazard in any form to the applicant or his neighbors. If the Board opts to deny this variance application,Mr.Shampine would either be required to move the shed or reduce i t in height to 7 feet to meet the current setbacks and codes for storage sheds. Board Member Austin asked Mr.Abraham to go back to the original site plan presented and point out where the property in question is located? Is that all under the CR-1 zone? Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,replied that i t is a CR-1 zoned area. Board Member Austin asked Mr.Abraham if the CR-1 zoning allows for motor homes and those types of things that are occupied in that area? Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,answered no,i t doesn't allow for motor homes.It is conventional construction only. Board Member Austin wanted to know if this property is subject to the CC and R's in this area.Are you aware that there are occupied motor homes to the east of the subject property? Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,replied that he was not aware of the motor homes. Board Member Austin stated that he also observed other buildings east of the property that are much higher than 96".By observation i t looks like they are at least 10'or more from the property line. Board Member Slocum commented that the concern is the height of the building. Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,presented pictures of the structure that were taken in December of 2001. Chairwoman Gardner asked if there were any further questions or comments? Board Member Slocum noted that the way the Building Code or Ordinance is,i t doesn't go by the actual cost of what you are putting in to the construction.You went by the size.This is a fully constructed building. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - 3 - Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,replied yes,i t is quite customized. Board Member Slocum commented that you are not really required by law to put a certain dollar amount into it. Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,replied no,i t is based on the size. Board Member Austin remarked that according to your report you had received a complaint regarding the structure. Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,remarked that the nature of the complaint was a call from an individual noticing the shed during its framing stages.They thought it may be too high in relation to the property line.It was investigated by our Code Compliance Office.A door hanger notice was placed on the resident's door in August,2001.A follow up was conducted in December,2001.Meetings were conducted in January with Mr.Shampine.After presenting Mr.Shampine with options,he decided to go with the variance. Board Member McGahan questioned the door hanger notice.Is the door hanger notice what we consider a legal notice for a notification to an individual concerning something of this nature as opposed to a certified letter?A door hanger notice can be taken and thrown away.In Mr.Shampine's statement he claims he had never received the first notice and later on got another notice.The first notice was in August,and Mr.Shampine didn't receive another notice until December.All this time nothing had been done. What sort of legal notice do we have? Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,said that typically a door hanger notice is hung at the initial stage of enforcement.The recipient of the notice is given a specific amount of time to comply.If there has been no compliance,the Code Compliance Officer will follow up with a certified letter as the next step.The certified letter was sent in December of 2001. Board Member McGahan asked why so much time had lapsed,thereby giving Mr.Shampine a chance to put so much money into the project? Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,answered that it was an administrative error. Board Member Austin asked if we knew what direction from the subject property did the complaint come from?You said you only received one complaint? BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - 4 - Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,stated that there was one (1) anonymous complaint.It appeared the complaint came from driving on the access road between the properties from the north. Board Member McGahan commented that i t is not Mr.Shampine's fault that the building of the structure wasn't stopped and Mr.Shampine didn't get the notice in time. Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,reported that Mr.Shampine did attempt to call and find out. Board Member Slocum wanted to know what the building was treated with? Steve Abraham,Assistant Planner,replied that it was treated with 3/8"plywood and stucco. Chairwoman Gardner asked if the applicant would care to address the Board? Robert Shampine,1327 S.Idaho Road,addressed the Board.He stated that he called to find -out if he needed a permit to build a shed. Staff advised that as long as it was 120 square feet or smaller and didn't have utilities,he wouldn't need a permit.He received a certified letter in December and they told him that they left a notice on his doonin August,but he didn't get it.If he would have gotten the first notice,he could have lowered the height then. Chairwoman Gardner asked Mr.Shampine if by chance had he asked about the height of the building when inquiring the first time about the square footage? Mr.Shampine answered no Board Member Spelman questioned if the staff had asked Mr. Shampine about the height of the building? Mr.Shampine replied no.Staff had told him about the 120 square feet and no utilities.He asked about the distance needed from the property line and staff advised 4 feet. Chairwoman Gardner commented that height does make a difference. Are there any other comments orquestions for Mr.Shampine. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - 5 - Board Member Slocum asked Mr.Shampine about the 3/4 pitch and i f the shed had stucco all the way up to the gable. Mr.Shampine stated that i t is not a very steep pitch.The shed has stucco all the way to the gable. Board Member Austin remarked that he observed the shed and i t is very nice and you have a very nice home.Why did you select that location for the shed?You have a lot -of room on the lot. Mr.Shampine said,thatte wanted to put a garden over there and he wanted a shed by the garden. Chairwoman Gardner asked if there was.-anyone else that would care to speak for or against this item.Mr.Austin do you have a question for staff? Board Member Austin commented that most of his questions were answered.My-concern is that applicants are not given correct information by staff.Anytime -a person .builds a permanent structure particularly on concrete,bolted down,with a stucco finish,and a really strong lookingished, I would think: that staff could answer the questions.This is a major construction here.When'Mr.Shampine asks staff about the .size,do we ask about the height at the time?That troubles me.We don't want to send a message to the community,but on the other hand I realize that staff are swamped.We should be asking questions so that the applicant is aware of what is involved.Knowing that i t is a permanent fixture like this would you not make an extra effort to make sure i t is done properly.I observed the building and i t is pretty nice fora shed.Mr.Shampine indicated that i t is solely for a shed purpose. Board Member_McGahan commented that she would agree with Board Member Austin on these concerns.I personally encountered something similar as well.I have received 3 different answers from 3 different people on things.Maybe -this is awake up call that we need to be abreast of answering questions and giving out information to people when you don't know the answers.This puts a hardship on people and they go through a lot of work and expense on something that :could have been prevented.I don't want us to set a precedent for the future.If the Board should approve this variance maybe stipulations could apply on a case by case basis. Joel Stern,City Attorney,advised that this Board acts on a case by case basis.The Board of Adjustment does not set precedents. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - -6 - Rudy Esquivias,Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator,remarked that the Ordinance does not address different types of construction or value of storage buildings,accessory buildings,or storage sheds.Basically,i t relates back to the Building Code that refers to square footage.You can have a shed that is 120 square feet that you get at K -Mart for $100.00,or you can have a shed that is built much nicer.Neither shed,i f i t is less than 120 square feet,no more than 7 feet in height,or if it doesn't have utilities, would require a building permit.The moment you get over 120 square feet and 7 feet in height or want to put electricity or water,then you are subject to building codes even if it less than 120 square feet.As far as giving out information on the phone,we do try to be careful.Some people ask general questions and get general answers.Ideally,every question should be answered in writing,but the volume would be overwhelming.As staff we need to ask more questions. Chairwoman Gardner announced that she would entertain a motion and a second.I want to remind the Board that there needs to be findings of the reasons for the motion. BOARD MEMBERS McGAHAN/SLOCUM M/S "I MOVE THAT BA -1-02,A REQUEST BY ROBERT SHAMPINE,FOR A VARIANCE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE,SECTION 6.0116.4,ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STORAGE SHEDS,ALLOWING A STORAGE SHED TO EXCEED THE HEIGHT LIMITATION OF 8 FEET AND ENCROACH INTO A REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES,BE APPROVED." Rudy Esquivias,Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator,asked if the Board wanted any conditions,or to site the findings. Board Member McGahan ADDED THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS TO THE MOTION: I.THE STORAGE SHED WILL NOT AFFECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF PERSONS WORKING OR RESIDING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 2.THE SHED WILL NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE CHARACTER OF OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. Chairwoman Gardner asked for a second. Board Member Austin asked if we could amend the conditions to add, "THE SHED SHALL NOT BE ENLARGED OR BE SERVED BY ANY UTILITIES WHICH WOULD REQUIRE FUTURE PERMITS". BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - 7 - Chairwoman Gardner replied yes. Board Member Austin SECONDED THE MOTION. Chairwoman Gardner asked for a roll call vote. Rudy Esquivias,Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator,asked if we are voting on the amendment first? Joel Stern,City Attorney,advised that she amended her original motion so all you need is to consider the one motion. Chairwoman Gardner asked for a roll call vote. MOTION CARRIED FOR APPROVAL VOTE 4-1 (Chairwoman Gardner cast the dissenting vote). Joel Stern,City Attorney advised that i t should be noted in the minutes that if anyone feels aggrieved by this decision they have 30 days to appeal.They should seek legal advise under ARS Section 9-462.06 and other statutes that are applicable. OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS None REQUEST OF STAFF None INFORMATION AND REPORTS Rudy Esquivias,Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator,reported that we received a copy of Superstition Mountain Properties permit from the State Land Department to conduct their temporary parking lot.I gave you a copy of the cover sheet that I mailed to the applicant Mr.Edlund reiterating the motion of the Board and the conditions.The State incorporated most of our conditions.The only difference was in regard to the temporary fencing.The State is still debating on the temporary fencing.Normally,under this type of permit the State does not allow temporary structures.If a fence is left up for a long period of time it could be considered a temporary structure.On the other hand,the State Land Department felt that the land should be BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - 8 - protected and given a chance for re -vegetation after each yearly event.Mr. Edlund is doing a follow-up on the conditions.He is currently working on the traffic management plan to provide to the various public safety agencies. They will be -improving the entrances.Mr.Edlund has also met with the appropriate individuals regarding the environmental concerns. SELECTION OF MEETINGS,TIMES,LOCATIONS AND PURPOSES BOARD MEMBERS McGAHAN/SLOCUM M/S "I MOVE THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & APPEALS BE HELD AT 6:30 P.M.,AND THE REGULAR MEETING AT 7:00 P.M.ON APRIL 8, 2002". MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss,and with no objections,Chairwoman Gardner adjourned the meeting at 7:42 P.M. NIARI GARDNER,CHAIRWOMAN RU ECUTIVE SECRETARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MARCH 11,2002 - 9 - ORDER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA CASE NO.BA -L1-02 DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APPLICANTS: PROPERTY LOCATION:, TAX, ASSESSOR'S PARCEL #: SIZE 'OF SUBJECT •PARCEL: ZONING DISTRICT:. REQUEST: March 11,2002 Robert and Pamela Shampine The subject site is a 26,136, square foot property located at 1327 South Idaho Drive,about 1/8 of a mile North of 16 th Avenue on the east side . of Idaho, Road (complete legal , description contained in,Case ,file BA -1-02). 102-04-011B ±.6 acres CR-1 (Single Family Residence Zone), Zoning Ordinance ,Section 15:0200 The applicants are.requesting,a side yard setback variance for an existing detached storage shed which is no more than 120 square feet in area,but taller than 8 feet:requesting to locate the shed 5.5 feet .from the east property line,instead of 10 feet as normally required. ORDER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS CASE BA -1-02 (Robert &Pamela Shampine) PAGE 1 OF 3 BOARD AUTHORIZATION:Pursuant to the Apache Junction City Code ,Volume II,Land Development Code ,Chapter 1,Zoning Ordinance, Article 11,Section 11.0103 Powers, Subsection 11.0103(h),which empowers the Board to: "Allow a reduction of building site area and yard requirements where,in its judgment,the shape of the building site,topography,location of existing buildings,or other condi- tions make strict compliance with said regulations impossible without practical difficulty or hardship,but in no case,except as hereinafter provided,shall these regulations be reduced in such a manner as to violate the intention and purpose of this Ordinance ...." BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:,Motion and Second by Board Members McGahan/Austin: "I move that a :request made :by Robert Shampine,for a variance to. the :Zoning Ordinance,Section .6.0116.4, Accessory Buildings and.Storage Sheds,allowing a storage shed to exceed the height limitation of eight feet and encroach into a required side yard setback for accessory structures,be APPROVED." The Conditions of Approval of the Variance are: 1)The shed shall not:be enlarged or: be served by any utilities which would require future permits. ORDER -BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS CASE BA -1-02 (Robert &Pamela Shampine) PAGE'2 OF 3 Findings for Decision: 1)The storage shed will not affect the health and safety of persons working or residing in the neighborhood. 2)The shed will not negatively affect the character of other residential properties in the neighborhood. MOTION PASSED,VOTE 4-1 (Chairwoman Gardner had the dissenting vote) SIGNED: MARI GARDNER,CHAIRWOMAN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & APPEALS ATTEST: RUDY EntI/VI4/ffECUTIVE SECRETARY BOARDitrIkDYSTMAT & APPEALS cc: -(applicants)Robert and Pamela Shampine,1327 S.Idaho Road, Apache Junction,AZ 85219 -Joel Stern,City Attorney -Curtis Shook,City Manager -Kathy Connelly,City Clerk -City Council Members -Planning and Zoning Commission Members -Dean Svoboda.Development Services Director -Planning Division Staff -Case File BA -1-02 :sh ORDER -BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS CASE BA -1-02 (Robert &Pamela Shampine) PAGE 3 OF 3 DATE DATEDATE