Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-07-11 BOA MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA JULY 11, 1988 7 00 P.M. (NO WORK SESSION HELD) PRESENT ABSENT GUESTS Mrs Castro Mrs. Blatterspiel List in Mrs. Kelley Mrs. Lynch Planning Mr. Pfeifer Mr. Schaffer Office Mr. Sanchez, Chairman Mr. Dunn, Staff Mr. Newcomer, Executive Secretary Mrs. Pruitt, Recording Secretary SYNOPSIS. Election of officers continued to August 8, 1988. Agenda for July 11, 1988 approved as submitted. Minutes for June 13, 1988 approved as submitted. BA-6-88 approved. BA-7-88 approved. 1. Roll Call four members present with three absent as shown above. 2. Chairman asked the Board to postpone the election of officers since several members were absent �.. 3. Pfeifer/Kelley M/S "I would move that we continue until a later date the election of a Chairman and Vice-Chairman. " Motion passed 4-0-0. 4. Chairman asked for a motion to accept the agenda dated July 11, 1988. 5. Castro/Kelley M/S "I make a motion that we approve the agenda as presented " Motion passed 4-0-0. 6. Chairman asked for a motion to approve the minutes dated June 13, 1988. 7. Pfeifer/Castro M/S "I move that we formally accept the minutes dated June 13, 1988. " Motion passed 4-0-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES JULY 11, 1988 PAGE TWO 8. Chairman opened BA-6-88 to the public and asked for staff briefing. 9. Mr. Dunn briefed the Board on case BA-6-88, an application by Apache Greyhound Park, Inc. requesting a Variance for relief from the 35' height limit in order to construct a 12' addition atop the existing Judge 's Tower located at the Southwest corner of Apache Trail and Delaware Drive. 10. Chairman asked the Board if they had any questions of staff. They had none. He asked the applicant to address the Board. 11. Dick Lewis was from Cullen/Burr Associates, Architects, and represented Apache Greyhound Park, Inc. He explained the reasons for the Variance request. 12. Chairman asked the Board if they had any questions of the applicant. They had none. He asked if others wished to speak in favor of the request. 13. Tom Damiano commented why he thought the Variance should be granted. He said he did not feel this would block anyone's view of the Superstition Mountain. 14. Chairman asked if any wished to speak in opposition to the application. There were none. He then asked for staff recommendation. AMft 15. Mr. Dunn gave staff recommendation. He added the present animated sign atop the structure could not be re- erected once it is removed. 16. Mr. Pfeifer asked why this sign could not be re-erected. 17. Mr. Newcomer replied the animated sign presently is a noncon- forming sign, and according to the Apache Junction Sign Code, once a nonconforming sign is moved or changed, it must be brought into conformity with the Sign Code. 18. Board concluded the sign was a distinguishing feature of the Apache Greyhound Park. 19. Chairman closed the hearing to the public and asked the Board to consider the application. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES JULY 11, 1988 PAGE THREE 20. Pfeifer/Castro M/S ""I move that case BA-6-88, a Variance request from Apache Greyhound Park, Inc. for relief from height limit in reference to Section 16.0202 in order to construct an addition atop the existing Judge 's Tower be approved subject to the following conditions . 1 The applicants dedicate to the City of Apache Junction the east thirty feet (30' ) along with a twenty-foot by twenty-foot (20' x 20' ) cutoff on the northeast corner of the subject site for public roadway and associated purposes prior to commencement of construction as per recommen- dation of the Public Works Department. 2. The sign structure located on top of the tower shall not be re-erected, relocated or replaced on top of the tower but would be allowed to be placed on the side of the tower, even though it does not meet current specifications in regards to animation. 3. No other roof sign shall be permitted to be erected on the tower structure. 4. This variance applies only to the Judge 's Tower in question and may not be extended to any other new or existing structure on the property. 5. The height of the tower may not exceed fifty- four feet (54' ) as measured from grade. ...... 6. No other structures whatsoever may be placed on top of the Judge 's Tower. 7. I would clarify then that the owner be allowed to use the existing sign--that is, the animated dog sign--providing the sign meets all other safety requirements and any other stipulations. 8. This variance may be revoked if any of the stipulations are not adhered to. In granting this variance, the Board bases its decision on the following findings of fact: 1. There are ' special conditions ' which exist on this property, and they are as follows that being the size, shape, topography, location and surroundings, which, in fact, do not prevail on any other property in this zone. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES JULY 11, 1988 PAGE FOUR 2. A ' hardship' would be placed on the applicant if the variance is not granted, and this hardship would be in the difficulties incurred in keeping the elements out. That would not be a self-imposed hardship by the property owner. 3. Granting the variance would not be detrimental to persons residing or working in the "" neighborhood because the Variance will not provide a situation which would affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. Finally, the proposed height would not significantly affect the aesthetic views or values since it would be only slightly higher than the existing sign and structure of the tower is now. The tower is in fact located a safe distance from the nearest adjacent property, therefore poses no problem. " Motion passed 4-0-0. 21. Chairman told the applicant the Board had voted to approve their request. He opened BA-7-88 to the public. 22. Mr. Newcomer briefed the Board on BA-7-88, an application of Kerry and Diana Hatch, and Jack and Denise Daniels requesting permission to install a single family dwelling constructed at the Mesa Vo-Tech School on a ,..., permanent foundation on Lot #92, Superstition Estates Subdivision at Coconino Drive, four lots north of 20th Avenue. 23. Chairman asked the Board if they had any questions of staff. They had none. He asked if applicant cared to address the Board. 24. Jack Daniels said the house was built by the Mesa Vo-Tech School and met all codes and specifications of the State of Arizona. He said the house is a new house which was built as a school project and would not degrade the neighborhood. 25. Chairman asked Board if they had any questions of Mr. Daniels. They had none. He asked if the home would be transported in one piece BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES JULY 11, 1988 PAGE FIVE 26. Jack Daniels replied yes, it would. 27. Mrs. Kelley asked if the house would be set on a concrete slab. 28. Jack Daniels explained plans for the foundation. 29. Chairman asked if any wished to speak in favor of the request. There were none. He asked if any wished to speak in opposition. There were none. He asked for staff recommendation. 30. Mr. Newcomer gave staff recommendation. 31. Chairman asked Board if they had any questions of staff. They had none. He asked Charles Coleman if moving the building would be stressful on it. 32. Mr. Coleman replied the Building Department would do a final inspection, but the building was designed to be moved, and he did not anticipate any problems. 33. Chairman closed the hearing to the public and asked the Board to deliberate and make a motion. 34. Pfeifer/Kelley M/S "I move that case BA-7-88, for which the applicants and legal description are a matter of public record, an application to install a single family dwelling unit constructed at another location on the subject site, be approved, subject to the following stipulations• 1. The approval is only for the specific structure for which plans, elevations, and photograph were submitted with the application. 2. The approval to install the structure is for the subject site of the application only. 3. The attached carport is a requirement of this approval so that the dwelling will be more similar in appearance to other homes in the neighborhood. 4. The placement and use of the structure and any accessory structures shall conform to all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES JULY 11, 1988 PAGE SIX 5. All permits and requirements by the Building Department and County Health Department for the foundation, installation, utility hook-ups, etc. shall be complied with. In granting this approval , the Board bases its decision on the following findings of fact• AIM lb 1. The construction, inspection, and siting of the dwelling unit are equivalent to the requirement that the unit be of 'conventional construction ' as defined in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance because• a The letter submitted by the City of Mesa states that the building was inspected by the City of Mesa during the course of construction and in fact complies with the 1985 UBC, 1985 UMC, 1985 UPC, and 1987 NEC which are updated editions of the adopted City of Apache Junction codes. b. The dwelling will be attached to a perma- nent foundation and utility hook-ups, to be inspected by the City, and c. The size, materials, and appearance of the dwelling unit are similar to that which is typical in the neighborhood. Motion passed 4-0-0. 35. Chairman told the applicant his request was approved and asked what comment he had earlier wished to make. 36. Jack Daniels asked if "carport" could be changed to "carport/ garage". 37. Chairman said a motion to reconsider the motion would have to be made. 38. Pfeifer/Castro M/S "I move that we reconsider the motion. " Motion passed 4-0-0. 39. Chairman said the floor was open for reconsideration of the motion. 40. Pfeifer/Kelley M/S "I move that case BA-7-88, for which the applicants and legal description are a matter of public record, an application to install a single family dwelling unit constructed at another location on the subject site, be approved, subject to the following stipulations : BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES JULY 11, 1988 PAGE SEVEN 1. The approval is only for the specific structure for which plans, elevations, and photograph were submitted with the application. 2. The approval to install the structure is for the subject site of the application only. 3. The attached carport/garage is a requirement of .... this approval so that the dwelling will be more similar in appearance to other homes in the neighborhood. 4. The placement and use of the structure and any accessory structures shall conform to all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. All permits and requirements by the Building Department and County Health Department for the foundation, installation, utility hook-ups, etc. shall be complied with. In granting this approval , the Board bases its decision on the following findings of fact: 1. The construction, inspection, and siting of the dwelling unit are equivalent to the requirement that the unit be of 'conventional construction ' as defined in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance because a. The letter submitted by the City of Mesa states that the building was inspected by the City of Mesa during the course of dllan construction and in fact complies with the 1985 UBC, 1985 UMC, 1985 UPC, and 1987 NEC which are updated editions of the adopted City of Apache Junction codes. b. The dwelling will be attached to a perma- nent foundation and utility hook-ups, to be inspected by the City, and c. The size, materials, and appearance of the dwelling unit are similar to that which is typical in the neighborhood. Motion passed 4-0-0 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES JULY 11, 1988 PAGE EIGHT 41. Chairman told the applicants their request was approved. He asked staff if the Board could have a worksession. 42. Mr. Newcomer replied one could be scheduled. 43. Castro/Kelley M/S to adjourn at 8.03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Charles R. N wcomer, Executive Secretary en anc ez, aiL"r�ian