Loading...
Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 09/20/2017MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT September 20, 2017 PRESENT: Warren Gardner, Chairman Cari Beesinger Guidry Steve Lane Dave Waddell James McKechnie, Asst. City Attorney Matt Prouty, Planner 11 ABSENT: Mark McBurnett Jerry Cedrone Thomas Yoder Tyson Traw David Lane Dee Reyes I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Warren Gardner called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. 0 Members 0 Alternate 42 0 0 0 Legal Dept. 0 City staff 0 Ex -Officio 0 Alternate 44 0 Alternate 41 0 0 0 Alternate 43 II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Gardner introduced the ZBOA members. The microphone was adjusted for clearer recording. III. MINUTES Mr. Dave Waddell made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 17th, 2017 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting. Ms. Cari Beesinger Guidry seconded. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote in favor. IV. REGULAR AGENDA 1. Case V 17-02 Request for a variance to allow the extension of an existing building in the required exterior side setback area in a Single Family 2 Residential (SF -2) zoning district at 4728 Neta Lane. Mr. Matthew Prouty introduced the qualifying criteria for case V 17-02. He stated the applicant and architect for the project, Mr. Michael Koen, was representing the Edgemere Church of Christ. He stated the church, located at 4728 Neta Lane, was BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 2 Septerr ber 20 2017 requesting a variance in order to construct an extension to an existing building that would encroach 14 feet 3 inches into the 25 foot exterior side setback. Staff notified 23 surrounding property owners and received 3 responses in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 with no opinion/undecided. Mr. Prouty stated Edgemere Church of Christ had been constructed on the site in 1962. He stated that modern setbacks were not a feature of the land at the time of the original plat. He stated the property was replatted in 2013 with a modern 25 foot building limit line on both the front and exterior side setbacks. He stated without the variance to the exterior side setback, the planned addition would not be possible. He stated staff had determined that the variance would not expand the degree of non -conformity that already existed. Mr. Prouty stated granting the variance would not create a use that was not allowed within the Single Family 2 Residential (SF -2) zoning district. If the variance were granted, the church would continue to meet the needs of the community without creating or expanding the degree of non -conformity. The structure would not encroach further into the 25ft BLL (building limit line) than the existing building already did. He stated staff believed granting the variance would not negatively impact the adjacent properties or create a public safety hazard in the residential neighborhood. Mr. Prouty stated staff felt the qualifying criteria had been met met and recommended review of the evaluation criteria. Chairperson Gardner asked if there was any discussion on the qualifying criteria from the members, and there was none. Mr. Steve Lane made the motion to accept the qualifying criteria of Case V 17-02. Mr. David Waddell seconded. The motion was taken to a vote and passed unanimously. Mr. Prouty presented the evaluation criteria for the case. He stated staff believed the granting of the variance would not be contrary to the public interest and the applicant's hardship was not a financial hardship. He stated granting the variance would not permit an activity upon the land which was not allowed by the terms of the zoning ordinance and would not be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare. Mr. Prouty stated staff recommended approval of the applicant's request for a variance from Appendix A - Section 6.10 Lots & Setbacks of the Subdivision and Development Regulations of the Wichita Falls Code of Ordinances, which would allow an encroachment of 14ft 3in into the exterior side setback along Greenbriar Road. Mr. Michael Koen stated that when the building had been constructed Greenbriar Road did not exist and there were no easements on the property. Chairperson Gardner asked if there was anyone else from the audience who wished to speak, and there were none. Chairperson Gardner opened the motion for discussion among the Board. There was no discussion. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 3 September 20, 2017 Mr. David Waddell made the motion to approve the evaluation criteria for Case V 17-02. Mr. Steve Lane seconded the motion. The motion on the evaluation criteria was taken to a vote and passed unanimously. 2. Case V 17-03 Request for a variance to allow a wheelchair ramp in the required front setback area in a General Commercial (GC) zoning district at 906 Denver Street. Mr. Matt Prouty introduced the qualifying criteria for case V 17-03. He stated Mr. John A. Erickson, applicant and architect for the project, was representing Mr. Brad Darland and Mrs. Natalie Darland, owners of Graduates Sales located at 906 Denver Street. He stated the request was to allow an ADA compliant wheelchair ramp to be constructed in the required front setback area for the business located in a General Commercial (GC) zoning district. Staff notified 18 surrounding property owners and received 0 responses in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 with no opinion/undecided. Mr. Prouty stated the applicants were requesting to construct a 36in. wide and 16ft. long wheelchair ramp in front of their business Graduate Sales in order to provide ADA compliant access to clients with physical disabilities. The property consists of a one- story structure built in 1910 that is utilized as an office building. The building is situated on an interior lot, in a General Commercial (GC) zoning district. Mr. Prouty stated that because the business is open to the public, it falls into one of the 12 categories listed in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) that are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of disability in the activities of places of public accommodations, hence the request to provide a wheelchair ramp. The current ordinance denies the applicant the opportunity to construct a safe and legal ramp to utilize the front door as, hence denying a non-ambulatory person to use the front and only public entrance door. Furthermore, the current Zoning Ordinance (Appendix B) Sec 4220 Projections and structures allowed in setback areas, does not list the construction of ramps in the setbacks as an allowed structure. ADA wheelchair ramps are backed by the federal government. According to Appendix A - Section 6.10 Lots & Setbacks, Subdivision and Development Regulations of the Wichita Falls Code of Ordinances, "Uncovered steps, porches, or patios that are no more than two feet above the adjacent grade may be placed within the required setback area". Because the proposed 18 in. tall ramp will include rails, making it more than the maximum 2 ft. above the adjacent grade, it violates the setback requirements of the zoning ordinance. Currently, ADA ramps are not a recognized structure allowed to be constructed without receiving a variance by the ZBOA. According to 2010 ADA Public Accommodations and Commercial Facilities (Title 111) Title 111 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in the activities of places of public accommodations and requires newly constructed or altered places of public accommodation—as well as commercial facilities—to comply with the ADA Standards. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 4 September 20, 2017 Planning and Building Department staff worked with the applicant regarding other possible ramp configurations located on the side, rear or inside of the existing structure. As a result, planning staff informed Mr. Erickson that the qualifying criteria appears to be met for a variance to allow an ADA compliant ramp to be constructed in the front setback along Denver Street. Mr. Prouty stated staff felt the qualifying criteria had been met and recommended review of the evaluation criteria. Chairperson Gardner thanked Mr. Prouty. Mr. Prouty proceeded to present the evaluation criteria for case V 17-03. Mr. Prouty stated there are special existing conditions/circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or building in the same district. Staff agreed that a reasonable accommodation & modification is appropriate since the structure was constructed in 1910 and has not been altered. The existing conditions as well as the travel distance from ramp to accessible parking locations at the site create special conditions and unique circumstances which are peculiar to this structure. A second evaluation criteria which was met was that the demonstrated special condition /circumstance did not result from a prior action from the applicant. The applicant's statement "the existing front entry is the only public entrance ....it would present a hardship to add another entry..." There is insufficient space to incorporate a ramp on the side. Staff responded and confirmed the structure was built in 1910 and the current owners have maintained the structure in its original form until now. The rear of the building is used for storage. Mr. Prouty elaborated on the third and fourth points within the evaluation criteria. The granting of the variance is consistent with the intent of this ordinance, is in harmony therewith; and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare. Mr. Prouty concluded that based on the evaluation criteria being met, staff recommended approval of the applicant's variance for case V 17-03 and requested review of the evaluation criteria by the ZBOA. Chairperson Gardner asked if there were any questions from the audience or board, there were none. Mr. Dave Waddell made the motion to approve the evaluation criteria for Case V 17-03. Mr. Steve Lane seconded the motion. The motion on the evaluation criteria was taken to a vote and passed unanimously; variance was granted. V. NEW BUSINESS Chairperson Gardner requested new business. City staff had none. VI. ADJOURN The Boa d'Iurned at 3:05 p.m. Chairperson Date