Loading...
Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 10/16/1985M M I N U T E S MW ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 16, 1985 PRESENT Bob Balch, Chairman Joan Mason, Vice Chairman Imma Jeanne Alexander Members David Gossom, Alternate #2 X Robert Seabury AN Roger McKinney, Director of Planning X Jeanie Thompson, Assistant City Attorney Subir Mukerjee, Development Coordinator 4r Bernice Prchal, Planner II City Staff Paul Stillson, Planner II Barbara Bridges, Secretary X ABSENT Bill Rowland Member 40 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Balch called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Joan Mason, seconded by Mrs. Alexander, and carried with none opposed that the September 18, 1985 Minutes be approved. BUSINESS ITEMS - PUBLIC HEARING ON VARIANCES AND ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS 1. V-85-19. Request to reduce the rear setback line of a through lot (Sec. 4320) at 4304 Kemp Blvd (Faith Village Unit III, Lot 3A, Blk 73) Board members reviewed the variance application submitted for Adam Nacol. Mr. Mukerjee advised Mr. Nacol is proposing a retail jewelry and office machines store for this site. A conditional use approval has been obtained from the Planning & Zoning Commission. This request for variance to reduce the rear setback from 25' to 15' is recommended for approval by the staff because the property line along Wolfe Street will serve as the rear property line, and a 6' privacy fence will be erected along this property line which will screen the commercial use from the residences and prohibit access onto Wolfe. It was brought out the ordinance requires maintenance of the privacy fence, so if it deteriorated in the future, it must be repaired by the property owner. After discussion, it was moved by Mr. Seabury, seconded by Mrs. Alexander, and carried with none opposed that the variance be granted. co Item No. hIN5 Page No. / 1" -13- 2. V-85-26. Request for alley access for a commercial establishment (Sec. 6210G) at 1601 Bluff Street (Lot 9A, Blk 12 Jalonick Addition) Mr. Mukerjee advised this request involves the conversion of an existing church (III into an adult day care center. The applicant requests use of the alley as access for commercial activity, and the staff recommends denial of the request. Although the church previously used the alley for access, the use of the property is being changed, and the building expanded; therefore it is felt alley access could not be grandfathered. Further, the 9' alley is not designed for two-way traffic and is not constructed to street standards for through traffic. The Board was addressed by Mr. Aubrey Vordenbaum, contractor. Mr. Vordenbaum stated the owners do not want to construct off-street parking as recommended by the Planning Department, and are requesting alley access for exiting the property only. This would better accommodate the elderly, and perhaps handi- capped people who would be closer to the entrance. Mrs. Mason referred to a previous variance request which was denied by the Board because the Legal staff had advised the physical condition of the property owner was not a basis for a variance. After discussion, Mr. Gossom stated he feels the argument for grandfathering is valid. Jeanie Thompson, Assistant City Attorney, advised the Board could not take action on this as an appeal to an administrative decision, as the Notice of Meeting had not covered this as a business item. It was therefore moved by Mr. Gossom that the Board make a decision on the variance request and so table the request for administrative appeal until notification can be done. This motion was seconded by Mr. Seabury and carried with none opposed. I.t was then moved by Joan Mason that the Board deny the request for variance because there is lack of special condition and hardship. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Alexander and carried with none opposed. 3. V-85-27. Request for alley access for a commercial establishment (Sec. 6210G) at 800 Indiana Street (Lots 1 & 2, Blk 175, Sec. 3-6 Original Townsite) Mr. Mukerjee advised the staff recommended approval of this request for the following reasons: - The lot is located in the CBD and 8 parking spaces will be eliminated if alley go access is denied. - The alley has 25' of pavement, and alleys in the CBD are designed and main- tained for use as secondary thoroughfares. This provides enough room for traffic even with a delivery vehicle parked. - All surrounding uses are commercial. The intent of the ordinance to protect residential use of alleys is irrelevant in this area. The Board was addressed by Dick Bundy of Bundy, Young & Sims, the architectural at firm. He noted alley access already exists, and the request is only to add another opening. Mr. Seabury stated if the purpose of restricting alley access is to protect residential property, and there is no residential property in an area, couldn't the ordinance be reworded to make this a little easier? Mr. McKinney agreed it could be. It was brought out such a change would have to be originated by the Planning & Zoning Commission, with a public hearing process, and it was requested that this issue be reflected in these Minutes. do Item No. -14- page No, _�� After further discussion it was moved by Mrs. Alexander that the request be approved based on the fact that it is located in the CBD, there is 25' of pavement, the surrounding uses are commercial, and the alley could accommodate one-way traffic. The motion was seconded by Robert Seabury, and carried with 4 'in favor' by Balch, Mason, Alexander, and Seabury, and 1 'opposed' by Mr. Gossom. 4. A-85-1. Appeal of a staff decision denying construction of a 2,000 sq. ft. storage garage in an SF2 zone at 3239 Northwest Drive (Wichita Garden Home- steads, Tract 26A, Blk 26) as Mr. Mukerjee advised the staff recommended denial of this request because a structure of this type and size is of commercial stature. Furthermore, a 2000 sq. ft. storage garage is not incidential to a 1200 sq. ft. residence. The Board was then addressed by Harold Hawkins, realtor. Mr. Hawkins originally advised the Board this building would house antique cars owned by the prospective purchaser of the property. When questioned about the size AV of the building, he stated it would be also be used for ceramics by the applicant's wife. Mrs. Alexander questioned what the use of this building might be in the future if the property were sold, as it could be used, for A example,as a motorcycle or muffler shop, or something else that could adversely affect the neighborhood. Mr. Seabury noted that under the circumstances, perhaps the applicant should request a rezoning. ,s After further discussion it was moved by Mrs. Mason that the request be denied because the building is too large for this type of SF2 classification. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Alexander, and carried with a vote of 4 'in .favor' by Balch, Mason, Alexander, and Gossom, and 1 'opposed' by Mr. Seabury. 5. V-85-28. Request to exceed the height limitations in an LC zone (Sec. 3410(7)) is at 3001 Southwest Parkway (Lot 1, Blk 1 Midwestern Farm Subdivision) Mr. Mukerjee advised the staff recommended approval of this request because the building site is adjacent to a major arterial and a major collector, and similar height buildings may be constructed immediately west of this property. Also, the intent of maintaining residential privacy for adjacent dwellings is not violated since they are approximately 500' apart. After discussion it was moved by Mrs. Alexander that the Board approve a variance to exceed the height limit to 65' in this LC zone. The motion was seconded by Robert Seabury and carried with 4 'in favor' by Balch, Alexander, Gossom and Seabury , and 1 abstention by Mrs. Mason. 5. Executive Session pursuant to Article 6252-17, Sec. 2, Paragraph E of the Revised Civil Statutes Regular Board members moved to the Council Conference Room to hold the executive session. The Board returned to the Council Chambers to adjourn at 3,:30 p.m. J Bob Balch, Chairman Item No. M Page No. 3 -1 5-