Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 11/20/1985El
M I N U T E S
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
November 20, 1985
to PRESENT
Bob Balch, Chairman X
Imma Jeanne Alexander
Robert Seabury
Richard Sutton, Alternate #1 � Members
William Kidd, Alternate #3 �
Syd Litteken, Alternate #4
Subir Mukerjee, Development Coordinator X
Bernice Prchal, Planner II X City Staff
Barbara Bridges, Secretary X
ABSENT
.Joan Mason X
Bill Rowland X Members
It David Gossom, Alternate #2 X
M
El
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Balch called the meeting to order at 1:15 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by Mrs. Alexander, seconded by Robert Seabury, and carried with
none opposed that the October 16, 1985 Minutes be approved as printed.
BUSINESS ITEMS - PUBLIC HEARING ON VARIANCES
1. V-85-29. Request to reduce the number of trees required for a commercial
establishment (Sec. 6830(B)) at 400 Burkburnett Road (Original
Townsite, Lot 16B, Blk 75)
Mr. Kidd was the applicant for this business item, so Syd Litteken, Alternate
#4, replaced him on the Board. The quorum acting then was Balch, Litteken,
Seabury, and Sutton.
Mrs. Prchal advised the applicant has replatted 3 lots into 1 in order to
construct a 2400 sq. ft. building used as a lounge. Under the Zoning Ordinance
he is required to plant and maintain 8 trees on the site. However, he feels
3 trees should be adequate since he has redeveloped only a portion of lot.
Mrs. Prchal noted the Planning & Zoning Commission had reviewed this issue
last July and decided to retain all landscaping requirements of the ordinance,
M noting they are only minimum requirements at best, and additional landscaping
would be preferable. The staff recommended denial of the request based on
the fact there are no special conditions or hardships, and the ordinance is
explicit on the requirement for determining the number of trees.
rl
Item No. Mt N
-16- Page No. I____
M
Mr. Kidd addressed the Board, stating he would prefer to plant 3 large trees
rather than 8 little ones. This would provide some shade, and would be
barricaded for protection from customers driving in and out of the lounge.
He felt this should meet the intent of the ordinance, as the landscaping is
required for aesthetic reasons. It was pointed out the 8 trees could be
clustered together at the choice of the property owner.
After discussion it was moved by Bob Seabury that the variance be granted, as
since only a portion of the property is being redeveloped, and he would
rather see 3 large trees than 8 little ones. The motion was seconded by
Syd Litteken, but failed to pass with a vote of 2 in favor by Seabury, and 40
Litteken, and 2 opposed by Chairman Balch and Sutton. Therefore, the variance
was denied.
2. V-85-30. Request to construct a carport within the side setback area in an
SF2 zone (Sections 4220 and 3140(6)) at 2304 Talunar Lane (Sunset
Heights, Lot 14, Blk 5)
Acting members of the Board during the consideration of this business item
were Balch, Alexander, Sutton, Seabury, and Kidd.
The Board was addressed by the applicant, Mrs. Kathy Bullard. She advised
the existing garage is too narrow to accommodate either her or her husband's
car. They desire to construct a carport into the side setback area because
their backyard is small, and there are many large trees on the property.
Mrs. Prchal explained the staff recommendation for denial of the request,
including:
- Although inconveniences do exist, no legally based hardship has been sub-
stantiated. In addition, the lot is not rendered useless by denial of this
request.
- The public health and safety would be jeopardized.
- The intent of the ordinance explicitly prohibits buildings, including
carports, to be placed in setback areas.
It was brought out that expansion of the garage toward the house would add
approximately 3' in width. Dr. Sutton felt that since the garage already
violates the setback, expansion might be grandfathered. This would be more up
expensive, but would be a solution.
After further discussion, it was moved by Mrs. Alexander that the variance
be denied, based on the reasons as presented in the staff recommendation.
This motion was seconded by Robert Seabury, and carried with none opposed.
3. V-85-31. Request to reduce the rear setback requirement in an LC zone
(Sec. 3410(6)) at 1619 Midwestern Parkway (Southmoor Addition,
Lot 5-A, Block 8)
The Board was composed at the beginning of this business item by Balch,
Alexander, Sutton, Seabury and Kidd. Prior to the motion, Mrs. Alexander
had to leave, and Syd Litteken joined the Board.
so
Item No. S
Page No.
-17-
Mrs. Prchal and Mr. Mukerjee presented the reasons for staff recommendation
of approval of the request as follows: The lot is an irregularly shaped
C (triangular) lot, originally bisected by a utility easement which has been
relocated. Also, the proposed office complex backs up.to the carports of an
apartment complex. The purpose of the 10' rear setback requirement in LC
zones is to maintain a buffer between adjacent residences, which is not the
circumstance here.
The Board was also addressed by Gene Stephens, .the applicant and contractor
for the project. Mr. Stephens stated that due to the shape- and size of the
lot, and the parking spaces required, it is his opinion the lot would never
be developed with an LC use without a variance. Among other things, Dr.
Sutton stated a 10' setback would not deny any use of the property, just the
use proposed by Mr. Stephens, and the size and shape of the lot were known
prior to the purchase. Mr. Stephens advised plans for the complex were
begun prior to passage of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Mukerjee also stated
the issue is REASONABLE use, and it is felt that due to the special conditions
of the lot, a 10' setback would deny REASONABLE use of the property.
After further discussion, it was moved by Mr. Seabury that the variance be
granted due to the shape of the lot, and the difficulty of building on an
irregularly shaped lot. The motion was seconded by Mr. Kidd, and carried
with none opposed.
4. Add -on item
Chairman Balch welcomed the Alternates which have been appointed to the
Board by the City Council, and outlined the voting procedures.
The meeting adjourned at 2:25 p.m.
El
r,
M
Bob Balch, Chairman
Item No. ( `>
-18- Page No. 3