Loading...
Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 01/20/1995MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 20, 1995 PRESENT: Tom Hill, Chairman Members Dr. Edwin C. Bebb Roger Murphy Charles A. Peters, III Jane Hermann * Alternate #1 Bill Daniel * Council Liaison Steve Seese, City Planning Administrator City Paul Stillson, Planner III Marty Odom, Planner I Diane Parker, Recording Secretary ABSENT: None I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by Chairman Hill. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Seese stated the minutes from the December 20, 1994 meeting should be amended to includ Mr. Bill Daniel, Council Liaison. Mr. Peters made a motion to approve those minutes with the amendment. Dr. Bebb seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. III. VARIANCE A. V 95-01 Reduce Front Setback to Ten Feet 1900 Block Bama Road GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant/Property Owner: Randy Wachsman Purpos-: Variance from the provisions of Section 4240 (e), to allow reduced setbacks on one side of the street only. Property: 1900 Block of Bama Road, unplatted PAGE 2 dENT JANUARY 20, 1"S Existing Land Use: Zoning: Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: COMMENTARY Vacant Single Family Residential North: Vacant, residences, SF-2 South: Weeks Park Golf Course, LC East: Residences, SF-2 West: Holliday Creek, SF-2 The applicant is currently developing a reduced setback residential subdivision. To qualify for reduced front setbacks, Section 4240 requires that both sides of the street must be platted. As only one side of the street will be platted, a variance is requested. The entire Section 4240 is reproduced below. "4240 FRONT SETBACK FOR REAR ACCESS SUBDIVISIONS. In single-family, duplex, or zero lot line residential lots, where the only vehicular access is taken from a rear alley or private access easement, which is at least twenty (20) feet wide, the front setback may be reduced to five (5) feet, provided: a. The lots abut only a residential street and not any larger street sections. b. The sidewalk is constructed abutting the curb and has at least 4 feet of unobstructed width. c. All utilities located in the front yard or the street right-of-ways are placed underground. d. No vehicular street access or curb cut is permitted. e. The entire block on both sides of the street between intersecting streets is platted at one time with a statement on the plat that front vehicular access and curb cuts are prohibited." The property is part of a proposed 34-lot subdivision approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission in November, 1994. A variance is requested for nine reduced setback lots facing Bama Road; they will have a ten -foot building limit line with rear access. The subdivision will meet all the requirements of Section 4240 except subsection (e). SPECIAL CONDITIONS/HARDSHIP The applicant has cited the following as special conditions/hardships: "Approved replat of lots (to zero lot line lots) require floor plans to be narrow and deep. In order to have adequate driveway and turning radius for rear entry garages. The front building limit line needs to be reduced form 25 to 10 feet." 2. "Applicant owns the property north of Bama and the City of Wichita Falls owns the property south of Bama (Weeks Park Golf Course)." 3. "Ordinance states that in order to reduce front building limit line, homes constructed on both sides of the street must have same building limit line, and all homes on both sides of street will be rear entry. Applicant cannot meet these requirements because he does not own both sides of Bama Road." 4. "Applicant cannot abide by the ordinance because he does not own both sides of Bama Road. Also the land on the south side of Barna Road is owned by City of PAGE 3 Wichita Falls is currently a golf course and will always be a golf course, and will never be 'eveloped into residential lots." CONSISTENT WITH ZONING ORDINANCE INTENT The intent of Section 4240 (e) is to accomplish the following: a. Promote the orderly development of land, by providing reduced setbacks as a development option, b. Assure setback consistency by requiring both sides of the street be platted concurrently, c. Prevent the situation where there is front access on one side of the street and not the other. Conditions on the applicant's lot: The site of the proposed subdivision is now vacant, undeveloped land. Conditions in the general area: There are no existing structures along this section of street. On the south side of Bama Road is Weeks Park Golf Course, a City -owned facility. No residential similar construction along here is probable, since the City, at this time, is not likely to sell any golf course property for development. STAFF ANALYSIS The purpose of Section 4240(e) is to prohibit different setbacks and access requirements on opposite sides of the street. Here the lots are across from a golf course, where no development will occur, creating a special circumstance. The requirement of Section 4240(e) assumes that both sides of the street are available for development and did not address this kind of situation. Approving this variance would be consistent with the intent of Section 4240(e). RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that special conditions do exist in the general neighborhood and recommends approval of this variance request. Ms. Hermann stated there is a complaint from the neighbor across Lake Park Drive expressing a concern for the property values. She asked if this was a valid issue. Mr. Seese stated it is an issue the Board could consider. He further stated an appraisal report has not been submitted by those opposing this case. Ms. Hermann then inquired about market analyses to prove or disprove the devaluation of property. Mr. Randy Wachsman, applicant, was swom in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Wachsman stated this case was presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission several months ago and property values were discussed at that meeting. He also stated that reducing the setbacks would not change the surrounding property values. He remarked that the complaining property owner's house is appraised at $70,600 and his model will be approximately $160,000. Mr. Wachsman commented that this property owner believes her home is worth $200,000 - 250,000. Mr. Wachsman stated the ordinance r -rtaining to this matter was passed due to his deve'-nment, Rainberry Park. He explained there was no front entry and the home buyers did not wa. yards. He further commented that he was hoping to attract homeowners that preferred smaller ya ;is. He explained that the size of the home and the turning radius from the alley into the garage warrants the reduced setbacks. He also explained the difference in the setbacks between this subdivision and the Rainberry Subdivision. Mr. Wachsman stated he was presenting this case to the Board of Adjustment because he does not own the property across the street. PAGE 4 Chairman Hill stated that Mr. Wachsman development would be an asset to the area. Mr. Seese explained the response packets that the members received at the beginning of the meeting. Mr. Peters asked if the City had obtained any appraisals. Mr. Seese replied that the Board could request an appraisal before a decision is made; however, the City does not generate appraisals. Mr. Peters asked if the Tax Appraisal Office could offer assistance. Ms. Hermann explained the difference between the tax appraisal and a real estate appraisal. Ms. Hermann inquired about the size of the homes to be built. Mr. Wachsman stated the homes would range in size from 1,700 to 2,500 square feet. He also stated this development requires a variance because the ordinance states the houses must be rear entry and the setback reduction must apply to both sides of the street. The other side of the street is a City golf course. Mr. Seese stated that, if Mr. Wachsman owned the opposite side of the street, both sides of the street could have setbacks reduced without approval of the Planning & Zoning Commission and this Board. He further stated the issue presented today is due to the other side of the street being City property which prevents Mr. Wachsman from conforming to the regulation. The purpose of this Board is to make allowances for special circumstances or for unique hardships in order to fulfill the intent of the ordinances. Mr. Seese stated that staff has based their recommendation on the fact that the City owns the property across the street which creates the special condition. He further stated it is this Board's decision to determine if Mr. Wachsman is fulfilling the intent of the ordinance. Ms. Hermann stated she does not have a problem with this setback reduction. Dr. Bebb asked if the objection regarding the property devaluation was a valid objection. Mr. Seese stated that objection would need to be proved. Dr. Bebb stated his observation from driving around the area was that the surrounding homes did not appear to be as large as Mr. Wachsman's proposed homes. He asked if the property values of the proposed homes are relevant factors in the approval of this variance. Mr. Wachsman stated that his houses would have the same selling price regardless of the decision on the setbacks. Dr. Bebb stated he was in favor of this variance. Dr. Bebb asked if it would be a valid reason to deny a variance if a proposed building would devalue the property in the area. Mr. Seese stated it would be a valid reason and he reminded the Board if Mr. Wachsman owned the other side of the street he would not need approval. Mr. Dennis Probst was swom in by Chairman Hill. Mr. Probst stated a 10 foot building limit line is proposed around the cul-de-sac. Mr. Probst stated the issues of property values, traffic, etc. were addressed at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting when this case was heard and approved. Ms. Hermann made a motion to approve this variance. Dr. Bebb seconded the motion. Mr. Peters, Mr. Murphy, Dr. Bebb, Ms. Hermann, and Chairman Hill voted to approve the request. IV. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 a.m. Tom Hill, Chairman L-3 �/ y � Date ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 20, 1995 PAGE 5