Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 05/18/2005A
t
MINUTES
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
May 18, 2005
PRESENT:
Tom Cross
Jose Garcia
Michael Latham
James McNeil
Steve Wood
Ray Gonzalez
Paul Stillson, Planner II
Diane Parker
ABSENT:
Les Seipel, Chairman
Dave Lilley
I. CALL TO ORDER
Acting Chairman Cross called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Latham noted that in the minutes
members were noted as being alternates
minutes with the correction; Mr. Wood
approved.
III. REGULAR AGENDA
i
�xl
RECEIVED IN
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Datej
0 Members
0
0
0
0 Alternate #1
0 City Staff
0
0 Member
0 Alternate #2
of the April 20, 2005 meeting, two regular
. Mr. Latham made a motion to approve the
seconded. The minutes were unanimously
1. Case V 05 -02
Reduce the 25 -foot Building Setback Along Jarmon Drive
4729 Neta Lane
General Information:
Applicant: Wichita Christian School
Property: Lot 2, Block 1, Kemp and Newby Subdivision.
Requested action: Request for a variance to reduce the required 25 -foot setback
along Jarmon Street
Purpose: To allow the construction of an addition to the existing school
building that would extend closer than the required 25 -foot setback
from the property line along Jarmon Street.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • PAGE 1
Commentary:
The applicant, the Wichita Christian School, is requesting a reduction of the minimum
25 -foot building setback along Jarmon Street. They plan to add an addition to the north
side of the school building, shown below. A variance will allow a larger addition; the
request is based on a claim of special conditions.
Qualifying Criteria:
1. Special conditions or circumstances exist 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.
Applicant's statement. "The City of Wichita Falls required the school to dedicate
20 feet of our property, which is an unusual amount of land to be dedicated from
one side of a street."
2. Demonstrate the special conditions and circumstances do not result from
the actions of the applicant.
Applicant's statement: "The street dedication /setback was [required to be]
dedicated by the [platting requirements of the] City of Wichita Falls. The school
had no control over or say in the matter."
3. State how literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would
deprive the applicant of a right commonly enjoyed by other properties in
the same district under the terms of this Ordinance.
Applicant's statement: "There is a house on the corner of Spiser and Jarmon
which sits on the property line which prohibits or prevents the widening of the
street."
4. State how the granting of the variance would otherwise be in harmony with
the objectives of this Ordinance and would not confer upon the applicant
any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands,
structures, or buildings in the same district.
Applicant's statement: "There is already another house that is on the property
line. Our building would sit behind the existing property line that the other house
is on."
In 2001 the school property was replatted. During the replat approval process, the City
required dedication of additional land for the right -of -way of Jarmon Street. Jarmon
Street had a 30 -foot wide right -of -way, less than the standard 50 -foot width. To make
up the difference, a 20 -foot dedication of land was required. The City did not require the
school to widen the street pavement, which is only 21 feet wide. A standard local street
pavement is 30 feet wide. After the dedication of the additional right -of -way, there is a
distance of about 25 feet from the curb to the property line of the school.
Staff identified several factors that could be considered special conditions:
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • PAGE 2
1. Because there is an adjacent residence on the corner of Spiser and Jarmon, it is
unlikely that the rest of the 20 -foot strip can be obtained without condemnation.
The residence is about 18 feet from the curb of Jarmon Street.
2. The street is only a block long, with low traffic volume, making pavement
widening a very low priority City reconstruction project.
3. The right -of -way is larger on the applicant's side of the street, probably more
land than what will be required for street pavement widening. Staff estimated
there is about 5 feet of land between the pavement and the property line on the
other side of the street.
Evaluation Criteria:
In evaluating a variance request, once it has been determined by the Board that the
request qualifies to be heard, the Zoning Ordinance Section 7340 requires that the
following criteria be used:
a. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the public interest.
Staff feels that the public interest would be served if the Board decides to grant a
variance based on a finding of a special condition or hardship.
b. Special conditions exist, other than financial hardship alone, whereby a
literal enforcement of the terms of the Ordinance will result in unnecessary
hardship to the owner of the land.
Staff has identified the possible special conditions regarding the street and
adjacent residence as special conditions.
C. The variance will not permit an activity upon the land that is not allowed by
the terms of the Zoning Ordinance.
The property is zoned single family residential; a conditional use permit was
approved for this secondary school use in 2001. A new conditional use permit
will be required for the addition.
d. The granting of the variance:
Is consistent with the intent of this Ordinance;
The intent of the requirement for minimum right -of -ways widths and
setbacks is to provide adequate space for roads and utilities, and to
provide a visual corridor along streets. If the Board determines that a
hardship or special conditions exist, the granting of a variance would be
consistent with the intent of this ordinance.
Is in harmony therewith;
Staff feels that this proposal would be compatible with the existing
residential development in the area.
Will not be injurious to the neighborhood;
This proposal should not be in conflict with adjacent uses.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • PAGE 3
Or detrimental to the public welfare.
Granting this variance should not harm the long -term economic
development of the City or affect the public in the long -term through
function, appearance, or layout.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this variance to reduce the setback by 10 feet, thereby
establishing a 15 -foot setback along Jarmon Street. This would provide a setback more
typical of construction in other areas.
Consideration of Qualifyin_m Criteria:
Mr. Stillson presented the qualifying criteria. He stated that it would be doubtful if the
City would consider widening this street because it is only one block long and doesn't
have much traffic. Mr. Latham asked if the City would have first right of refusal if the
house on Spiser Lane were to go up for sale. Mr. Stillson stated that the City could not
prohibit the sale of the house or place conditions on the sale.
Mr. Latham made a motion to approve the Qualifying Criteria. Mr. McNeil seconded.
The Qualifying Criteria was approved with a unanimous vote.
Consideration of Evaluation Criteria:
Mr. Stillson presented the Evaluation Criteria. He noted that staff recommended
reduction of the setback by ten feet. Acting Chairman Cross asked what the maximum
reduction could be; Mr. Stillson replied that any number would be appropriate; however,
there should be some setback or the setback ordinance would be required to be waived
(by City Council). Mr. Latham inquired about public safety vehicles; Mr. Stillson
explained that when the site plan is reviewed by the Planning office that issue will be
addressed.
Ms. Janna Lee, 4900 Bel Air, stated she is a board member for the school. She stated
the school would have more options with a 10 -foot setback; however the school would
be pleased with any reduction. She commented that classrooms and library/technical /-
science labs were being considered for construction. To questioning, Mr. Stillson
responded that the variance is valid for 180 days. He suggested the school submit a
preliminary drawing during that time frame.
Mr. Latham made a motion to approve the variance application to establish a 10 -foot
setback; Mr. Garcia seconded. The variance passed with a unanimous vote.
IV. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m.
Tom Cross, Acting Chairman
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • PAGE 4
Date