Airport Board of Adjustment Minutes - 07/25/2001`W A
MINUTES
AIRPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
July 25, 2001
PRESENT:
RECEIVED IN
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Date b Y- D ( - C
Stephen Scarlott, Chairman ♦ Members
Ken Birck •
Rick Boone
David Mitchell •
David A. Clark, Director of Community Development ♦ city staff
Steve Seese, City Planning Administrator
Marty Odom, Planner I
ABSENT:
Preston Giles •
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Scarlott at 1:45 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 27, 2001 MEETING
Mr. Boone made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Birck seconded the
motion. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote in favor.
III. REGULAR AGENDA
1. Case ABOA 01 -02
Variance — To Expand A Building Within A 50' Buffer Area of Approach /Departure
Clearance Zone
4304 Alpine Drive
Applicant .......... ............................EMD Electrical, Inc./ City of Wichita Falls
Requested Action .. .......................Variance
Purpose ........... .............................To expand an existing building within a 50 foot buffer area of
an Approach /Departure Clearance Zone.
Property .............. ..........................1.893 acres, Block. 4, replat Twin Oaks Park, Block. 4,
Cherokee Co. SL.
Planning & Zoning Commission July 25, 2001 Page 1
Location ............ ...........................This site is located at the southwest corner of Twin Oaks
Street and Alpine Drive.
Existing Land Use ........................Vacant land, zoned Light Industrial (LI)
Surrounding Land Uses & Zoning N: ABC Roofing and Siding, GC
S: Vacant land, LI
E: Ferguson Plumbing and Heating, LI
W: EMD Electrical Inc., LI
Commentary.
This site is a 1.89 acre tract of land presently owned by the City of Wichita Falls. The property
owner to the west, EMD Electric Inc., wishes to purchase or lease the property from the City
and expand their existing building onto this property. The height of the existing building is 13.5
feet. The height of the proposed expansion will not exceed 15 feet.
Section 6455 C, of the Zoning Ordinance states: "Except as otherwise provided in this
provision, no structure or obstruction shall be erected, altered or allowed to grow in any zone
created under these regulations to a height in excess of 50 feet below the applicable height of
the surface used to describe such zone."
This particular location falls within the Approach /Departure Clearance Zone. The
Approach /Departure Clearance Zone at this location calculates to a maximum height of 19
feet. After adding the 50 foot buffer as required in Section 6455 C, the calculated maximum
height is 31 feet below ground level. The applicant is requesting a variance from the 50 foot
buffer requirement to construct to a maximum height of 15 feet. The proposed project will
meet FAA regulations.
Currently in the area there are several structures that penetrate the buffer including several
utility, telephone, and light poles. These poles are approximately 30 to 35 feet in height.
Therefore, obstructions already exist that penetrate the buffer at a greater height than is being
proposed.
The Board must determine in its findings that all the below criteria are met prior to awarding a
variance.
1. A literal application or enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary hardship; and
2. The granting of the relief would:
a. result in substantial justice being done;
b. not be contrary to the public interest; and
C. be in accordance with the spirit of the regulation.
Planning & Zoning Commission July 25, 2001 Page 2
Recommendation:
Since the City of Wichita Falls owns the property and is a co- applicant in this case, staff is not
making a recommendation in this case.
Mr. Seese commented that any reference to EMD Electrical Inc. should be replaced with EMD,
Inc. Mr. Seese stated when he reviewed the area, he found several telephone and light poles
encroaching into this buffer zone that are less intrusive that the applicant's proposed building.
He noted there was no staff recommendation in the staff report, but he asked the Board for a
favorable consideration for this variance.
Mr. Bruce Parker, applicant, stated that he has tried to buy the adjacent land (to the west) for
expansion but the owner is not willing to sell because he plans to expand his business. Mr.
Parker commented that his building is 13.5' at the center line; he has removed the air
conditioners and will not relocate them there. If this variance is not passed, he will have to
relocate because he needs more space for expansion. The new facility would be connected to
the older building and set up for offices.
Mr. Mitchell asked about the intent of the buffer zone. Mr. Seese stated that there is more
training and a wider variety of aircraft using Kickapoo AirPark and this ordinance was created
to limit structure height.
Mr. Birck commented that the buildings that exceed the buffer zone probably proceeded the
Zoning Ordinance and it does not appear they have been a threat to aviation or human safety.
He stated he was in favor of this request. Mr. Boone agreed.
Mr. Mitchell, also a member of the Dean Dale Water Supply Corporation board, stated his
concern was that, "the City of Wichita Falls wouldn't allow us to run a water line up the Upper
Charlie Road that was a non - attachable water line because of the airport zone. They didn't
want any more houses in the area. And we understood that. We spent quite a few thousand
dollars running it a different way. And I'm wholeheartedly against this, if it's good for the
goose, it's good for the gander."
Chairman Scarlott reminded the Board about a case several years ago that was approved
where a gentlemen wanted to attach a double -wide trailer to an existing single wide trailer to
improve his living conditions. This situation was similar since both office buildings would be
attached. Mr. Mitchell declared "that was a noise abatement issue only, he [the applicant] was
putting in a better structure for noise abatement."
Mr. Boone stated this structure would not damage the approach end and he saw no problem
with this. Mr. Birck stated he supported the applicant.
Chairman Scarlott stated he supported the applicant with this application. The City owns this
property and currently must maintain it; the use will alleviate this responsibility as well as
providing income to the City and creating new jobs in the community.
Planning & Zoning Commission July 25, 2001 Page 3
Mr. Birck made a motion to grant the variance. Mr. Boone seconded the motion. The vote
was three (3) in favor and one (1) opposed. The variance did not pass. Mr. Seese stated the
motion failed because it takes four (4) affirmative votes.
Mr. Birck suggested the Board reconsider. Mr. Seese stated this is a separate issue dealing
with airport zoning regulations which was created prior to the buffer zone being put in and Mr.
Mitchell's issue was related to land use density, residential development, noise zones, etc.
There are different circumstances involved in both cases.
Mr. Mitchell stated that was not correct, "it was a transmission line that no one could tie their
housing onto, by contract with the City of Wichita Falls. Therefore it wouldn't have added any
housing, it couldn't have added any housing. It was within Dean Dale's certificate of necessity
area." Mr. Seese asked for a reason for his defenestration for the record. Mr. Mitchell stated,
"we are not actually giving a variance here, I think doing what a different board should be doing
and that's changing this ordinance to allow everything to meet the requirement for what is in
the area at this time. The ordinance was made more stringent to protect public. If it was made
more stringent, then why aren't we abiding by it? If we aren't abiding by, then let's change it
back to at least let any one, I feel for these people, I really do. But if they want to build there,
then go back to the board that created this and ask them to change the zone or change the
ordinance so it allows anyone so that it allows anyone to come within the standards that are
there now."
When asked if this case could be appealed to City Council, Mr. Seese responded that the
appeal process would be through state district court.
Mr. Birck stated "the variance clause exists for special situations, such as this one. We are
dealing with a business that employees, improves the tax base, improves the appeal of the
City economically and otherwise. The structures have been in non - compliance since 1985 and
they have not been a threat to navigation or to human safety. This expansion will not worsen
conditions but certainly will enhance the economy. I think we should go forward."
Chairman Scarlott stated that boards function for the purpose of discussion and arriving at the
best solution. "I would hate for this board to be a tit - for -tat type of thing." He expressed
concern for employees that might lose their jobs if the business were to relocate.
Chairman Scarlott asked if it was this board that took the action he previously explained. Mr.
Mitchell stated it was not; he was using the example that the City would not negotiate an
agreement with Dean Dale Water Supply Corporation if we ran our line through that are
because they were afraid somebody might build there and we had a contact with them not to
tie onto that line, it was a transmission line only. It was just an example."
Chairman Scarlott stated that the previous case he talked about was also an example but it
concerned noise. He would hope that every case brought to this board is judge on its own
merits and not compared to actions of another board. I see this [the approval of this case] as a
very viable thing, a money maker for the City, provides jobs. Our sole job on this board is to
Planning & Zoning Commission July 25, 2001 Page 4
approve or disapprove variances to this ordinance. And all cases must be judged on their own
merits. Each case should be separate. Mr. Birck added, "and not according to precedence."
Mr. Mitchell stated that he wholeheartedly agreed with them. He did state substantial justice
would be done if we granted this ordinance. But, they should not be contrary to the public
interest. The public interest was protected in the ordinance. The ordinance said not within that
area. Now there were people [buildings] were grandfathered or you [the City] bought them out
and moved them somewhere else. The taxpayers paid for the consultant to tell them what to
put in the ordinance." Mr. Birck stated that all the variations could not be anticipated by the
consultants. Mr. Seese stated that is the uniqueness of the board of adjustment because no
one can anticipate every situation that will come up.
Chairman Scarlott noted that in his opinion this case was an expansion of an existing building
and that is why he was concerned about it being connected. He couldn't see why this board
would deny an expansion. Mr. Birck observed that there was only one neighborhood response
and it was favorable. The neighbors certainly do not seem opposed to this case.
Mr. Mitchell stated he "did not feel right going against it, but in reading what I read and practice
what I practiced, I don't believe we are within our realm to grant a variance."
Mr. Birck asked Mr. Parker what options were available if this variance were to be denied. Mr.
Parker stated he would relocate his business to Dallas. To questioning he responded that he
has 22 employees and plans to increase that to 32 employees; $1.8 million is the current
payroll with an increase to $3-4 million after the expansion. Mr. Birck stated that was
substantial and we could not lose that.
Chairman Scarlott suggested that another motion be made with a personal statement by Mr.
Mitchell added for the record. Mr. Birck made a motion to approve the variance as presented.
Mr. Mitchell seconded the motion. Mr. Mitchell declined to comment. The vote was four (4) in
favor and zero (0) opposed.
IV. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 2:11 p.m.
Stephen Scarlott, Chairman
ATTEST:
Date
Planning & Zoning Commission July 25, 2001 Page 5
Steve Sege, City PjaiKing Administrator
Date
Planning & Zoning Commission July 25, 2001 Page 6