Loading...
Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 11/17/1999MINUTES i BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT' 9 F November 17, 1999 PRESENT: Rainer Hanold, Chairman 0 Members John Key 0 Bobby Redwine 0 Michael Norrie 0 Alternate 1 Steve Seese, City Planning Administrator 0 City Staff Paul Stillson, Planner II 0 Diane Parker, Recording Secretary 0 ABSENT: Don McKinney 0 Members Charles A. Peters, III 0 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 1:38 p.m. by Chairman Hanold. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Redwine made a motion to approve the minutes from the June 18, 1999 meeting. Mr. Norrie seconded the motion. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote. III. REGULAR AGENDA Applicant ................. ...........................Bing D. Miller Property ................... ...........................2019 Victory Requested action ........ .......................Variance Purpose .............. .............................To allow the construction of a residence 5 feet from the side street instead of the required 15 -foot setback. Commentary: The applicant is requesting a variance to construct a residence that will be setback 5 feet from the side street (exterior side). Section 3140 (7) of the Zoning Ordinance requires a 15 -foot setback on the exterior side in a residential development. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • PAGE 1 The applicant's property is a 50 x 150 -foot lot at the southeast corner of Victory Avenue and Harrison Street. The property is part of the Harrison Addition, platted in 1925. The requirement for a 15 -foot side setback was incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance in 1985. It was based on a similar provision in the Subdivision Ordinance. The exact date that the 15- foot setback was adopted is not known, but it most likely was adopted in the 1950's or 1960's. In subdivisions designed to have 15 -foot setbacks, the corner lots are nearly always wider. That extra width allows the corner lots to have the same buildable area as interior lots. In the applicant's subdivision, all of the lots are the same width. Implied in that design is the concept that corner lots would have a five -foot setback on the exterior side. There are numerous examples of structures that were built here and in other parts of the city, (Floral Heights Addition, for example) with five -foot setbacks along the exterior side. Special Conditions /Hardships: The applicant has cited the following special conditions. Staffs response follows each comment: "This lot is 50 foot wide, to meet the new building code, this would take 20 feet away from the lot and look completely out of place in the neighborhood." Response: As stated earlier, this provision is not new, as it has been in place for over thirty years. The applicant is referring to a twenty -foot setback consisting of five feet on the interior side plus 15 feet on the exterior side, leaving a 30 feet as the maximum buildable width. In a standard interior 50 -foot lot, there is a five -foot setback on either side of the property, leaving 40- foot maximum buildable width. "This property was established years ago, so we feel that the new building code should not affect this lot " Response: Again the setback requirement has been in place for some time. The size of the lot was clearly not the result of actions by the applicant. "This is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Wichita Falls and we are requesting that this house conform to all the other houses in the neighborhood" Response: Literal interpretation of the provisions of the ordinance may deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by others in the neighborhood. "This is an established neighborhood and the only lot left in this block, so we are not asking for any more or less [setback] that the other homes around it." Response: Staff investigated the exterior side setbacks along Harrison and found that none of them had a 15 -foot setback. The corner lot north of this lot has a five -foot setback on the exterior side. The corner lot to the south has a six -foot exterior side setback. Analysis: In evaluating a variance request, 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 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - PAGE 2 Response: The setback regulations were developed to provide consistent development regulations throughout the city. Even in cases where the original plat did not establish a setback, front, side and rear setbacks are set out in the Zoning Ordinance. It is only in instances on corners where a 15 -foot setback is a problem. B. Special conditions exist, other than financial, hardship alone, whereby a literal enforcement of the terms of this Ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship to the owner of the land. Response: The width of the lot and the conditions in the neighborhood may be considered a special condition. C. The variance will not permit an activity upon the land which is not allowed by the terms of this Ordinance. Response: A single - family residence is a permitted use in this zoning district. D. The granting of the variance is consistent with the intent of this Ordinance, is in harmony herewith, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Response: Granting of this variance is not inconsistent with the spirit of the ordinance. Matching existing setbacks would promote compatibility in the neighborhood. Recommendation: Staff feels that special conditions may exist based on the size of the lot and the conditions on the adjacent properties. Chairman Hanold stated it should be determined if this request for variance meets the established criteria and should this Board consider this request. Mr. Key made a motion. Mr. Norrie seconded. The motion was passed with a unanimous vote in favor. The applicant, Ms. Jody Miller, was sworn in by Chairman Hanold. She stated that if she is unable to obtain the variance, they would not be able to build the proposed house. Mr. Norrie inquired about neighborhood covenants. Mr. Seese said he was not aware of any; the City does not enforce deed restrictions because that is a private contract between the neighborhood and the property owner. Mr. Key made a motion to grant the variance request at 2019 Victory. Mr.Norrie seconded the motion. The variance passed with a unanimous vote in favor. IV. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m. Rainer Hanold, Chairman BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • PAGE 3 Date