HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - Boards of Adjustment - Meeting Date: 12/12/2019MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
COUNCIL CHAMBERS BUILDING
CONFERENCE ROOM B3
5850 W. GLENDALE AVENUE
GLENDALE, ARIZONA 85301
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 12th, 2019
4:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 PM.
ROLL CALL
Committee members present: Chairperson Erminie Zarra, Vice Chair Cathy Cheshier,
Lawrence Feiner, Brian Britton, and Benjamin Naber are present.
Committee members absent: none
City staff present: Lisa Collins (Interim Planning Administrator), George Gehlert (Planning
Staff), Jenna Goad (Assistant Director, Public Affairs), Samantha Cope (Administrative Support
Staff), Russ Romney (Deputy City Attorney), and Christina Lavelle (City Staff) were present.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Chairperson Zarra asked for citizen comments, and no citizen comments were made.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
A motion to approve the November meeting minutes was made by Mr. Feiner and seconded by
Mr. Britton. All were in favor.
2020 CENSUS OUTREACH
Ms. Goad gave a presentation for the 2020 census. Ms. Goad made a point to express the
significance of census, and thus, the importance of accuracy for the census. The census deadline
is April 1, 2020, and the response can be done via mail or online. Ms. Goad then explained ways
to identify census workers, how much revenue each citizen produces to the city when included in
the census, and then encouraged the board members to share all of the information they learned
with anyone they know.
WITHDRAWALS AND CONTINUANCES
There were no withdrawals, but Ms. Collins noted that the ZIL 19-02 CATILN COURT will be
addressed in the January meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
VAR19-03: APARTMENTS VARIANCE FOR SIDE YARD SETBACK REDUCTION:
Mr. Gehlert gave the presentation to the Board. A request by Edmir Dzudza and Leonard
Saguid, representing the property owners V Homes, LLC, for approval of a Variance for the
property at 6632 West Maryland Avenue (zoned R-4 Multiple Residence), in order to reduce the
required 20 -foot perimeter setback required by the Glendale Zoning Ordinance (Sec. 5.430 — R-4
Zone, Table 2 - Multiple Residence Districts Development standards). Staff Contact: Ge )rge
Gehlert, Planner (623) 930-2597
The applicant is requesting a reduction of the required 20 -foot perimeter setback to seven
(7) feet on the east boundary; and five (5) feet on the west boundary. The Board must consider
the facts and determine if the findings required to grant a variance have been satisfied. The
Board may condition a variance to ensure that it will not grant special privileges inconsistent
with the limitation of other similarly zoned properties. The Board must deny the request if the
required findings have not been met.
Staff Findings and Analysis
1. There are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the property including its
size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, which were not self-imposed by the
owner.
The long, narrow lot configuration makes it difficult to develop the four units allowed by -fight
(together with required access, parking and landscaping improvements).
2. Due to the special circumstances, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would
deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties of the same classification
in the same zoning district.
The 20 -foot perimeter setback, applied to this lot with the adoption of the current setback
standards in 1993, narrowed the building envelope to 19.5 feet wide, creating further difficulty
achieving the four units allowed by right.
3. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the property hardship.
Again, the configuration of the lot makes it hard to achieve the four units allowed by right,
without some measure of setback reduction. The proposed setbacks seem reasonable, given the
adjacent development.
4. Granting the variance will not have a detrimental effect on the property, adjoining
property, the surrounding neighborhood, or the city in general.
Staff finds no significant impact. The property to the west is commercial. The single-family
home to the east features a similar (7') setback.
Recommendation
If the Board decides to grant variance, it should be subject to the following stipulations:
1. Development shall be in conformance with the applicant's notification letter and site plan
included in the Citizen Participation Plan Final Report, dated 9/24/19.
2. Administrative Design Review approval.
Proposed Motion
Move to approve VAR 19-03 per the findings and subject to the stipulations above.
After Mr. Gehlert gave the presentation, Mr. Dzudza provided further information in regards to
the dimensions, and then the board was asked if they had any questions. Vice Chair Cheshier
asked why this was presented to the Board of Adjustment instead of elsewhere, which woald've
accommodated those setbacks. Ms. Collins explained this is brought forward as a variance
because the lot is irregular. In this case, anything other than a variance would not be appropriate
for this case. Vice Chair Cheshier asked about the covered parking the properties have, and then
inquired about the neighboring properties.
After the public hearing closed, the board voted per each finding with the help of Mr. Romney.
1. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
2. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
3. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
4. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
Vice Chair Cheshier made a motion to approve the variance (subject to stipulations), and it was
seconded by Mr. Naber. All voted "aye" in favor, and none opposed. Variance granted.
VAR19-04: DOPA VARIANCE FOR FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACK
REDUCTION:
A request by Santos Ugalde, representing the property owner, Silva Vanesa Palafox, for
approval of a Variance for the property at 6735 N 61st Avenue (zoned R-3 Multiple Residence),
in order to reduce the required 20 -foot perimeter setback required by the Glendale Zoning
Ordinance (Sec. 5.420 — R-3 Zone, Table 2 - Multiple Residence Districts Development
standards). Staff Contact: George Gehlert, Planner (623) 930-2397.
. The applicant is requesting a reduction of the required 20 -foot perimeter setback to seven
(10) feet on the north boundary; and five (5) feet on the south boundary. The Board must
consider the facts and determine if the findings required to grant a variance have been
satisfied. The Board may condition a variance to ensure that it will not grant special privileges
inconsistent with the limitation of other similarly zoned properties. The Board must deny the
request if the required findings have not been met.
Staff Findings and Analysis
1. There are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the property including its
size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, which were not self-imposed by the
owner.
The lot is not wide enough to accommodate the required setback and still provide a reasonable
building envelope.
2. Due to the special circumstances, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would
deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties of the same classification
in the same zoning district.
The 20 -foot perimeter setback, applied to this lot with the adoption of the current setback
standards in 1993, narrowed the building envelope to 10 feet wide, rendering the lot virtually
undevelopable as a residence.
3. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the property hardship.
3
Again, the lot is undevelopable without some measure of setback reduction. The proposed
setbacks seem reasonable, given the adjacent development.
4. Granting the variance will not have a detrimental effect on the property, adjoining
property, the surrounding neighborhood, or the city in general.
Staff finds no significant impact.
Recommendation
If the Board decides to grant variance, it should be subject to the following stipulations:
1. Development shall be in conformance with the applicant's notification letter and site plan
included in the Citizen Participation Plan Final Report, dated 11/01/19.
Proposed Motion
Move to approve VAR19-04 per the findings and subject to the stipulation above.
After Mr. Gehlert gave the presentation, Mr. Ugalde made a quick comment to. encourage the
board to approve the motion. Vice Chair Cheshier then asked for clarification about the
dimensions, and Ms. Collins explained this is a common setback that would be :seen with this lot
type.
After the public hearing closed, the board voted per each finding with the help of Mr. Romney.
1. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
2. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
3. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
4. Mr. Naber, Vice Chair Cheshier, Mr. Feiner, Mr. Britton, and Chairperson Zarra all said,
"aye."
Mr. Naber made a motion to approve the variance (subject to stipulations), and it was seconded
by Mr. Britton. All voted "aye" in favor, and none opposed. Variance granted.
STAFF REPORT
Ms. Collins did not have a staff report.
BOARD COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Vice Chair Cheshier asked about the map placed in her packet, and it was condoled that it was
erroneously placed in the packet. No other business, board comments, or suggestions were.made.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting will take place on Thursday, January 9th, 2020, at 4 PM.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Feiner made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and it was seconded by Mr. Britton.
Samantha Cope
Recording Secretary
4