Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - Boards of Adjustment - Meeting Date: 4/12/2001 MEETING MINUTES CITY OF GLENDALE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GLENDALE COUNCIL CHAMBERS BUILDING CONERENCE ROOM B-3 5850 WEST GLENDALE AVENUE GLENDALE,ARIZONA 85301 • THURSDAY,APRIL 12, 2001 7:00 P.M. The regular meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. by the Chairperson, Ron Piceno, with the following members and representatives present: BOARDMEMBERS PRESENT: Hector Castro Daniel Drew Robert Koehler Ron Piceno, Chairperson Ann Ransom Douglas Ward BOARDMEMBERS ABSENT: Gayle Laureta CITY STAFF: Ray Jacobs, Zoning Administrator Jim Flenner, Acting Deputy City Attorney Teresa Halverson, Planner Tabitha Perry, Associate Planner Linda Graham, Recording Secretary Chairperson Piceno explained the Board's policies and hearing procedures. Boardmember Drew made a MOTION to APPROVE the minutes from the March 8, 2001 meeting as written. Boardmember Ward SECONDED the MOTION. The motion PASSED by a vote of 6-0. Chairperson Piceno called for Business From the Floor. There was none. Chairperson Piceno asked staff if there were any requests for withdrawals or continuances. There were none. • Chairperson Piceno stated the Board is required to hold a public hearing before making a decision on a variance or appeal request. He explained the purpose of the public hearing is to provide interested parties an opportunity to present testimony for the Board's consideration. April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 2 Chairperson Piceno called for the first public hearing item on the agenda. APPLICATION NO.: ZV-00-34 REQUEST: A request by Andrew and Regina Truitt to allow a side setback of 10 feet where 15 feet is required in the SR-17 (Suburban Residence) zoning district. Located at 6911 West Stockman Road. Staff contact: Ray Jacobs (Cholla District). Ms. Perry presented the application, reviewing the site and request. She stated the request meets findings 1, 3, and 4, however finding 2 is debatable. Boardmember Ward asked if the corner of the home exceeds 10 feet. Mr. Jacobs explained the 10 feet is located towards the rear because of the angle of the lot. Chairperson Piceno asked how many houses in the area have setbacks of less than 15 feet. Ms. Perry estimated there to be two or three. Mr. Andrew Truitt, 6816 West Morrow, stated the property on McKnight is three houses to the north, noting another variance was granted at 6920 West Stockman last year. He said all properties prior to the zoning variance change in 1993 had the opportunity to go to 10 feet from the lot line. He stated the shape of his lot requires the variance and that his neighbors do not have any concerns about the design. He confirmed for Boardmember Ward that the corner of the house would be at 10 feet 6 inches. He explained going to 10 feet on that corner allows for side entry to the garage, noting a lot of the homes in the neighborhood have side entry garages. Boardmember Drew asked Mr. Truitt when he purchased the property. Mr. Truitt stated it was purchased in January 2000. He acknowledged that the zoning in question was in place for seven years at the time of purchase. Boardmember Drew asked if the 10 foot setback needs to run the entire length of the building. He explained his concern is that a subsequent owner may use the rest of the 10 foot setback to further expand the home. Mr. Truitt said he would be agreeable to restricting the 10 foot setback to the corner of the house. Mr. Jacobs suggested they limit the variance to the attached site plan. Boardmember Drew suggested the site plan be redrawn to reflect the 10 foot setback. Mr. Truitt noted the home is 4,600 square feet and questioned whether subsequent owners would feel it necessary to expand the home further. Chairperson Piceno opened the meeting up for public comment on this case. As no comments were made, he closed the public hearing portion of the case. Chairperson Piceno called for the applicant's closing remarks. Mr. Truitt stressed that the house blends into the neighborhood and is set back even with all other houses on the street. He stated April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 3 the design would have no detrimental effect on the neighborhood and neighbors have expressed no concerns about the project. Boardmember Koehler made a MOTION to APPROVE ZV-00-34, subject to the following condition: 1) The variance shall be consistent with the site plan submitted with the Application. Boardmember Ransom SECONDED the MOTION. Chairperson Piceno opened the floor to discussion. Boardmember Ward stated he would approve the motion so long as they restricted the 10 foot setback to the corner of the house. Board members Castro, Koehler,Drew, Ransom, and Chairperson Piceno concurred. Chairperson Piceno called for a Roll Call Vote. The MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6 to 0. Chairperson Piceno stated anyone wishing to appeal the Board's decision on this item may do so by contacting the Planning Department within 15 calendar days of the date of this action. APPLICATION NO.: ZV-00-38 REQUEST: A request by Scot and Tiffany Herschman to allow a 7- foot side setback where 10 feet is required in the R1-6 (Single Residence) zoning district. Located at 5519 West Mescal Street. Staff Contact: Ray Jacobs (Sahuaro District). Ms. Perry presented the application, reviewing the site and request. She stated the request meets all four findings. Ms. Tiffany Herschman, 5519 West Mescal Street, explained their intent is to add a family room on to their home, noting it was a feature on other homes in the area that the original owner of their home elected not to have. She submitted signatures of other homeowners in the area who do not object to their request. Chairperson Piceno opened the meeting up for public comment on this case. As no comments were made, he closed the public hearing portion of the case. Boardmember Drew made a MOTION to APPROVE ZV-00-38 as recommended by staff. Boardmember Ward SECONDED the MOTION. Chairperson Piceno opened the floor to discussion. The Board members agreed the request meets the required findings. April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 4 Chairperson Piceno called for a Roll Call Vote. The MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6 to 0. Chairperson Piceno stated anyone wishing to appeal the Board's decision on this item may do so by contacting the Planning Department within 15 calendar days. APPLICATION NO.: ZV-01-02 REQUEST: A request by Ross Smith representing Glen Harbor Blvd. II, L.L.C., for a variance in the M-1 (Light Industrial) zoning district to allow a zero (0) rear setback where fifteen (15) feet is required. The request is to allow for the development of a self-storage/mini-storage facility. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glen Drive and 110`h Avenue within the Glendale Airpark. Staff Contact: Teresa Halverson (Yucca District). Chairperson Piceno noted Mr. Smith contacted Board members in an effort to answer their questions. He stressed that no substantive discussion concerning the application took place. Ms. Halverson presented the application, reviewing the site and request. She stated the request appears to meet findings 1, 3, and 4, however finding 2 is debatable. She said if the Board decides to grant the variance, it should be subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. She explained staff revised Condition 4 to clarify that the wall, not all storage, would be screened by landscaping. Boardmember Drew asked why they emphasized that the office would not exceed 24 feet in height. Ms. Halverson said the Glendale Airpark has a 56 foot building height limit and has a higher floor area ratio. She stated staff felt it was important to stipulate that the two story manager apartment/rental office not exceed 24 feet. Chairperson Piceno asked if the rest of the buildings, with the exception of the storage units on the north perimeter of the property, could go up to 56 feet. Ms. Halverson explained 56 feet is allowed under the Special Development Standards of the zoning ordinance. She confirmed for Chairperson Piceno that the applicant would have to go before the Board of Adjustment if, at some point in the future, they decided they wanted second stories added to the buildings. Mr. Ross Smith, 8801 East Raintree, asked Don Cramer, the project's architect, to review the project's elevations. Mr. Smith reviewed the site plan stressing that the property has an unusual configuration and is awkward to some degree. He stated granting the variance would have no detrimental effect on surrounding properties and the building would be a positive architectural addition to the Airpark. Boardmember Ward asked if there are any restrictions in the common area in terms of screening the north facing wall. Mr. Smith said he is not aware of any, however, it would have to meet with the Association's approval. He said their plans would be submitted to the Architectural April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 5 Review Committee for the industrial park at the same time they are submitted to the city for Design Review. Boardmember Ward asked where drainage would go. Mr. Smith said drainage would go into a retention basin to the south of the property. In response to Boardmember Ransom's question, Mr. Smith stated the properties to the east and along the frontage to the south are also owned by their firm. He said they currently have no plans for development of those properties. Boardmember Drew asked if the inside buildings would also be nine foot eight inches in height. Mr. Smith confirmed all of the buildings would be single story. Chairperson Piceno opened the meeting up for public comment on this case. As no comments were made, he closed the public hearing portion of the case. Mr. Smith stated they have no problems with staff's stipulations. He clarified that their proposal was to plant a row of trees along the north wall that would eventually create a visual barrier, not to screen the wall in its entirety. Ms. Halverson modified the stipulation to indicate that the exterior wall would be screened by landscaping. Boardmember Drew made a MOTION to APPROVE ZV-01-02 subject to the following stipulations: 1) The variance is valid only for the development of the property with a self- storage/mini-storage facility; 2) Development shall be in substantial conformance with the preliminary site plan dated January 30, 2001; 3) The height of the rental office/manager's apartment shall not exceed 24 feet in height. The height of the storage units on the north perimeter of the site shall not exceed 9'8"; and 4) The northern exterior wall shall be screened by landscaping from the open space/retention tract. Boardmember Ward SECONDED the MOTION. Chairperson Piceno opened the floor to discussion. All Board members indicated they would support the motion. Chairperson Piceno called for a Roll Call Vote. The MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6 to 0. Chairperson Piceno stated anyone wishing to appeal the Board's decision on this item may do so by contacting the Planning Department within 15 calendar days. APPLICATION NO.: ZV-01-04 REQUEST: A request by Alex and Paulina Simon to allow a separation of 1170 feet where 1320 feet is required for a group home in the SR-17 (Suburban Residence) zoning district. Located at 6932 West Stockman Road. Staff contact: Ray Jacobs (Cholla District). April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 6 Mr. Jacobs presented the application, reviewing the site and request. He said the request meets findings 1, 2, and 3, however, finding 4 is debatable. Boardmember Ransom noted the public has been asked to address the variance regulations only and questioned where people would go if they wanted to address the use of the property itself. Mr. Jacobs explained uses are controlled by the zoning ordinance of the particular zoning district. Anyone wanting to address the use of the property would have to address the zoning district in question. Mr. Tom McCarthy, 5540 West Glendale Avenue, Suite B-105, applicant's representative, said his clients went through the City of'Glendale and were acquainted with the regulations for the opening of a group home. He stated they entered into an interminable agreement to purchase a particular residence and went to the City of Glendale to determine if a group home would be permitted at that location. He said the home purchased was suitable for a 6 to 10 resident group home, however the cost of the home made it unsuitable for a group home of smaller size. He submitted copies of the City's clearance letter dated November 29, 2000, stating his clients purchased the home based on that clearance. He said his clients have done nothing to cause the hardship and the request is for the minimum necessary to alleviate it. He stated approval of the variance would not have a detrimental effect on the neighborhood, whereas denial of the request would result in a severe economic hardship for the applicant. He asked the Board to grant the variance, stressing use of the property is not at issue. Boardmember Koehler asked if all necessary licenses have been obtained. Mr. McCarthy said the licenses have not been obtained because the letter was withdrawn by the city. Boardmember Castro asked when the property was purchased. Mr. McCarthy stated it was purchased on December 6, 2000, immediately after obtaining the letter of clearance. He noted the rescision letter was dated December 29, 2000. Chairperson Piceno opened the meeting up for public comment on this case. Mr. Robert Young, 6929 West Stockman Road, said he and others in the neighborhood are very disturbed by the application. He noted work was performed on the house after the date of the rescission letter. He said he and his neighbors bought into a single family, residential neighborhood and do not support a group home. He expressed concern about the number of people that would reside at the home and questioned whether the septic system would be adequate. Mr. David Burtis, 18020 North 69th Drive, concurred work was performed on the house without a building permit having been issued. He stated approval of the application would have a detrimental effect on his property. He pointed out the applicant failed to get permits from the Maricopa County Health Department for the septic system. Boardmember Ward asked Mr. Burtis if he was aware of the other group home in his neighborhood. Mr. Burtis stated he was not. April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 7 Mr. Richard Osborn, 6901 West Stockman Road, concurred with the previous speakers, stating all of the neighbors hope the application is not approved. Mr. Andrew Truitt, 6816 West Morrow, said he contacted the applicants and expressed his concerns. He stated the applicants did not appear to care about his concerns or those expressed by others in the neighborhood. He stated the applicant's request should not be granted just because the City of Glendale made a mistake. He stated any claim the Applicant has against the city should be handled in a court of law, not in this venue, because the variance, if granted, would stay with the property in perpetuity. He said approval of the application would have a detrimental effect on their property. Ms. Kim Klokkenga, 17849 North 69th Avenue, suggested a poor attempt was made at notifying the neighborhood, noting she never received a letter. She said the current limitation of 1,320 square feet between group homes allows for approximately every fourth house in the neighborhood to be a group home. She asked that the Board continue to hold to that established limitation, stating an exception to that rule would set a precedence. She expressed her opinion the city should also enforce a density limitation. Mr. Ward asked Ms. Klokkenga if she was aware of the other group home in her neighborhood. Ms. Klokkenga said she was aware of one group home in her area and, since learning of this case, she has been made aware of two others. Ms. Julie Skrzypek, 7050 West Stockman Road, said they chose to buy in that neighborhood because the homes were spread out and the area had a rural character. Ms. Francine Gehr, 6921 West Stockman Road, stated she never received a notice from the applicant. She questioned what effect the variance would have on their property value. Boardmember Koehler asked Ms. Gehr if she did not receive notice of the zoning variance request or notice of a group home. Ms. Gehr stated she did not receive either notice. Mr. Arthur Gehr, 6921 West Stockman Road, asked the Board not to approve the request. Ms. Rachael Simeon, 5940 West Pershing, stated she owns a group home called Group Care Home. She suggested others in the neighborhood were not aware of the group homes already in existence in the area because they make good neighbors. She said most group homes invest a great deal of money in their property and, as a result, the value of their properties are higher than others in the neighborhood. Mr. John Vetter, 7041 West Riser, stated he does not want a group home located in his neighborhood and he would not have bought his house had he known one was planned. Ms. Roberta Osborn, 6901 West Stockman, stated the residents in the neighborhood should not have to suffer because the city made a mistake. April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 8 Mr. McCarthy explained notification letters are provided to the city who then designs and operates the system through which they are sent out. He stressed that the applicant is requesting a nominal variance in distance and that it represents the minimum necessary to accomplish their intent. He reiterated the hardship was not imposed by the applicant and denial of the request would result in a significant economic loss for the applicants. He assured the Board that Mr. Simon would make all necessary applications should their request be granted. Chairperson Piceno closed the public hearing portion of the case. Boardmember Drew asked about the notification letters. Mr. Jacobs explained the city reviews the proposed area of notification and the applicant sends the letters out. Boardmember Drew made a MOTION to APPROVE ZV-01-04. Boardmember. Ransom SECONDED the MOTION. Chairperson Piceno opened the floor to discussion. Boardmember Koehler said, while he has sympathy for the property owner, he is not sure the request meets findings 1 or 2. He said he does believe the request meets finding 3, explaining he has not seen any evidence that approval of the request would plower property values in the area. Boardmember Drew said he believes finding 1 was met, but that he is not sure finding 2 was. In regard to finding 3, he expressed his opinion that the good of a neighborhood should not be overridden because of a mistake. He stated finding 4 was not met and he believes the variance would have a negative effect on the neighborhood. Boardmember Ward stated the distance requirement was established with a particular purpose in mind and granting the subject variance would precipitate other requests. Boardmember Castro said he does not believe all four findings were met, therefore he cannot support the motion. Boardmember Ransom agreed group homes make for good neighbors, stating, however, single family neighborhoods should not be targeted with more than their fair share of them. She stated the request does not meet all four findings, therefore she has to oppose the request. Chairperson Piceno agreed finding 4 was not met. Chairperson Piceno called for a Roll Call Vote. The MOTION FAILED by a vote of 6 to 0. Chairperson Piceno stated anyone wishing to appeal the Board's decision on this item may do so by contacting the Planning Department within 15 calendar days. April 12,2001 Board of Adjustment Page 9 Chairperson Piceno call for Other Business. There was none. Chairperson Piceno called for the Planning Staff Report. Mr. Jacobs pointed out they have two new staff members. He noted Boardmember Ransom would not be in attendance at the May 10 meeting. Chairperson Piceno called for Board Comments and Suggestions. There were none. As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. CYgZ) %k4&i.71 Linda Graham, Recording Secretary