Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Board of Adjustment - 9/27/2005 MINUTES ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 27, 2005 ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS M 11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE CALL TO ORDER: at or after 3:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Colleen Kessler, Chair Thomas Martin, Vice Chair Bart Schannep, Member Paul Parisi, Member John Hickey, Member MINUTES Approval of the Minutes of August 23, 2005 MOTION: A motion was made by Member Schannep and seconded by Member Hickey to approve the minutes of August 23, 2005 as presented. Motion carried, 5-0. Due to a conflict of interest Member Schannep excused himself from the case. 1. CASE NO. OV10-05-08: VALERIE FEUER FOR MMLA, 800 W. WETMORE, TUCSON, AZ 85719, REPRESENTING FIRST AMERICAN TITLE TRUST 9022, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR LOTS 82 AND 83 OF VERDE RANCH SUBDIVISION. SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PARCELS #224-07-0860 & 224-070870) 11859 AND 11871 N. PROSPECT POINT PLACE, ORO VALLEY, AZ, 85737. Valerie Feuer, a representative from MMLA Psomas, explained that the applicant was requesting that the side yard setback on the south side of lot 82 and the side yard setback on the north side of lot 83 at the rear of the lots be reduced to 4 and 5.5 feet respectively. She reported that due to an error when the concrete company poured the foundation, the home on lot 82 was located too close to the property line with lot 83. She explained that the mistake was not discovered until the house was at an intermediate stage, fully framed and enclosed with preliminary mechanical, plumbing and electrical installation. In answer to a question from Chair Kessler, Ms. Feuer reported that if the variance was approved the plats would reflect a change in the lot lines between lots 82 and 83 to show the 5 foot on one side and the 4.5 foot on the other side. She added that the official document on file with the Planning and Zoning division does reflect the new changes. 09/27/05 MINUTES 2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector reported that First American Title and Trust were requesting to reduce the required side yard setback of 7.6 feet for both lots 82 and 83. She explained that the reduction for lot 82 was on the south property line only, from 7.6 feet reduced by 3.6 feet, leaving a 4 feet setback. She said that the reduction for lot 83 is on the north property line only, from 7.6 feet, reduced by 2 feet, leaving a 5.6 feet setback. She reported that the request was to relieve an error made during the foundation layout for lot 82. Dee Widero explained that the request was to encroach into the required side yard setback, in order to complete construction of two new homes within the Verde Ranch subdivision. The construction has been held up due to an error on the foundation layout for lot 82. She reported that in August of 2004, there was a request to adjust the property lines for lots 81, 82 and 83 prior to any submittal of house permits. She explained that the subject lots property lines were approved to be adjusted and were re- recorded with Pima County. She reported that when the adjustment pins were placed, the original pins were also in error left in place, hence causing confusion and misalignment of the foundation of lot 82, but the plans were approved with correct setbacks and dimension. She reported that all inspections during the time from excavation and layout to the present were all assumed from the incorrect pin. She said that after lot 82 was issued a pool and spa permit, the pool company was confused by multiple pins and discovered the error. She explained that the only solution without demolishing a home three quarters complete would be to request a reduction to the lot setback from the property line for both lots 82 and 83. She explained that this would allow both, lots 82 and 83 to meet the Fire Code regulation, but both homes would require a variance for zoning setback regulations. Staff finding of facts: • Currently lot 82 is in violation of zoning setback regulations. • The error occurred by not removing the original set of property line pins, and was not detected until the pool was about to be laid out. • If this request is approved, a minor plat change to the lot lines will be required to be recorded, prior to future owner certificate of occupancy. In answer to a question from Member Martin, Chief Civil Deputy Town Attorney Joe Andrews explained that only the original contractor has the authority to remove their survey pins. He reported that it would be against State Law to pull another builder's survey pins. Chair Kessler opened the public hearing and swore in all witnesses that were intending to testify. Donna Gill, 411 West Ontario Street, Chicago Illinois, the applicant explained that an error had occurred and that the error did include everyone who has been involved in the development of the home, however, she hoped the variance will be granted for Lot 82. 09/27/05 MINUTES 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR Dick Monroe, 5460 East Broadway, real-estate agent representing the applicant of Lot 83, explained that his client understood that a mistake had been made and had no problems with the adjustment of the setback to their property. Chair Kessler closed the public hearing. MOTION: Member Martin moved to approve Case No.OV10-05-08, a request to encroach into the side yard setback from the required 7.6 feet, for both Lots 82 and 83. Motion failed for lack of a second. MOTION: Member Hickey moved to Deny Case No. OV10-05-08, finding that the 5 very special and specific criteria items had not been met. Member Parisi seconded the motion. Discussion: Chair Kessler reiterated that the Board does have specific parameters that had to be followed for a variance approval, but personally disagreed with the motion to deny. She stated that she did not believe the circumstances had been created by the owner, but was an oversight and an unfortunate mistake. She said that the variance would not impose any special condition or be detrimental to the community or sabotage the spirit of the Zoning Code if the variance was approved. Member Parisi sympathized with the applicant and builder but supported the fact that the Board had to adhere to the 5 criteria, therefore, as a member of the Board he did not feel comfortable approving the variance with the special circumstance, because he believed the situation was self imposed. In answer to a question from Member Martin, Joe Andrews explained that it was a combined responsibility between the owner and the builder to insure and verify the property's foundation and layout. Don Hatcher, 3275 West Ina Road, reported that the building official had not detected the error but the pool company. He reported the fact that all of the parties involved had acknowledged the mistake and hope the Board would understand. Member Hickey stated that according to state law all 5 criteria had to be met and in his opinion, criteria numbers 2 and 3 has not been met. Vice Chair Martin stated that he did not believe the mistake was deliberately self- imposed. He believed that there was a "letter of the law" and a "spirit of the law", and in this particular instance, in his opinion, all 5 criteria were satiated and the applicant should be allowed to enjoy their property rights now and not have to defer the time period. Chair Kessler agreed. Rudy Carrillo, a representative from Heritage Home, clarified that even though the ownership of the property had not been officially closed, the potential buyer does have beneficial ownership. 09/27/05 MINUTES 4 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR Donna Gill explained that the way that home cost has been increasing in the past year, it might be impossible for her to purchase the home if the builder chose to void the current contract and increase the cost of the home. Joe Andrews explained that essentially the property owner and builder holds the title but some of the rights are in the hands of the person who contracts to purchase the property, therefore, he affirmably did not disagree at all with Rudy Carrillo comments. ROLL CALL Chair Kessler— nay Vice Chair Martin — nay Member Parisi — aye Member Hickey— aye Motion failed, 2-2, due to a tie vote. MOTION: Vice Chair Martin moved to approve Case No. OV10-05-08, request to encroach into the side yard setback from the required 7 foot 6 inches, for both Lots 82 and 83. Chair Kessler seconded the motion. ROLL CALL Chair Kessler— aye Vice Chair Martin — aye Member Parisi — nay Member Hickey— nay Motion failed, 2-2, due to a tie vote. MOTION: Member Parisi moved to continue Case No. OV10-05-08 to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Member Hickey seconded the motion. ROLL CALL Chair Kessler— aye Vice Chair Martin — aye Member Parisi — aye Member Hickey— aye Motion carried, 4-0. 2. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES AND OPERATING PROCEDURES Discussion and possible action on the Rules and Operating Procedures Member Schannep returned to the meeting a 3:57 p.m. 09/27/05 MINUTES 5 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR Chair Kessler gave a brief historical perspective of the Rules and Procedure guidelines development to bring the new Board members up-to-date. In addition, she reported that the Town Council has directed the Board to develop a more streamline document, and that Member Hickey had developed such a document. She explained that the revised version of the rules and procedures had been made available for each Board member. She requested that the members individually review the document and submit any additional recommended changes at the next regularly scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting. There was discussion regarding the following issues: • The training manual. • Notification of the study session meeting held on August 31, 2005. • Information in the Zoning Code and the training manual. • The evaluation procedure. • A member's term limit. • Rules and procedures that is mandatory by State Law. • The rotation of the Chair and Vice Chair. • Cases of Appeal. • The Zoning Code. • Ex Parte contacts. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Member Schannep moved to adjourn the meeting at 4:39 p.m. Member Hickey seconded the motion. Motion carried, 5-0. Respectfully submitted, • O ` Ar Apii/cAdk} Linda Hersha, Office Specialist