[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:07]
>> I WILL CALL THE CLAY COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING TO
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
ORDER FOR AUGUST 22, 2024. THE FIRST ITEM WE HAVE IS THE APPROVAL OF ARE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS MAY 23 2024. DO I HAVE ANY REQUESTED REVISIONS OR CHANGES, OR DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES? THERE IS ONLY TWO OF YOU.>> I WILL LET YOU MOTION TO APPROVE SINCE I WAS NOT THERE, I CANNOTVERIFY THE ACCURACY . [LAUGHTER]
>> I WILL MOTION TO APPROVE. >> I HAVE READ THEM, I WAS THERE, THEY DO SEEM CORRECT. I HAVE A MOTION FROM ONE OF THESE TWO, AND A SECOND FROM ONE OF THESE TWO WE DO NOT HAVE A RECORDING SECRETARY TONIGHT. [LAUGHTER].
ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES SAY AYE.
APPROVED THREE ÃZERO. THE SECOND ITEM IS OUR FIRST OF TWO PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD DURING THE MEETING.
THIS IS THE TIM OR ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC AND GET UP AND TALK ABOUT ANYTHING THAT IS ON THE AGENDA.
WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA. WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE WILL ALSO HAVE PUBLIC
[1. Public Hearing to consider Application BOA 24-0009; Variance to Article III, Sec. 3-13(f)(5) of the County Land Development Code.]
HEARING FOR THE AGENDA ITEM. I WILL CLOSE IT AND COME BACK TO WESTFORD NOW, I WILL GO ON TO A PUBLIC HEARING FOR BOA24-0009. >> MR. CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE, THE APPLICANTS ARE PETER AND KATHLEEN (NAME), THE AGENT IS MR. JEFFREY (NAME).
THE PARCEL IS LOCATED AT 6683 STATE ROUTE 21.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CLAY COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION THREE Ã13 ARTICLE III SEC.
3-12(F)(5) TO REDUCE THE SIDE SETBACK IN THE AR ZONING DISTRICT FROM 20 FEET TO 17 FEET.
HERE IS A PICTURE OF THE PARCEL.
IT IS A LONG, NARROW PARCEL. AS PRESENTLY DEVELOPED WITH THE MANUFACTURER DWELLING. THE PARCEL IS LOCATED ON STATE ROAD 21 BETWEEN SHANDS ROAD AND COUNTY ROAD 52.THE PARCEL STRETCHES THE LENGTH FROM STATE ROAD 21 DOWN TO SPRING LAKE.
AS I INDICATED EARLIER, THE PARCEL IS LOCATED IN THE AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.
IT HAS A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL. THE AR ZONING DISTRICT REQUIRES A SIDE SETBACK OF 20 FEET. THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS APPROXIMATELY 97.5 FEET IN WIDTH.
THE APPLICANT WISHES TO REPLACE AN EXISTING MANUFACTURED DWELLING UNITS WITH A NEW UNIT PWHICH IS A LITTLE BIT LONGER, AND WILL ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE SETBACK BY 3 FEET.
THE APPLICATION MATERIAL, WHICH WAS PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKETS DOES INCLUDE A LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY STATING THAT THEY ARE AGREEABLE WITH THE REDUCED 3 FOOT SETBACK. AS YOU ARE AWARE, THERE ARE SIX CRITERIA TO JUDGE VARIANCES AGAINST.
I WILL TOUCH EACH ONE, AND AS I INDICATED, THE PARCEL IS UNDER 100 FEET, 97.5 FEET. WHICH DOES ADD THE SIDE SETBACKS OF 2090 SIDE REDUCES THAT DOWN BY 40 FEET PER SETBACK IN WHICH TO PLACE ANY STRUCTURES.
NO OTHER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS, WITH THE PARCEL THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER PARCELS IN THE AR ZONING DISTRICT. THE EXISTING DIMENSIONS OF THE PARCEL WERE IN PLACE PRIOR TO REDUCTION OF THE COMPANY TO PPLAN AND 91. THE WIDTH OF THE PARCEL IS NOT A RESULT OF THE ACTION OF THE APPLICANT.
IT WAS CREATED THAT WAY, HOWEVER THE APPLICANT IS CHOOSING THE LENGTH AND SIZE OF THE NEW MANUFACTURER LIMIT TO BE PLACED ON THE PARCEL. AS I INDICATED, THEY HAVE
[00:05:05]
CHOSEN THE NEW STRUCTURE OF THE NEW DWELLING, IT WOULD RESULT IN AN ENCROACHMENT OF THE SIDE SETBACK.THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL CONFIRM THE APPLICANT APPROACH WHICH IS NEITHER OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AR ZONING DISTRICT BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK.
THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF AN ORDINANCE WOULD NOT DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY INTO BROTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AR DISTRICT. IT WOULD MEAN THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REPLACE THE PRESENT DWELLING UNIT WITH A UNIT IN THE SIZE THAT THEY DESIRE.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO REDUCE SETBACK TO 17 FEET IS THE MINIMUM REQUIRED TO BE ABLE TO LOCATE THE MANUFACTURER UNIT OF THE SIZE DESIRED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL ALLOW FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE MANUFACTURER UNIT DESIRED.
AS I INDICATED EARLIER, A LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL INDICATES THAT THEY HAVE NO ISSUE WITH ENCOURAGEMENT INTO THE SIDE SETBACK. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE SHOULD NOT BE INJURIOUS OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE . WITH THAT, STAFF FIND THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE SIDE SETBACK IN THE AR ZONING DISTRICT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS DUE TO A DESIRE FOR DWELLING UNITS THAT IS LONGER THAN THE EXISTING UNIT ON THE PARCEL. THE SIZE OF THE REPLACEMENT DWELLING IN THECHOICE OF THE APPLICANT .
STAFF RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SIDE SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO 17 FEET.
ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> MIKE, DO YOU KNOW OF THE EXISTING MOBILE HOME WAS PUT ON THE PROPERTY?
>> I DO NOT. >> WE HAVE A LOT OF AR ZONING.
THIS IS BEING HUNDRED FEET WIDE AND 2200 FEET LONG WE WERE SETTING UP FOR THE 25TH SETBACK ON THE AR,WE WERE THINKING THE PROPERTY , MOST OF THEM WERE 8000 X 2000, SO 20 FEET WHICH IS THE NUMBER. IF WE KNEW THAT WE ONLY HAVE 100 FEET TO WORK WITH, IF YOU WENT OUT THERE AND ACTUALLY MEASURED, PROBABLY A LOT OF THOSE WERE THERE BEFORE 87.
THE BUILDINGS ARE WE CLOSER THAN RIGHT NOW.
>> THERE WERE A LOT OF THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, ESPECIALLY ALONG THE LAKES, YOU SEE THEM MORE OFTEN.
>> I AM NOT SAYING THAT THEY ARE IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THAT LOT, JUST KIND OF LIKE HELPING THE LAKE YOU CAN OF THE FRONT YARD ON EITHER SIDE, MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT AND SAY MAYBE THE SIDE YARDS DON'T NEED TO BE 20 FEET
WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE 100 FEET. >> IS SOMETHING STAFF CAN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WITHTHE UPDATE .
>> ANYTHING WE DO AROUND THE LAKES, THE GOOD NEWS IS YOU ON 5 ACRES. YOU ALL HAVE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OF MIKE? >> I ASSUME YOU MUST BE MR. (NAME)? IF YOU IS THAT YOUR NAME AND
ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> I WILL, ESTEEMED CHAIRPERSON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
(STATES NAME AND ADDRESS). >> TO USE WITH EVERYTHING YOU ARE ABOUT STATE IS THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD?
I AM HERE AS AN AGENT FOR KATHLEEN.
WE ARE RIGHT HERE I'M SURE, ANY QUESTIONS THE BATHROOM TO I HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THE DATE OF THE HOME, IS ON THE DEED THAT WAS PRESENTED IN PACKET. IT IS A 1985 DOUBLE WIDE.
WE COULD ASSUME, I WOULD WANT TO ASSUME, THAT HOME HAS BEEN
[00:10:03]
THERE SINCE 1985. ANOTHER POINT ON THE FRONTAGE AND THE ZONING AND THEWIDTH OF THE LOT , WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GRAB ONTO AS A HARDSHIP, RIGHT NOW THIS IS 133 FEET OF FRONTAGE, BUT THEROAD, IF YOU LOOK AT IT , COMES DOWN AT AN ANGLE FROM THE NORTHEAST TO THE SOUTHWEST AT A PRETTY GOOD ANGLE. IT LEAVES ONLY 97.5 FEET OF WIDTH. IT WAS A LITTLE BIT LONGER, WE COULD OF GOT THAT WITH WHICH - - LOTS LIKE THIS.>> MEASURESPARALLEL TO THE ROAD .
[LAUGHTER].>> THAT IS A PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE.
BUT IF WE HAVE AN HUNDRED FEET OF WIDTH, - - ASKING TO DO.
WE DO HAVE A PHOTOOF THE HOME, I THINK THAT IS IN THEIR .
THE HOME WILL BE SET UP AND FULLY SKIRTED WITH ALL OF THE TOWING GEAR REMOVED. IN FACT, WITH THE NEW HOME, IT WILL FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK IT WILL BE AN ASSET.
>> MOST OF THEM ARE FURTHER OFF THE ROAD ANYWAYS.
>> YES, MAYBE A QUARTER-MILE OFF THE ROAD.
>> YOU BOUGHT THELAND FOR THE LAKE, IT SHOULD BE ON 21 .
>> YES. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. (NAME)?
>> I PROBABLY KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I ASSUME THE REASON FOR NOT TURNING THE HOUSE TO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE SETBACK IS TO HAVE THAT BACKYARD OR FRONT YARD ON THE LAKE?
>> I APPRECIATE THAT, YES. THAT CERTAINLY IS IT.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY TURN 845B0, OR EVEN 90B0 TO GET IT T FIT IN THERE. AND THE SLOPE IS SUCH THAT IN THAT 60 FEET, THE LAKE AND OF THE HOUSE IS 50 FEET OFF THE
>> WE SAW ONE LETTER FROM ONE LABOR, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING
[INAUDIBLE]. >> WE HAVE NO OBJECTIONS FROM
ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS. >> BUT THE LETTER SAYS THEY DO NOT OBJECT, THAT IS ON THE SIDE THAT YOU WANT TODECREASE IT
FROM 2017 ? >> THAT IS CORRECT.
[INAUDIBLE] >> OKAY, BUT INEED YOU ON THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE THESE ARE ALL RECORDED .
>> I'LL WAIT. >> I JUST HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION THEN, IT IS REDUCE SETBACK ON BOTH SIDES OF THE
ONE SIDE? >> JUST THE ONE SIDE, THE SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NO PROBLEM.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU JEFFREY, I APPRECIATE IT. NOW I WILL OPEN UP THIS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING SO ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE YOU WANT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST CAN COME UP AND GIVE YOUR TWO CENTS WORTH, BUT YOU HAVE TO BE IN THE MICROPHONE SO WE CAN HEAR YOU.
WE ARE ALL OFFICIAL, EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE WEARING A KANSA CITY JACKET . [LAUGHTER].
IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THERECORD, PLEASE .
>> (STATES NAME AND ADDRESS). TWO QUESTIONS.
I ALSO AM THE OWNER OF 6673 STATE ROAD 21.
NOW, WHAT THAT DOES, YOU ARE AWARE HOW LONG THE LENGTH OF THE LOTS ARE. THERE IS A BUSINESS ZONE LOT ON THE HIGHWAY, AND THERE IS A RESIDENTIAL LOT, I AM ASSUMING THAT IT MAY BE PART OF THE BUSINESS, I DO NOT KNOW WHERE THE PROPERTY IS THERE AND HAVE NEVER ASKED BECAUSE I DON'T CARE BUT, THERE IS A RESIDENTIAL HOME BEHIND IT HEADING TOWARDS THE LAKE. BEHIND THAT IS ANOTHER
[00:15:01]
RESIDENTIAL HOME AND THEN THERE IS 5673.AND THERE'S THE HOME ON THE LAKE BECAUSE OWN PROPERTY ON EAST AND REP WEST I HAVE NO OBJECTION WHATSOEVER, I DON'T KNOW IF THE LAST PROPERTY HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT, BUT IT SHOULD NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ADJACENT TO WHERE HEY WANT TO PUTTHE HOME. IT'S ONLY BACK ONE LOT.
THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THESE PEOPLE DOING WHAT THEY WISH TO DO.
NOW, YOU COULD PROBABLY ANSWER THIS .
I DO NOT KNOW IF IT WAS THE ORIGINAL DOUBLE WIDE OR SINGLE WIDE THEY GAVE YOU THE INFORMATION IT WAS PARKED THERE AND 85, WAS THAT DOUBLE BACK? THAT WAS A DOUBLE WIDE.
PRIOR TO THAT, THERE WAS A SINGLE WIDE.
I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS, THE ONE I PURCHASED MY PROPERTY, THEY SAID I COULD GO ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
IT WENT TO 10 FEET, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS TOLD THAT ONE TIME THE SETBACK AND NOW IT'S 20 FEET.
WHEN DID HE GO TO 10 FEET? I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THAT.
>> I BELIEVE IT WAS EITHER 828 .
>> 85 SOUNDS RIGHT BECAUSE SINGLE WIDE HOME MAY HAVE BEEN CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAT MY CURRENT DOUBLE WIDE IS.
THAT 33 IS NEGLIGIBLE TO ME. >> MIKE, I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT, IT IS 85. YES MAKE A MISTAKE IN A MATTER
FOR THE RECORD PLEASE. >> (STATES NAME AND ADDRESS).
WE DO NOT PLAN ON PURCHASING THIS PLACE.
WE TRIED TO GET INSURANCE FOR OUR PRESENT PLACE AND WE COULD NOT GET INSURED. I KEPT PRAYING WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT AND WE ENDED UP BUYING THE NEW PLACE.
AT THE TIME, I DO NOT KNOW IT WAS GOING TO CAUSE A PROBLEM,
SO I APOLOGIZE. >> THAT IS THE REASON THAT WE
WE ARE HERE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU MA'AM. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING THIS BACK TO THE BOARD FOR QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, THEIR AGENT OR COUNTY STAFF.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OR A MOTION FOR
DENIAL? >> I THINK THE ONLY PERSON THAT IS POSSIBLY AFFECTED BY THIS DOES NOT HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT , SO IF ONE PERSON DOES NOT HAVE AN ISSUE, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE EITHER, SO I WOULD MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
>> I WILL SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE REDUCE SETBACK ON THE ONE SIDE ONLY AS LISTED IN BOA 24-0009. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ALL OPPOSE? PASSES THREE ÃZERO.
CONGRATULATIONS FOLKS, GOOD LUCK TO YOU.
NOW, I WILL OPEN A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANYONE WHO WANT TO SPEAK ON THE ANYTHING, ON THE AGENDA OR NOT THE AGENDA INCLUDING MY WIFE'S FAVORITE FOOTBALL TEAM, WHICH IS TAYLOR SWIFT'S BOYFRIEND STAMPER THAT HER CRITERIA.
SHE CANNOT TELL YOU THE NAME OF THE TEAM, THOSE THAT IS TAYLOR SWIFT'S BOYFRIEND CAME. ROADS ARE WET AND HAVE A LONG DRIVE, SO I'M OPENING AND PCLOSING THE SECONDPUBLIC HEARING. ANYTHING TO BRING TO US ?
>> NO I DO NOT, NOT TONIGHT WE DO HAVE AN APPLICATION THAT WILL COME NEXT MONTH. I THINK IT IS ONLY ONE, MAYBE TWO, BUT I KNOW THERE IS ONE AT LEAST.
>> ARE YOU GOING TO BRING DEATH IN? I DON'T WANT TO SHELLSHOCKED THAT WHEN SHE SEES HOW FREELY I RUN THESE MEETINGS, I AM NOT REALLYOFFICIAL .
[00:20:01]
>> I WILL KEEP HER AWAY. >> I KNOW YOU ARE TRYING TO TRANSITION, I DON'T WANT HER TO STAND UP AND GO THIS IS NOT
VERY PROFESSIONAL. >> AS LONG AS THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SAYS EVERYTHING IS KOSHER.
>> I THINK SHE GAVE UP ON ME A LONG TIME AGO.
WHEN SHE FIRST CAME IN, SHE WAS TELLING PEOPLE - - THAT IS KEITH, THAT'S HOW IT IS. IF THEY DON'T LIKE YOU, THEY CAN FIRE ME. PLEASE FIRE ME.
[LAUGHTER]. OKAY, WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.