10-13-1988 Minutes
I'IOTIONI
SECOND I
VOTE:
MINUTES
SALINA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY COMMISSION ROOM
OCTOBER 13, 198B
4aOO P. M.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Hauc;, Gain.., Snyd.'.,
Whit. and Chri.tian
Strahan,
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Bro""n
STAFFa
P.t.rson and Sch.mpp
OTHER STAFFa
B.nc;tson and Ho~~
Tn. m..tin9 ""a.
Chairman Snyd.r.
e:all.d
to
ord.r
.t
41:03
P.M. by
4U.
Approval o~ minut.s
S.pt8mb.r 1~, 1988.
o~
l"'.gul.1'"
m..ting
o~
Mr. Str.han mov8d that tn. minut.. o~ tn. l"'.gu1.1'"
m..tin9 o~ S.pt.mb.r 1~, 198B, b. .e:e:.pt.d i¡nd .pprov.d
a. ""ritt.n.
Mr. Whit. s8Cond8d tn. motion.
Tn. vot. ""a. unanimous <6-0) in ~avor o~ th., motion.
..e.
Application 4tV8B-1~, ~il.d by G.ra1di W. Smith,
rwqu8Stin9 a ~ront y.rd ..tback v.ri.ne. o~ 20'
~ro. 3e.~' to 1e.~' on prop.rty l.;.lly d..crib.d
.. Lot 17.nd tn. Ea.t 1/2 o~ Lot 1~, in Slock ~,
o~ Coll.;. Vi.... Addition, to tn. City o~ S.lin.,
Salin. County, Kan..., <.k. 332 And.rson Str..tl.
Mr. P.t.rson pr...nt8d tn.
eont.in8d in tn. ca.. ~il..
Sta~~
R8Por t ,
""hie:h is
Mr . Snyd.r
1"'8C.iv8d?
..k.d
i~
e:orr.spond.ne:.
.ny
n.d
b..n
Mr. P.t.rson said non. h.d b..n I"'.e.iv.d.
Mr. Snyd.r ..k8d i~ tn. .pplicant "".S pl"'.s.nt .nd i~ 1'1.
had .nythin9 ~urth.r to .dd?
Mr. Smith said h. h.d nothing to .dd to
P.t.rson h.d pr...nt8d in tn. sta~~ 1"'8port.
""h.t Mr.
Mr. Snyd.r ..k8d i~ .nyon. "".s pr...nt ""1'10 ""ant.d to
.ddr... tn. Soard .ith.r in ~.vor o~ or in opposition
to tn. v.ri.ne. l"'8qu..t?
Tn.r. ""a. no on. pr...nt.
Mr. Snyd.r said .. I drov. p.st this, I noti':.d so",. o~
tn. dr.in.g. slough h.s b..n ~ill.d in on th.t lot.
Wa. th.t . con.id.r.tion o~ . "".t.r ponding?
Mr. P.t.rson s.id I .'" going to giv. you ""h.t I b.1i.v.
is tn. .ns"".r .nd th.n I'm going to I"'.~.r it to Mr.
HO~~. As I I.Ind.rst.nd it, our drain.g. ..S.I".,.,t 01'" 01.11'"
o"",.,.rShip is not on th.t n.l~ o~ tn. lot. ~.'I"'.
.ctu.lly to tn. "".st o~ th.t y.t, so I don't b.1i8v. it
"".. p.l"'t o~ our int.nd.d 5tl"'l.Ictl.l1"'8.
I'IOTION:
SECONDs
VOTE:
S.linA BoArd o~ Zoning App.als
Octob.r 13, 198B
P.g.2
Mr. Ho~~ s.id th.t's
I"'ight to pond ""at.r.
right.
w. don't
h.v. any leg.l
Mr. Snyd.r A.k8d i~ it c:.n b. ~ill.d in, why c:an't the
house b. s.t th.r.?
Mr. P.t.rson ..k8d Mr. S",ith what
the .mount o~ ~ill n8C.s.ary?
h.v. you c.lc:ul.t.d
Mr. Smith said the bigg.st probl.m is in ord.r to ~ill
in the 2~ ~oot "".st o~ that prop8rty you'd have to go
~rom north prop.rty lin. to south prop.rty lin. .nd
have that point out. To do th.t, I would Actually h.v.
to ~ill in And it ""ould tap.r do""n into the slough
.r...
Mr. Snyd.r said the ~ill that
it still on thi. prop.rty?
h.s b..n
don. th.r., is
Mr. Smith said y.s, that is .a.t o~ the .lough.
Mr. Haug ..k8d ""hat str..t ""i 11 th i s housi. b. .ddress.d
o~~ o~? Wh.r. ""i 11 the ~ront o~ the hou!l. l"ac:e Th i I"'d
or Anderson?
Mr. Smith said it ""ill probAbly l".ce A"d.rson b.ings
th.r. is no curb or gutt.r on that Ii t'=l. s8Ction o~
Third right ther..
Mr. Hau.; .aid the r.a.on I .sk is on Thil"'c~ Stre.t th.re
.1"'. no 1'101.1... that ~ac. to""ards Third Str...t. It ""ould
b. a little bit di~~erent.
Mr. Smith
Anderson.
said
that' s
right so this he.u.. wi 11 l".c.
Mr. Haug said so by rights we'r. talking .bout. sid.
yard s.tback rath.r than . ~ront yard s.ttlack?
Mr. Peterson said by layman'S termirlology th.t'.
corr.ct, but by Zoning terminology, .ny y.rd .djoining
. str..t is .ctually l"ront y.rd.
Mr. Haug A.k8d .bout
Third Str.et?
the gArAg. b.ing acCess.d o~~ o~
Mr. Smith said it would b..
Mr. Christian mov.d th.t Application .V88-1~ b.
.pprov.d .. in my opinion it m..ts all l"iv.
r8quir.m.nts o~ K.S.A. 12-71~.
Mr. StrAM.n s8Cond.d the motion.
Th. vote ""as unanimous
Mot ion cArri 8d.
<6-0)
in
l"avo'l'"
o~ motion.
.3.
Application .V8B-lá, l"iled by Boss.1m.,." Inc. o~
Kan.a., r.qu..ting t""o v.ri.nc.s, on,. v.ri.nc:. to
.110"" construction o~ an addition in the Fl00d"".y
Ov.r l.y District .nd on. v.ri.,.,c:. tl, I"'.duc. the
.l.v.tion I"'.quir.m.nt 1"0r the 10w.st ~loor o~ the
truck s.rvic. b.y ~rom 1222.4' above 5.. lev.1 to
1221.77' on prop.rty 10c:.ted at 1'~44 North Cjlth.
Mr. P.t.rson g.v. the St.~~ R.port ~ounc in the Ca.. -
~il.. H. .1.0 indicat.d oth.r th.n the num.rol.ls
Co,.,tacts ""ith the applicant, trying to nelp ni", through
Salin. Soard o~ Zoning Apeals
October 13, 1988
Page 3
this process ""ith his stal"l" or architectul"'.l engineers,
""e have not received inquiries concerning this.
Mr. Snyder a.ked i~ Mr. So..elman
o~ Bos.elm.n ""as present.
or a I"'epresentative
ChuCk Sos.elm.n and his F.ther, Fred Bosselm.n, ""ere
pre.ent. Chuck Sos.elman s.id the 9th Street .nd I-70
Exit, "". ~eel, is a very strong commercial .re. 1"0r the
busines, ""e're in. The I"'e.son ""e bought the property
"".S ~or the l.nd. .Th. building is not ""orth too much,
so ""e're .,king ~or this v.ri.nce so ""e c.n rebuild it.
Mr. Sndyer a,ked i~ anyone else ""as in attend.nce ""ho
"".nt8d to spe.k in ~avor 01" or in opposition to the
reque.t?
No one ""as present.
Mr. H.ug a,k8d about any rel.tionship i::l.tween this
application .nd Slue Se.con's .pplic.tion?
Mr. Peterson said they "".re both Floodw.)' except the
Floodway dea1t with on the previous .pplic,ation "".s .n
.rea """.re the moving ~lood ""ater ""ould b.c:< into .. it
hit. constriction .t Cr.w~ord Street. So I"'ather than
having moving water, it "".s "".ter that ""as storage and
back8d up into it. The bound.ry VAl'" i .I,ce ~or the
boundary amendment th.t ""e l"'equest8d th.t they m.ke h.,
b..n .pprov8d at the State level .nd no"" can be
submitt8d to the FEMA level. W. .re not going to b.
d.aling with. boundary change here. This boundary is
.n .ppropriate boundary .nd there is no ""jay to divert
thi, w.ter el,ewhere Þ8C.u,e r.ther th.n stc2r.ge ""ater,
it is actually moving ~lood water. It is ,'llhat "". term
rivering ~looding, so there is not . "".~' to o~~set
stor.ge .,we did on the previous one by designating
add i t i onal- l.nd on the landown.r ' 5 prop..r ty . Th i .
boundary is one that mu,t I"'em.in .s is .nd so Actually
pnysically it is building out into thg FloodwaYI
now.ver, """at tne State nas said is thAt 1:his .rea o~
construction is .ctually shadowed by 1:he existing
structure. The State indicates th.t the ~10"" o~ the
~loodwater. com.s .cros. this propertv ~rom the
westerly to the easterly dil"'ection. By doir,g that, the
existing bui lding shadows the are.s pr"opos8d ~or
.ddition. The diagon.l distance o~ tnis building is
wider existing then it ""ill be .1"ter celnstruction.
They wi 11 not Add to the diagon.l dis1:ance o~ the
building. There~ore, in the State's certil"!.c.tion they
indicate it is .ll"'e.dy in the shAdo"".d existing
structure .nd ""i 11 not incre..e the ~loeld level or
~looding problems.
Mr. Christian .,ked .bout tne tanks i~ thlty .re going
to b. neld down il" "". get ""ater over there, ""ill
~lot.tion give you A pl"'oblem 01'" not?
Mr. Sos,elm.n said once they Are poUl"'ltd over ""ith
concrete And ~ull o~ l"uel .nd once they t'I.ve settled
into tn. sand, there .re no proÞlems.
I'1r. Snyder .sked il" ne intended to l"'ebl.li1d the dike?
I'1r. Bosse1m.n said
I"'et.iner ""ails.
th.t's
co"'ing
back
in with the
Salina Board o~ Zoning Appeals
October 13, 198B
Page 4
Mr. Snyder ..ked about
Intern.tional?
leveling
in
1"1'" 0 I'll t
o~ Stew.rt
Mr. Christian said
tnat's parkinc;.
he
talked
""i th
Mr. St....art and
Mr. Snyder .sked about
. Floodway?
Mr. Peterson said th.t you need to n.ve a development
permit to do ~illing activity in the FloClld""ay and tne
Flood Frin;e .nd I ""ill get with Mr. St.,wart .nd work
out the details on this. The :Iurpclse o~ that
development permit is so that ""e can mCilnitor exactly
"""at you l'Iave .sk8d. Mr. Bosselman has clone some 10101"'1<
on hi, property and he ha, . developme,.,t ):Iermi t for the
burial o~ the tanks. He did some l"'egriLding that 'did
not increa,e l'Iis elevation levels 1"01'" sclme .ddi tio,.,al
parkin; area or at least smoothing out eMisting
parking. Again, we did not is.ue . development permit
b8Cau,e it did not change the level pIPr se o~ the
:Iroperty.
th.t r.ising
tne level
o~ the
Mr. Snyder .,k8d who the ather
concluded that this wa, correct?
eng i rleer
lola' that
Mr. Peterson said it is the Benjamin and Associates, a
~irm hired by Mr. Sosselman, and then an engineer with
tne State Division Water Resources.
Mr. Christian stated tn.t due to my lack o~
understanding a~ tnis Federal progr.m, I think our
Board should o8slc our .ttorney to t.ke tt'lis particular
.pplication and give 1.1, your vi..... Cln it to ~e in
compliance with F8deral r.;ulations .nci the v.riau'
agencie, involved.
Mr. Bengtson said l.t me make one disc1ainler, i~ I may,
.nd tnat is certainly that in terms o~ tl'le day to d.y
experience that we've had with FEMA and ~Iorking on the
Stat. level that Mr. Peterson .nd Mr. Ho~'f' probably had
some more :Ir.ctical in,ight then I migl'lt. A, far a.
tne jab that you ~olks nave in l"rant of )'01.1, you ne8d
to loolc .t those requirements that MI"'. Peterson na,
outlin8d ., ~ar.s the ~indings that )'01.1 must make
be~ore you c.n consider gr.nting such. v.Lri.nce. As I
understand and am I correct, the key ~.ctClr is.n over
simplil"ication to emøha,ize the signi1'icance o~ the
~act that it simply does not ~urther inhibit the 1"10""
in the event o~ 1"100ding. In my estimaticln, that's the
key. As long a, that nas been documented, both by the
priv.te engineer .nd" the State and I a..,ume /'Ir. Ho~~,
there wOuldn't be .ny I"'e.son to question that.
/'Ir. Christian .aid you ~ee1 the necessary criteria nas
been re.ched .nd presented to this Board?
/'Ir. Peterson said, Mr. Sengtson let me 1ïeld that. I
have .n idea that might let the Bo.rd all feel a little
more.t e.se. I took ~I"'am the Ord i nAncIP the cr i te,. i a
I"'equirement. that you mu,t c:erti~y to be .,ble to 1.,ue
the v.rianC8. Tl'I.t ordin.nce ""as de...elooed ~I"'om a
model that FE/'IA g.ve 1.1' and, in ~act, a~ter ""e n.d
pa,.ed the ordinance "".. sent to FE/'IA ~ol'" I"'evie.. ! am
going to detail this just a little bit ~or you. FEMA's
I"'ules are ~ol"'.ver I"'evolving. In the time it tool< us to
Salin. SoArd o~ Zoning Appeals
October 13, 198B
P.ge ~
get. model and to get it passed by tne City
Commission, which takes si~ ""eeks .ppro~imAtely to get
that drawn up, their rules had changed, 80 they
request8d cert.in modi~ication, to our ordin,ance .nd
,ent it b.ck to us. We pa"ed the modil"icAtion!8. T"ey
got the s8Cond version back and approved it. ~;o, they
have on l"ile a copy o~ our ordin.nce. In th_il'" mind
.nd in the approval that they ".ve given us, which wa.
in writing, the ordinanC8 requirements are ""hAt is
n8C..,ary ~or you to grAnt a v.riance. ¡:EMA, in
cont.cting them, .nd discus,ing with thum this
particulAr application, did not ~ind .nything with it
negative. I~ they h.d, they would have re,pondud to us
about it. The thing that ""e perhAps in the pi'5t have
not done ., ""ell.. ""e could have is tl'le State
certi~ication. This time you received it be1'ore you
made your d8Cision and in the l"uture we Are goirlg to do
th.t in that ~ashion. You will Al"".ys know the St.te's
position be~ore you do the v.riance. That i, not a
requirement. That is our pre~erred method o~ o~er.tion
so you know what they think be~ore you nAve to mAke
your d8Cision.
Mr. Christian said l"irst let me SAY I c8rt.inly don't
-ant to .ppear negative to any improvement, don't
misunderstand me, but I ~eel a little uncom~ortAble
when we get to de.ling with these Flood Plains .nd we
c.n very ea,ily make some decisions at this Soard that
Can Jeop.rdize not ju,t maybe these people but ather
people a, well. I'm curious il" our ChairmAn ,nas any
direction 1"01'" u. to t.ke.
/'fr. Snyder s.id I would like to give the Boall"d some
direction, but I need to h.ve legal in~ormation. I~ ""e
approve this, then it is approved A' it eMists. I~ ""e
deny it, then Mr. So"elm.n h.s two Choices, ., I
under,t.nd. No. one, FEMA ".. the ~inal '.y" Am I
corr8Ct on th~s? At the time that this ordin.nc8 101.'
put i nto e"'~ect, FEMA wa, to "e.r all o~ them .nel there
were such a multitude o~ th8m that they .t tl'le time
,.id th.t the Bo.rd a~ Zoning Appeals should taklÞ these
.nd he.r them and .pprave ""hat is I"'ight .nd """at is not
right, then Mr. So',elman has a choice to go t:o FEMA
and get the .pprov.l ar to the Courts to get their
.pproval, am I right on th.t?
Mr. Bengtson said I know
~rom any decision by this
Distict Court i~ Someone
determinations. No"", Mike
direct appeal to FEMA.
certainly that the I"'.'cou".e
Board is dil"'8Ctly to the
""ishes to appeal one o~ your
or Don, I'm not .w.re o~ any
Mr. Ho~~ s.id ne w.sn't a""are o~ thAt.
Mr. Sengtson s.id I CAn appreciate Mr. Christian's
concern .nd I' m sure those o~ you thAt ""ere 01"1 thi. 5
Bo.rd at the time th.t the FEMA ordinance wen'!: into
8~"'ect recall that it ""a, made quite clear th.lt .ny
inkling a~ any abuse o~ your discretion along thi~ line
could Jeopardize tne entil"'e Salina program. There
could be Some se,-iou, I"'epercu..ions.
Mr. Snyder
Salina.
s.id .nd
the I"'wpercussion
is on the total
~r. Bengtson s.id that is corrwct so it obviously
behooves you to give it your strictest Scl"'utin~'. In
looking .t the Sta~~ Repol"'t, I ""ould SAY this that I
Salina Board o~ Zoning Appeals
October 13, 198B
Page ó
think i~ you c.n look.t the material th.t has been
outlined and .ay ye, that makes sense tl:l me and those
rea,on, seem like legitimate reasons, I don't think
your hands are so ti8d. I would say il" YI::lU can look At
these and be com~ortable with the e)Cpla'"ation that is
given under each o~ those ~actors, I tl~ink you 're in
sa~e territory. I'll he.itate to try to substitute my
Judgment 1"0r you because I think that is something .11
o~ you are in as good as or bette'l'" posi tion to
determine given the e)Cplanation as outlin'R.
Mr. Christian a.k8d in your own opinion do you ~eel
that this application .nd l"indings ""e have presented to
1.1, ""111 meet these 1"1ve ~lnding' 01" l"act under K.S.A.
12-71~?
Mr. Bengtson said I believe so.
Mr. Snyder said maybe.... o~ the Board should go through
these ~indings o~ ~.ct one at a time becau,e il" there
i, any one o~ 1.1, who has .ny doubt maybe this is
something ""e should do.
Mr. Bengtson said I think that i, . good ~oint.
~. Chri,ti.n ,aid I have Ju,t rwvi....ed these .gain .nd
to me they comply a. ~ar .. these 1"1ve listed in the
Sta~~ Report.
Mr. Peterson ,aid Mr. Christi.n .rw you saying the
Sta~~ Report ~lndings, you think, meet that bec.use the
application i, not that complet8.. the Stal"~ Report
and you ~ight want to take a look at th.t .pplication.
I'~ ..suming you mean Sta~~ Report. When the .pplic.nt
~illed out the .pplication, he was not completely .w.re
o~ what those individual questions meant and he and I
had to have telephone conversations veri~ying A lot o~
this data, -so you're not going to ~ind complete answer.
on the .pplication.
Mr. Snyder said I'm looking at the
application and I cannot agree to those.
ones
on
the
Mr. Peterson said.... did not u,e those to develo~ the
Sta~~ Report. We got .ddition.l in~ormation ~rom the
applicant. Mr. Chuck So,.elm.n And myse11" talked at
length about this over the ~hone to get the .dditional
data th.t I needed ~or the Stal"~ Re~ort.
Mr. Haug .,ked about the s~ecil"ic construction?
Mr. Bos,elman .howed the existing building on the ma~.
Wh.t "'I"'e proposing is .dding onto the sho~ building.
Thi, i, . two story .ddition .nd the,., ~e'l"'e going out
with the building .nother 20 ~eet.
Mr. Peter.on said the truck service bay and its sm.l1
hallway.re the only two sections that .I"'e actually in
the ~loodway.
Mr. Snyder .,ked what is this going to be used ~or~
Mr. Sos.elman said
I"'est.urant b.sically
be .n addition to the
""ill Þe the shower
I"'ooms.
this will be.n addition to the
more o~ .n oce,., are.. This will
stol"'e .rea and the ucst.il"" unit
are. but thel"'e ""on't be sl.ecing
SalinA Board o~ Zoning Appe.ls
October 13, 198B
Page 7
Mr. Peterson asked il"
provided?
there
would
be
A
lounge .re;a
Mr. So.selmAn s.id yes.
Mr. Snyder Ask8d about the locAtion o~ the sc:Ale and il"
that is .ctu.lly in the waterwAY, is it not?
Mr. Sosselman said no.
som....here.
The property line
i!J over here
Mr. Snyder asked About
Mr. Bos,elman?
the dike and i~ it :ls owned by
Mr. Sos,elman sAid it is.
Mr. Peterson sAid that dike is a unit or duvice built
by the Sosselmans, not endorsed by the City, not
constructed by the City, it is not considered a
n8Ces,ity by the City, but we think it is .n e)lcel1ent
idea.
Mr. So"elman said ""e didn't build it, it can'e with the
purcha,e.
Mr. Snyder said it lola' taken into consideratton by FEMA
.t the time that they were implementing the Flood
Plain, am I right?
Mr. Ho~~ sAid no, not a, ~lood prot8Ction, net.
Mr. Bos,elman said T8d Harder, """0 owned th.. : roperty,
built th.t to k-.p the water out o~ the,.. building'
here.
Mr. Peterson said .t one time the entire pare:el,
including Stewart .nd White, w.s .11 one p.rcel and
owned by one party.
Mr. StrAhan said when you're mentioning th.t there's no
sl-.ping I"'ooms or things like that, you're talking
about the truck service b.y only?
"
.
Mr. Peterson said sleeping I"'ooms al"'e f'or l"utul"'e
consideration. Right now "".'re tAlking o1,bout truck
service bay only .nd the only I"'e.son 1"01'" th.t is
because o~ the type o~ structure, Mr. Boss.'lman 'feels
like it is . nece.sity to le.ve that 1"1001'" level where
it is .nd it's not practic;al; in ~act, it's practically
impo"ible to ~loodproo~ .n overhe.d door tn.t a semi-
truck could get through. It's just too big, so ne
needed the v.riance to be able to leave that ~loor
level the s.me.
Mr. Snyder .,ked i~ this is an addition to the building
itsel~ 01'" is this only. second story on the e)listing
building?
Mr. Bos.elman said it's e)listing building, it's .ll"'e.dy
two story.
Mr. Peterson s.id in answer to Mr. H.ug's Question
.oout building in . cert.in section. Tnat section
could be built ""ithout .ny approval. It is in the
Flood Fl"'inge, it ""ill b. ~loodproo~. Tne truck service
bay .150 nas an additional v.ri.nce I"'eque.t o~ . lowel'"
elevAtion I"'eql.lil"'eme,.,t ;and ""e set up some very sø.ci~ic
condition. ~or thAt to be gl"'.nted. Tn.t it b. 1"01'" .
S.lina Soard 01" Zoning Appeals
October 13, 1988
P.ge8
truck service bay only. That there not be ,nny sle8Ping
are. ever. And that it not be used 1'or a higher
intensity occupancy. That comes 1"1'" om 1:he Building
Code. Higher inten,i ty occupancie. wo~lld be the
convenience stare, the restaur.nt, un assembly
building. We just "".nted to protect that ëll"'e., not so
much ~or Mr. Sosselman because he's going to be very
~.miliar ""ith this process, but should he !IOmedAY sell
it, so that the nex t owner and """oever l"clllows in my
~ootsteps wouid have something on record in the l"ile
that would say you may not convert this .rea to any
other use. I have also a,ked Mr. Bo!lselman very
,peci~ically, would it be economically ~e.5ible to
totally move this building and reloc.te it on the north
side 01' his property, which is only iT, the Flood
Fringe, and he very emphatically and I am !Iure he wi 11
tell you that .gain today, said no. Tne building does
have. signi~icant value in its existing form and can
be, i~ you grant the variance, . very usable structure
once it's add8d onto. We also asked h:im about the
~loodprao~ing requirements. His arenitec': is working
on those right now and the building in the ¡:toad Fringe
will be ~loadproo~.
Mr. Christian said a, I I"'_re.d these ~indil'gs o~ ~act.
r.;arding number one, it is not unique in that .re.
really becau,e the area ea,t there is more so subj.c~
to ~looding then this area here; now my question, MI"'.
Chairman is, would you consider a motion which does not
include all ~indings ~~ l"act?
"'". Snyder said I
~inding. o~ ~act.
would not,
it has to m.et all l"ive
Mr. Christian a,ked the
~elt on number one?
other Board
memb,.rs how they
"'". Haug said it looks like to me the ulr'liqueness is
that the building already exists there .nd ~or him to
be .ble to use it properly and, o~ coul"'se, that ~.lls
into another cat.;ory under unn8Ce.,ary n,ardshiø, but
ju,t the ~act it exists I think it meets nulftber one.
Mr. Christian said
meets number one?
so
you
~.el com~ort.b1e that it
Mr. Haug said yes.
Mr. Christian said .11 o~ you do?
The other Soard members said yes.
Mr. Christi.n said two, ""e know it does. T~~ree, strict
applic.tion o~ the provision o~ the zoning ordin.nc. o~
which v.ri.nce is I"'eouested ""ill constitute un,.,ecessary
hardshiø upon the property owner I"'eøres.nted in the
apølic.tion, ""e know th.t it would i~...e didn't gra,.,t
it, riC;ht?
Mr. Snyder said I .gree with that.
Mr. Christian said 1"0ur, the variance de.il"'8d ~ill not
.dversely .~~ect the public health, .al"ety, morals,
order, convenience, prosøerity, 01'" general ~e1~al"'e. It
meets th.t, I"'ight?
The Board di.cussed number ~our.
I'IOTIONs
SECONDs
Salina Soard 01" Zoning Appeals
October 13, 1988
Page 9
MI"'. Snyder .sked whAt the appl icant .nswered 0" that?
Mr. Christian said it doesn't increase tne 1"10"d level.
Mr. Haug said so that' 5 why there is no .dverS4w e~~ect.
Mr. Peterson said I need to answer. c¡uestio,' 1"0r MI"'.
Snyder. The Applicant had originally sta'=ed there
would be no adverse e~~ect bec.use it will be an
improvement to North Salina and the proposed l"inished
~acility will be the ~inest truck and auto stC)P in the
State o~ Kansas. While I would agre. w:Lth those
potentials, it didn't l"it with the ordinance I"'ltquested,
so I c.lled and ask8d 1"01'" additional data and developed
~rom that the .nswer you n.ve in your Stal"~ R~)ort.
Mr. Strahan ask8d i~ the Sta~~ Report is made it part o~
the request?
Mr. peter.on said i~ you want to accept tne crjlteri. o~
the ~ive ~inding, o~ ~.ct having be.n met .s presented
in the Sta~~ Report, you c.n do th.t in tntt l"orm o~
your motion, you can do it on your own as you .re
beginning to develop it now, or you may do tnttm .s tne
.pplicant h.s stated with essenti.lly tnOfle three
alternatives in the Stal"~ Report.
Mr. Christian moved tnat Application .VEi8-lá be
.pproved subJect. to the ~inding, o~ l"act as s~arat.ly
listed under K.S.A. 12-71~, .nd also tne ~indings
pre,ent8d by tne sta~~ and th.t my mot ion wo4.lld be to
the e~~ect th.t tne construction must be she.wn a, on
the submitt8d site pl.n, the u,e o~ tne truc~t service
bay cannot be al ter8d to A nigher inten,i ty clccupancy
or sleeping ar.., and the applicant must submit.
written notarized stat8ment o~ noti~ic.ltion o~
increas8d ~lood insurance r.tes ~or con,tr\,lction o~
~inished ~loor below the 100 year ~lood level.
~r. Strahan seco,.,ded the motion.
Mr. Sengtson said I think it might be nelp1'ul i~ ""e
l"'e~err8d to the ~ive condi tions as I"'equil"'eci by the
statute And the conditions .s suggested by the sta~~.
I am wondering il" it might .lso be ;ood to ac~:nowledge
that you a, . Board are .w.re that you t'lave been
provided ""ith .dequate certil"ication.
~r. Christian said I thought I nad included that in my
motion but maybe I didn't state it cleArly. I think ""e
should mention th.t the evidence pre.ented 1ealds us to
believe that ""e CAn l"'ightl"ully Approve this s\.I,bject to
this new report th.t ""e h.ve received and h.ve in
~orce. Is that wh.t you'l"'e saying?
Mr. Bengtson said the only two points I thought ""e
might .dd, just to make sul"'e everybody is trying
together, is at tne bottom o~ the l"il"'st page o~ the
Sta~~ Report; No. 1 I"'e~ers to the ~ive conditions .nd
obviously tho.e have bee,., satis~ied; and No.2,
possibly acknowledging that you are all aw.re that
certi~ication has been provided demon.trating that ~~e
proposed development ""ill not I"'esult in any increase in
~lood levels; No.3, your ~inding th.t- issuance o~ the
vari.nce ""ill not I"'esult in incre~sed ~lood ~eights,
.ddition.l tnl"'e.ts to public sal"ety, 01'" .~traol"'din.I"'Y
public e~pense.
MOTIONs
SECOND:
VOTE:
"
.
Salin. Board o~ Zoning Appe.ls
October 13, 198B
P.gel0
Mr. Snyder .sked Mr. Christian il" he wouJld like to .dd
that onto his motion?
Mr. Chri.tian said with your permis,ion, ¡¡ would like
to m.ke that inclusion to my motion and !Iubject to his
second.
Mr. Str.h.n
condition.
s.id
I
wi 11
with
that
second
th.at
The vote was unanimou,
Motion carri8d.
<á-O)
o~ motion.
in
~.vur
There being no ~urther busines.
adjourned the meeting .t ~:O~ P.M.
Ch;airman
Snyder
Mich.el E. Peter!50n
A"istant Secret,.ry
Approv8d1