2012-6-26 MinutesMeeting of June 26, 2012
Chairman Doug Cook called the Blair Board of Adjustment to order at 12:00 p.m. Members
present were Doug Cook, Wyman Nelson, Carl Rennerfeldt, Dick Wardell and John Abbott.
Member absent: Dave Kaslon. Others present were Assistant Administrator Green.
Motion by Abbott, second by Rennerfeldt to approve the minutes of the July 29, 2010
meeting as presented to members. All members present voted Aye. Chairman Cook declared the
motion carried.
The applicant Paul Kult, 1917 Butler Ave, Blair, Nebraska was not present.
Assistant Administrator Green stated the applicant would like to construct an 18' x 22' stick
built accessory structure without a primary structure on Lots 1 -4 and vacated alley less highway
right of way, Block 2, Neff s Addition, Blair, Washington County, Nebraska. The property is
currently zoned RML — Residential Multi- Family Low Density. Section 1103.02 of the Blair
Zoning Regulations states "No accessory structure shall be constructed without a primary building
or structure. No accessory building shall remain if the primary structure is removed or
demolished ". Based upon Section 1103.02 (7), a primary structure is required before an accessory
structure could be built. When Highway 75 was widened previously, residential access to this lot
was purchased by NDOR and closed off because of the raised island and turning lane onto Wright
Street. Access to the lot is available from the alley, but a building permit for a primary structure
could not be granted because of the lack of direct access to a street. The applicant is seeking a
variance from the requirements of Section 1103.02 (7) and other references to the primary structure
requirement in Section 1103. This property is unique due to the fact it has no access. If the request
is granted, it would allow the applicant to construct a building which would have to comply with
building code regulations and other zoning regulations for the construction of an accessory
building. Board member Nelson questioned the legal description and stated if approved, he
suggested the variance only be approved for Lot 4 as opposed to all the lots. Assistant City
Administrator Green reviewed the role of Board of Adjustment members in reference to the state
law requirements for the issuance of a variance. He noted that it is the responsibility of the
applicant to prove his hardship and no variance should be authorized by the board unless it finds
that: (a) The strict application of the zoning regulation would produce undue hardship; (b) such
hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same
vicinity; (c) the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent
property and the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance; and (d)
the granting of such variance is based upon reason of demonstrable and exceptional hardship as
distinguished from variations for purposes of convenience, profit or caprice. No variance shall be
authorized unless the board finds the condition or situation of the property concerned or the
intended use of the property is not of general or recurring in nature as to make reasonably
practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the zoning
regulation. Also, no variance may be granted that would cause substantial detriment to the public
good and substantially impairing the intent and purpose of any ordinance or resolution. Green also
reviewed Section 1302.01 of the Zoning regulations regarding a variance. Board Member Abbott
stated he did not feel comfortable issuing a variance that would not allow Staff to regulate the use
of the building and would set a precedent for other areas in the community. Board Member
Wardell stated the granting of this variance would open a can of worms for other areas within the
community. Board Member Nelson stated he was struggling with whether or not the highway
reconfiguration was considered a hardship since the property owner at that time was compensated
for that. Discussion was held regarding surrounding property owners, how long applicant had
owned the property, previous highway access, use of the building and affect of variance on zoning
ordinance. Discussion was also held regarding different options available to the applicant that
would be consider by both the Planning Commission and City Council and would provide for more
control or regulations on the use and construction of the accessory building if it were allowed.
There were no comments from the floor or in writing. Chairman Cook closed the public hearing.
Motion by Abbott, second by Wardell to deny the variance submitted by Paul Kult, 1917 Butler
Ave, Blair, Nebraska to construction an 18' x 22' stick built accessory structure without a primary
structure on Lots 1 -4 & vacated alley less highway right of way, Block 2, Neff s Addition, Blair
City, Washington County, Nebraska. Members present voting Aye: Rennerfedlt, Abbott, Wardell
and Cook. Members present voting Nay: Nelson. Chairman Cook declared the motion carried to
deny the variance request as submitted by Paul Kult.
There were no communications from the floor.
Motion by Wardell, second by Rennerfeldt to adjourn the meeting at 12:45 P.M. All
members present voted Aye. Chairman Cook declared the meeting adjourned.
A� A -
Bre a Wheeler, Secretary