11/05/2024 MinutesBoard of Adjustment Meeting
November 5,,2024
Page 1
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
OF THE CITY OF PA19TEXAS
NOVEMBER 512024
The Board of Adjustment of the City of Paris met for a regular session at 12 p.m. on
November 5, 2024, at the City of Paris- City Hall, Council Chambers located at 107 E
Kaufman St.
Present: Board Members: David Hamilton, William Sanders, Harley (}raven, Ben
Vaughan and Richard Thompson.
City Representative: Stephanie Harris, Alix Putnam and Osel Amo-
Mensah.
1. The Board ofAdjustment meeting was called to order by Chairman David Hamilton, at
12: 00 p. m.
2. Approval of minutes from previous meeting. (October], 2024)
Motion was made by William Sanders, seconded by Ben Vaughan to approve minutes for
the October 1. 2024 meeting. Motion carried 5 ayes — 0 nays.
Public hearing to consider and take action on the petition of Lyle Edwards o RT Fitness
-L �f
regarding a variance to the City of Paris Area Regulations, Section 9-70](2), on Lot 3,
Block 3, of the Felts, Fort & Varner Addition, being located at 950 E Austin Street.
David Hamilton opened the public hearing.
Director of Planning and Zoning, Osei Arno-Mensah presented case to board.
Harley Draven asked about the Planning and Zoning recommendation on the variance and
was informed by Osei that the P&Z had not considered the issue due to lack of quorum.
Lyle Edwards of 5430 Brittany Lane, and applicant, explained in more detail to the board
the need for the variance in order to move forward with their plan for expanding the
building since they have limited space on their lot. Mr. Edwards also informs the board
that they are willing to improve the sidewalk during the project so there is a proper fire
exit.
No one else spoke in favor or opposition of the request.
Public hearing was declared closed.
Board of Adjustment Meeting
November 5, 2024
Page 2
Motion was made by Harley Draven, seconded by Richard Thompson to approve the
variance to the City of Paris Area Regulations, Section 9-701(2) based on the following
findings. Motion carried 5 ayes - 0 nays.
FinAing.s
1. The lot is platted.
2. The request for variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the proposed
district and will not harm the health, safety and welfare that will protect the character of
the immediate vicinity of the area.
3. The applicant has indicated a hardship sought because the building was constructed 37
years ago by St. Joseph hospital and was placed on the site to avoid an existing City of
Paris 10" water line running diagonally across the property that required the building to be
setback to its present location. Thus, creating a hardship for future expansion resulting in
a special and unique condition of restricted area of the lot, that exist on the subjec t parcel
of land, which are not applicable to other parcels of land in the current Office (0) Zoning
District, and which cause unusual and practical difficulty or unnecessary hardsl-Ap to the
use of the property with site improvements and expansions permitted by the ordinance with
the provision sought here to be varied.
4. The hardship sought to be avoided is not the result of (a) the applicant's own actions (self-
imposed or self-created), and (b) economic or financial "hardship."
5. Theprovision of the ordinance regulation that are sought to be varied, deprive the applicant
of reasonable rights to use the property that are commonly enjoyed by other older
commercial properties in the current Office (0) and proposed General Retail (GR) Zoning
4 0
Districts which are required to comply with these same ordinance provisions.
4. Public hearing to consider and take action on the petition of Dawn Downs regarding
variances to the City of Paris 4ccessory Building and Area Regulations, on Lot 9, Block
B, of the Summerwood Estates, being located at 4290 Sunrise Drive, Sections and
variances asfall ows:
1) -Variance to allow a detached accessory structure in the front yard,
Section 1,3-101(a).
2) 3' variance to allow a detached accessory structure to be located O'ftom
the side property line, Section 13-101(b).
3) 1.5' variance to allow a detached accessory structure to be located o' from
main structure, Section 13-101 (c).
4) 20' variance to allow a detached accessory structure in the front yard
creating a 5front setback, Section 9-5 01(1).
David Hamilton opened the public hearing.
Board of Adjustment Meeting
November 5, 2024
Page 3
Director of Planning and Zoning, Osei Amo -Men ah presented case to board.
There was discussion amongst the board and staff about when the concrete was poured.
Sandy Collard of 4280 Sun -rise Drive, spoke in opposition of the request.
Stephanie Harris, City Attorney, clarified that even if the applicant had applied for the
permit before the structure was erected the same requests would be required, but it would
be in advance of the permit rather than after the fact.
David Hamilton made note of the 3 inputs received in opposition of the request and I in
favor that were included in the memo.
No one else spoke in favor or opposition of the request.
Public hearing was declared closed.
Motion was made by Harley Draven, seconded by Ben Vaughan to deny the variances to
the City of Paris Area Regulations and Accessory Building Regulations based on the
following findings. Motion carried 5 ayes - 0 nays.
Fin4ings
1. The carport structure setbacks cannot be met.
2. The lot has to be replated.
3. The request for variances is not in harmony with the general purposes and 'Intent of area
regulations for accessory buildings in residential and apartment districts contained in the
Zoning Ordinance 171 o Subsection 13 -101. (a, b, & c), and will not protect the character
of the immediate vicinity of the area.
4. Apart from the variances sort in the required lot front yard, building separation and side
yard set back requirements, there are no special and unique conditions of restricted area of
lot width, that exist on the subject parcel of land, which are applicable to other parcels of
I f
land in the SF -3 Zoning District, and which cause unusual and -practical difficulty or
unnecessary hardship to the use of the property with site improvements permitted by the
ordinance with the provision sought here to be varied. The residential lot is consistent with
the adjoining residential lots.
S. The hardship sought to be avoided is the result of (a) the applicant's own actions (self-
imposed or self-created), and no (b) economic or financial "hardship."
6. Thep rovision of the ordinance regulation that are sought to be varied, does not deprive the
applicant of reasonable rights to use the property that are commonly enjoyed by other
residential properties in the SF -3 Residential Zoning District which are required to comply
with these same ordinance provisions.
5. Adjournment.
November