Public Hearing followed by discussion and possible action on any and all matters regarding Variance Case No. 2023-0407 - Mariscos El Navegante.  A request by Jesus Ortiz, owner of Mariscos el Navegante, for a variance from the City Code Chapter 18.75 - Table No. 15 to reduce the parking required from 32 to 8 in a neighborhood commercial (C-1), located at 840 D Street in San Luis, Arizona. (Jose A. Guzman, Director of Planning & Zoning)

A. Open Public Hearing
     1. Staff Presentation and Applicant if available
     2. Call to the Public on this item
B.  Close Public Hearing
C. Action on Variance Case No. 2023-0407

The property in question is located at 840 East D Street; parcel number 775-38-109 and is zoned as Community Commercial (C-2).  The request is to reduce the parking space required from 32 to 8 from the City Code Chapter 18.75 - Table No. 15 of the City of San Luis Zoning Ordinance.  This variance will allow the owner to construct a dining area addition to the existing building. 

AGENCY REVIEW:
As with all variance requests, this was distributed to various review agencies. We have received comments from the following agencies:

1. City of San Luis Fire Department (8-14-23)

As required by State Statute, staff sent notification letters to property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project (35 letters).  

The City has received letters of opposition from the following owners:

• 763 Cesar Chavez St
• 834 Cesar Chavez St
• 835 2nd Ave
• 836 N 4th Ave
• 828 N 4th Ave
• 820 Cesar Chavez St
• 863 Cesar Chavez St
• 890 D St
• 845 Cesar Chavez St
• 773 2nd Ave

CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL:
All requests for a variance from the City of San Luis Zoning Ordinance must meet the criteria for a variance as set forth in the City of San Luis Zoning Ordinance. A variance is not a right. It may be granted to an applicant only if the applicant establishes compliance with all of the hardship criteria established in A.R.S. §9-462.06 and is Section 18.15.060 (C) of the Zoning Ordinance. In all cases, the application shall address all of the following hardship criteria:

1. There exist special circumstances or conditions regarding the land or building referred to in the application, which do not apply to other properties in the zoning district.
2. The above special circumstances or conditions are preexisting and are not created or self-imposed by the owner or applicant.
3. The variance is necessary for the preservation of substantial property rights. Without a variance the property cannot be used for purposes otherwise allowed in this zoning district.
4. The authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity, to adjacent property, or to the neighborhood or the public welfare

The Arizona Revised Statutes (§9-462.069-462.06. Board of adjustment) further state that the Board may not:

1. Make any changes in the uses permitted in any zoning classification or zoning district.
2. Grant a variance if the special circumstances applicable to the property are self-imposed by the property owner.

ANALYSIS:

1. There exist special circumstances or conditions regarding the land or building referred to in the application, which do not apply to other properties in the zoning district.
   
   Staff does not find that there are any special circumstances or conditions relating to this request. The lot is rectangular in shape and is 10,880 square feet in size. Therefore, the lot shape is not a special condition or circumstance and the lot size is bigger than the minimum lot size required for this zoning district which is 8,000 square feet.
    
2. The above special circumstances or conditions are preexisting and are not created or self-imposed by the owner or applicant.
   
   There are no special circumstances or conditions. The conditions creating the request were created by the property owner.
    
3. The variance is necessary for the preservation of substantial property rights. Without a variance, the property cannot be used for purposes otherwise allowed in this zoning district. 
   
   Staff does not find that the approval of this request is necessary for the preservation of substantial property rights. The property is currently being used as a restaurant which is a permitted use in the zoning district, if variance is denied, the property owner will be able to continue with the current use. 
    
4. The authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity, to adjacent property, or to the neighborhood or the public welfare.
   
   If this variance is approved, it might not be materially detrimental directly to persons residing or working in the vicinity, however, it would potentially increase the issue of off-street parking that currently exists in this neighborhood. There is currently a problem in this area regarding limited off-street parking availability due to existing businesses and agricultural workers parking their cars in this area all day, by allowing less on-site parking, more customers will have to use the limited off-street parking.

A. I MOVE TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.
     1. Presentation by staff and/or applicant
     2. Call to the Public on this item
B. I MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
C. I MOVE TO DENY VARIANCE CASE NO. 2023-0407 BECAUSE THE APPLICATION DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR A VARIANCE.