Board of Zoning Appeals

AGENDA BASEHOR BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS July 23, 2026 Regular Meeting 5:00 p.m. Basehor City Hall 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes of the Preceding Meeting a. March 24, 2025 Meeting 4. PV-001-26 – Request for a variance to exceed the rear building setback line for 1583 Grayhawk Drive for a deck addition. 5. Adjournment *To obtain a copy of any materials where redactions of personal information occur, please contact City Hall staff at 913-724-1370 or info@cityofbasehor.org* Page 1  MINUTES BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS March 24, 2025 Regular Meeting at 5:00pm Basehor City Hall 1. Call to Order 5PM 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call Members, Steve Foss, William Lindquist, Brian Freeman Staff-Jim Sherman, Planning Director, Alex Van Dyke, Assistant Planning Director, Diana Jacobson, Permit Technician 4. Approval of minutes of the preceding meeting. a. Minutes of December 16, 2024. Member Freeman motioned to approve the minutes with Member Lindquist seconding. Motion carried 3-0. 5. PV-001-25-Request for variance to exceed the allowed wall signs in CP-2 zoning district for Fareway Meat & Grocery Member Freeman opened the public hearing. No public comment Member Freeman closed the public hearing Member Freeman motioned to approve PV-001-25 with member Lindquist seconding. Motion carried 3-0. 6. Adjournment Member Freeman motioned to adjourn with Member Lindquist seconding, motion carried 3-0. Meeting adjourned 5:40pm. Submitted without corrections or additions on this 23rd day of July 2026. ________________________ ____________________ David Howard, Chair Diana Jacobson, Permit Tech Page 2  City of Basehor Agenda Item Cover Sheet Board of Zoning Appeals Item No. 4 Meeting Date: July 23, 2026 Staff Contact: Alex Van Dyke Topic: Variance Request for 1583 Grayhawk Dr Regarding Rear Yard Setbacks Narrative: The applicant is requesting to exceed the setback line for a deck. Staff Recommendation: Denial Recommended Motion: I move to deny Case No. PV-001-26, rear yard setback request for 1583 Grayhawk Drive. Attachments: Staff Report Application Deck Plan Page 3 Page 4 property. Finally, granting the variance would run contrary to the general spirit and intent of the Building Code, which establishes setback requirements to maintain consistent development patterns and adequate separation between structures and property lines throughout the district. Variance Request and Analysis The Zoning Regulations provide that a variance may be granted, upon finding by the board that all the following conditions have been met: 1. That the variance requested arises from such condition which is unique to the property in question, and which is not ordinarily found in the same zoning district; and is not created by an action or actions of the property owner or the applicant. 1.1. This factor asks whether the condition necessitating the variance is unique to the property, not common in the zoning district, and not the result of the property owner's own actions. In this case, the condition does not meet the standard. The home was newly constructed and could have been designed and sited to accommodate a deck within the required setback from the outset. The need for the variance was created entirely by the builders and applicants own design and construction choices, not by any unique physical characteristic of the lot itself. Staff finds this factor is not satisfied and supports denial. 2. The granting of the variance request will or will not adversely affect the rights of the adjacent property owners or residents. 2.1. This factor considers whether granting the variance would adversely affect the rights of neighboring property owners or residents. Staff did not cite this factor as a basis for the denial recommendation, indicating that the deck itself is not expected to create significant adverse impacts on adjacent properties in terms of privacy, light, or access. This factor is generally satisfied, though it alone is not sufficient to support approval given the deficiencies in the other criteria. 3. That the strict application of the provisions of the Building Code Ordinance of which variance is requested will constitute unnecessary hardship upon the property owner represented in the application. 3.1. This factor requires a showing that strict application of the setback requirement would impose an unnecessary hardship on the property owner. Staff finds this factor is not satisfied. The home was constructed and received final approval without a deck, meaning the property is fully functional and usable as built. Any hardship the applicant now faces stems from the decision to build without a deck rather than from any hardship imposed by the ordinance itself. A self-created hardship does not meet this standard. 4. That the variance desired will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, the general welfare, or the harmonious development of the city. 4.1. This factor asks whether the variance would adversely affect public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, the general welfare, or the harmonious development of the city. Staff did not cite this factor as a basis for denial, suggesting the City of Basehor Board of Zoning Appeals Page 5  deck is not expected to create a direct public safety concern. This factor is generally satisfied, though it does not outweigh the concerns raised under the other criteria. 5. That granting of the variance desired will not be opposed to the general spirit and intent of the Building Code. 5.1. This factor evaluates whether granting the variance would conflict with the general spirit and intent of the Building Code Ordinance. Staff finds this factor is not satisfied. Setback requirements exist to preserve consistent development patterns and maintain adequate separation between structures and property lines throughout the district. Granting a variance to accommodate a deck that was omitted during original construction, on a lot that already has less setback buffer than most homes in the district, would run counter to that intent. 6. That the variance, if granted, is the minimum variance that will afford relief and is the least modification possible of the Building Code provisions, which are in question. 6.1. This factor requires that the variance, if granted, represent the minimum modification necessary to provide relief. Staff did not identify this as one of the primary factors supporting denial, but it is worth noting that because the home was built without a deck, the applicant has flexibility in deck size, configuration, or placement that a property with an existing hardship might not have. This suggests alternatives may exist that would reduce or eliminate the need for encroachment into the setback, which further weakens the case for approval. Table 1: Variance Analysis No. Variance Condition Condition Met Condition Not Met That the variance requested arises from such condition which is unique to the property in question, and 1 which is not ordinarily found in the same zoning district; and is not created by an action or actions of the X property owner or the applicant. The granting of the variance request will or will not adversely affect the rights of the adjacent property 2 X owners or residents. That the strict application of the provisions of the Building Code Ordinance of which variance is requested 3 X will constitute unnecessary hardship upon the property owner represented in the application. That the variance desired will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, 4 X prosperity, the general welfare, or the harmonious development of the city. That granting of the variance desired will not be opposed to the general spirit and intent of the Building 5 X Code. That the variance, if granted, is the minimum variance that will afford relief and is the least modification 6 X possible of the Building Code provisions, which are in question. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial. Staff finds that not all necessary conditions are met. City of Basehor Board of Zoning Appeals Page 6 ACTION OPTIONS: 1. I move to approve Case No. PV-001-26, Setback Variance Request for 1583 Grayhawk Dr, based off the conditions to be considered; or 2. I move to deny Case No. PV-001-26, Setback Variance Request for 1583 Grayhawk Dr., for the following reasons; or 3. Continue the Public Hearing to another date, time, and place. City of Basehor Board of Zoning Appeals Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10