Jenks Board of Adjustment approves variance for 531 West H Street to resolve setback encroachment

The Jenks Board of Adjustment voted to approve a variance that recognizes an existing front build-line encroachment at 531 West H Street, clearing a title issue tied to the property's nonconforming setbacks.

City planning staff described the lot as platted in 1974 and said the original portion of the building was constructed in 1981, with a later 5,000-square-foot addition bringing the structure to roughly 10,000 square feet. Staff said the property is zoned industrial light and that updates to the city's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) have made several buildings in the subdivision nonconforming under current setback rules. Staff recommended approval to resolve the title problem and to avoid forcing a future buyer into repeated appeals.

"This is a quasi-judicial board," Marce, city planning staff, told the board while reviewing the statutory standards for variances and the procedural requirements for an affirmative vote. Marce said the board must find that literal enforcement of the UDO would create an unnecessary hardship, that the hardship is peculiar to the property, and that any relief granted is the minimum necessary. Marce recommended approval.

Lou Reynolds, the applicant's representative, told the board the building likely complied with the zoning and building-permit review in place when it was constructed and that the current UDO treats industrial setbacks differently than earlier codes. "If you will, because I didn't I was gonna file this application and I was told that I was not needed and the application got filed," Reynolds said, and later described the building history with the anecdote about older permit practice. He said the purpose of the variance was to make the existing building lawful under current code so a future buyer would not face rebuilding restrictions after a loss.

Board members reported a site visit, noted only one phone inquiry with no formal objections, and discussed whether the statutory tests for a variance were satisfied. One board member disclosed that they lease space at the subject property; that member did not recuse and participated in the vote.

A motion to approve the variance (to allow the existing setback as requested) was made, seconded and passed by roll call. The board's affirmative votes met the legal threshold required for a quasi-judicial variance. Staff said the approval should clear the title concern, though the title company must still decide whether to close without further UDO amendment.

Marce told the board the city will consider targeted UDO updates to avoid recurring nonconformities in older industrial parks. The applicant and staff also noted that, if the board had denied the request, the applicant could appeal the decision to district court.

The board returned to general business after the vote; staff plans follow-up on code amendments and will share proposed language with the applicant and the city attorney.