HomeMy WebLinkAbout1957-09-04 MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
September 4, 1957 3:30 P.M.
• COUNCIL CHAMBER
Present:
Mr.
L. M. McGoodwin, Chairman
Mr.
Clarence Young
She
Mr.
Witt Carter
port, which
Mr,
J. R. Crocker, Sr.
side property line
Mr.
and Mrs. W. W. Ramey,
Applicants
Mr.
Karl Greenhaw, Attorney
for Mr. and Mrs. Ramey
Mr.
W. B. Putman, Attorney
for Mrs. Brewer
Mr.
Harry Lyons, Applicant
Mr. L. M. McGoodwin, Chairman, called the meeting to order and asked the
secretary to withhold reading the minutes of the previous meeting held July 29,
1957, until Mr. Clarence Young arrived.
The
first application was that of Mrs. C. B. Craig,
of 322 N.
Washington Ave.
She
wished to erect a
cantilever type aluminum car
port, which
would be closer to
the
side property line
than the five feet required by
the Zoning
Ordinance.
Mr. Lieberenz reported to the Board that Mrs. Craig had withdrew her application.
• Her statment reads as follows:
Mrs. Craig notified the Building Inspector that prior to making her application
for the variance her next door neighbor had given Mrs. Craig the understanding
that she had no objections to the proposed car port. But after the notice was put
in the paper, the neighbor voiced an objection, whereby Mrs. Craig came by the
next morning and asked that her application be cancelled.
Mr. Carter moved the application be withdrawn.
Mr. Crocker second the motion.
There being no further discussion, a vote was indicated and roll was called.
McGoodwin Yes
Carter Yes
Crocker Yes
The application was granted.
96 J
Sept. 4, 1957
Page -2-
• The next application was that of Mr. Harry Lyons of 228 S. Block St. His request
was to extend his garage building in such a way that it would be closer to the
property line than the 5 feet required by the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. McGoodwin asked Mr. Lyons to explain to the Board what the reasons were
for making the application. Mr. Lyons replied that his present garage was too
short for his car. Several years ago when he had earlier model cars they fit in
his garage, but his present car would not. Also, he didn't have storage space,
nor a place for a work bench.
Mr. McGoodwin asked
Harold to
read the section of
the Zoning
Ordinance which
regulates the action of
the Board
of Adjustment
and
matters of
this type.
Mr. Lieberenz read Part 3 under Section 15, which was as follows:
3. To authorize a variance where, by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness
or shape of a specific piece of property of record on the date of the passage of this
Ordinance, or by reason of exceptional topographical conditions or other extra-
ordinary or exceptional situation or condition of a specific piece of property, the strict
application of any provision of this ordinance would result in peculiar and except-
ional practical difficulties and particular hardship upon the owner of such property
and amount to a}pr.actical confiscation of such property as distinguished from a
• mere inconvenience to such owner, provided such relief can be granted without sub-
stantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the general
purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan as established by the regulations and
provisions contained in this Ordinance.
•
17
Sept. 4, 1957
Page 4 -
Mr. Lyons stated that the area of his lot was reduced when the highway by-pass
• was built. His lot width on the East was reduced foam 51 feet to 22 feet and
thereby making it impossible for him to move his garage building to the South
away from this North property line and still satisfy other requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance,
L
Mr. Crocker asked if there was any objections from the people. There weren't any.
Mr. McGoodwin stated that the lot was small to begin with and a considerable part
of the lot was taken away from Mr. Lyons by the highway and so reduced the size
of the lot a considerable amount. Also, he felt that in this particular instance he
should have a written statment from neighbors to any objections.
Mr. Crocker said he did not think this necessary because if the people had any ob-
jections, they would have voiced them by now.
There being no further discussion, a vote was indicated and roll was called:
Carter
Yes
McGoodwin
Yes
Crocker
Yes
The application was granted.
The minutes of the last meeting were read and several corrections were made.
The next application was that of Mr. W. W. Ramey. Mr. Lieberenz stated that
Mr. Greenhaw and the party involved in the Ramey application were here to see
if the case could not be reopened.
Mr. Young stated that as a motion was passed at the last meeting to deferr action
until the court decides.
Mr. McGoodwin brought outthe fact that some of the Board members have indicated
that they consider re -hearing Mr. Ramey's case as set out in the original application.
After a lengthly discussion among the Board members about reopening the case prior
to court action Mr. Crocker moved the Board reconsider the action and reopen the
case.
After no further discussion, a vote was indicated and roll was called:
Young No
McGoodwin Yes
Crocker Yes
. Carter Yes
Due to the fact that Mr. Putman had a misunderstanding as to the purpose of this
meeting, the Board felt that he should have the opportunity to gather his facts pert-
inant to the case.
W
Sept. 4, 1957
Page -4-
Mr. Crocker moved the hearing to be re -opened before the Board next Tuesday,
• Sept. 10, 1957 at 3:30 P.M.
Mr. MCGoodwin second the motion.
The next application presented before the Board by Mr. Lieberenz was that of
Mary R. Penick, as requested by Mr. Giles Penick, Jr. of 409 Washington Ave.
Mr. Penic$ stated in his written application that Mary R. Penick wishes to remodel
her property on Markham road. The resident would be remodeled in such a way
that it would be closer to the rear property line than the 25 feet required by the
Zoning Ordinance.
His request is to (come out from his house 12 feet to the West. The house is sitting
so far back on the end of the lot. It will be ohly six feet from the property line,
normally 2t ft. to the West. The house is sitting so far back on the end of the lot.
It will be only 6 ft. from the property line, normally 25 ft.
The reasons read as follows:
Reasons for Variance:
• The house, which is less than five hundred square feet in floor area, is too
small for owner,occupancy or for the production of revenue. In order to realize the
full beneficial use of the property it is necessary that the house be enlarged. Due
to the location of the house it is impossible to extend it either to the North or East.
Applicant regards it as impractical to extend the house to the South, which is toward
the front of the lot, for the following reasons:
(a) There is a uniform slope of approximately five degrees to the South. This
would require an expensive and unsightly dirt fill and foundation about four feet high
on the street side of the house.
(b) For use as a carport an extension to the South would require added expense
of new grading of drive -way approach with retaining walls and new landscaping expense.
(c) An extension to the South would destroy symmetry and proportion of the
structure and defeat the ou mer's purpose to improve the architectural quality of the
house.
(d) An extension to the South would not harmonize with the existing floor plan
and would partially obscure the view which is one of the principal assets of the house.
None of the above hardships or objections exists with relation to a West ex-
tansion. In addition, the space to the West of the house is unsuited by grand and
• relation to existing floor plan for any other use, and the denial of this application
would constitute a practical confiscation of this land and a hardship on its owner.
a
Sept. 4, 1957
Page -5-
The granting of the application will not diminish the light and air to any adjacent
property, will not increase the public danger of fire, will not impair established
property values in the area and will not in any way impair the health, safety,
comfort, morals or welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Fayetteville.
Applicant therefore respectfully urges that the variance herein requested be granted,
There being no further discussion, a vote was indicated, and roll was called:
McGoodwin
Yes
Young
Yes
Carter
Yes
Crocker
Yes
The application waa granted.
There being no further business, Mr. Crocker moved the meeting adjourn.
• Secr ary
Approv d: ��
100