Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-12-06 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held at 3:50 P. M., Monday, December 6, 1976, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: David Newbern, Chester House, Mrs. Don Mills, Larry Smith. MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Carl Yates, Connie Clack, Dr. James White. OTHERS PRESENT: Jess Hawkins, Mrs. Exie Hardy, Mr. and Mrs. W. A. Emerson, Dr. J. B. Hays, Angie Medlock, Bobbie Jones. In the absence of Chairman Yates and Vice -Chairman White, David Newbern called the meeting to order. The public hearing was opened on Appeal No. 76-34, APPEAL NO. 76-34 Jess N. Hawkins, 2700 Block of Wyman Road, on an Jess Hawkins application to waive street frontage requirements 2700 Block of Wyman Road for tandem lots; or more specifically one 41.5 foot drive for two tandem lots and the required is a 25 foot private drive for each tandem lot. Mr. Jess N. Hawkins was present to represent. Mr. Hawkins said he has two tandem lots on the back of his property and has a 41 feet, 6 inch driveway back to those lots. He said what he would like to do is build one 25 foot wide road and have room on each side for utilities and would like to have per- mission to build on the other tandem lot. He would like to use the same driveway for both lots and have each party share the cost of taking care of the driveway. He said the tandem lot on the southeast corner already has a house on it. He is having to pay taxes on the southwest corner lot which he cannot use. He said he is on a fixed income and he needs to either sell the lot or build on it and sell it. David Newbern asked if he is proposing a common drive for the two lots and Jess Hawkins said "yes". David Newbern said the Ordinance would require two 25 foot wide driveways and Mr. Hawkins is proposing to have just the one driveway. He asked Mr. Hawkins who owns the adjoining property. Mr. Hawkins said Edward Tate owns the land on the Northeast corner and Owen Johnson owns the Northwest corner. David Newbern asked if the driveway out to Wyman Road was an easement and Mr. Hawkins said he owns all of the land as shown on the map. Mrs. Don Mills asked if the 41 feet, 6 inch driveway is the only land Mr. Hawkins owns which fronts on Wyman Road and Jess Hawkins said "yes". Chester House asked if he had talked to Mr. Johnson about buying 81 feet from him and Mr..Hawkins said Mr. Johnson bought the lot from someone else and has already taken ten feet from the west side which only leaves 115 feet and he doesn't think he would consider selling any of it. Mr. Hawkins mentioned that this driveway has been measured three different times and said one measurement is 39 feet, one 41 feet, 6 inches, and the last one is 43 feet, 7 inches. Mrs. Mills asked how much wider this would be than the driveway that is presently there and Mr. Hawkins said it wouldn't be any wider. He said 25 feet of it would be gravel and then he would leave the rest of the driveway for utilities. He said the utilities for the house on the west side have to come out on the west side of the driveway. David Newbern asked Jess Hawkins if he had once owned all of the land and sold some off and Mr. Hawkins said "yes". Mr. Hawkins said he bought it about 25 years ago, and sold off some of it about 5 years ago. Mr. Hawkins said he only gets $163 a month from Social Security and his wife gets less than half of that so he needs to sell this land; as it is now, it is useless to him. He said he can't do anything with it but he still has to pay taxes on it. No one was present to oppose the request. The public hearing was concluded. h7 nB� • • • Board of Adjustment Meeting December 6, 1976 -2- The public hearing was opened on Appeal No. 76-35, APPEAL NO. 76-35 W. A. Emerson, 617 North Walnut Street, for an W. A. Emerson application to vary setbacks; more specifically 617 North Walnut Street he is requesting a side yard setback of 4 feet, and the Ordinance requires 8 feet. Mr. $ Mrs. W. A. Emerson were present to represent. Mr. Emerson said it would improve the appearance of the structure and be of good use to him to build the garage on the side of the house. He said presently there is a garage at the back of the house which he could use as a shop. He said all of his neighbors, north, south, and west have approved what he is proposing to do and have no objections to it. David Newbern asked if this would be on the north side of the property and Mr. Emerson said "yes". He said his neighbor on the north, Mr. Hudson, is very willing for him to do this. David Newbern stated that the Ordinance requires that the Board find some sort of hardship (usually involving the characteristic of the land) and asked Mr. Emerson if there is any physical hardship. Mr. Emerson said he needs the shop because at the present time he has to leave his tools and his lawn mower outside. Also, it is nearly 100 feet for him to back out to the street and the new garage would only be about 55 feet out to the street. Mrs. Mills asked if he could put the garage at the back of the house or at the side of the old garage and he said he couldn't very well do this because this is the land which he uses as a garden. David Newbern asked if he could build the shop next to his existing garage. Mr. Emerson said this would take up more of his garden space David Newbern acknowledged the following letter to Bobbie Jones, Planning Administrator: Dear Mrs. Jones: Reference - Appeal # 76-35 Mr. W. A. Emerson, 617 N. Walnut We wish to state that we have no objection whatever to the granting or approval of the variance requested by Mr. Emerson. It is believed that his proceeding to build his carport to a line four feet from his lot line will in no way adversely affect the use or value of any adjoining or nearby property. Mr. Emerson is elderly and retired and the use of his present garage as a workshop will be a real boon to him. Lot #18, adjoining Mr. Emerson on the south, has been bequeathed to us by our sister's (Dr. Vera MacNair, deceased) will which is presently in the Washington County Probate Court and in which Mrs. Parker is named as executrix. Therefore we have legitimate interest in the matter aforementioned. Very truly yours, Helen MacNair Parker Glenn H. Parker Mrs. Emerson stated that the proposed garage would not be out of their lot line, it would just be out of the area where they are permitted to build. She explained that at the time the existing garage was built the side setback was only'S feet; now it is 8 feet. There was no one present to oppose the request. The public hearing was concluded. • • Board of Adjustment Meeting December 6, 1976 -3- The public hearing was opened on Appeal No. 76-36, APPEAL NO. 76-36 Dr. J. B. Hays, 1915 Green Acres Road, for an application J. B. Hays to vary setbacks; more specifically, he is requesting 1915 Green Acres Road a side -yard setback of 5 feet 6 inches, and the required is 15 feet. Dr. Hays said they are planning an addition to the present office with an extension to the west. He said at the time the office was constructed it did not require the setback since it was zoned commercial and he and Dr. Hammels (who has since passed away) did the parking on an individual basis on the front. He said at that time he could have built the building on the property line but set it back 51 feet. He said they would like to keep the building in the same line as it is now. He said the hallways and plumbing tunnels would be on a parallel basis and the building would look much better and be more functional. He said at the time the zoning was changed, heLdid not know it would require an additional setback or he would have opposed it. The City changed the zoning "on its own". David Newbern said Dr. Hays is asking for a sideyard setback which would keep the building in line as it is now. He asked if he could construct the building op his property getting the same amount of floor space and meet the requirements of the Ordinance but not have it on the same line as it is now and Dr. Hays said he could. He said they could set it off 15 feet, but they have tunnels for plumbing and said you would have a 10 -foot change in the plumbing. He said it would not be practical Dr. Hays also said the asthetics of the building would be much better if they could do it on a parallel basis. Mrs. Don Mills asked what problems he would run into if the variance was not granted. Dr. Hays said he would have two hallways and the building would not look good. He showed the members of the Board a drawing showing the tunnels and the proposed addition. Larry Smith explained the drawing to the members and showed them how the tunnels were originally built for expansion. Mrs. Mills asked what problems Dr. Hays would run into if he moved the building back 10 feet and Larry Smith said he would have to run the tunnels outside of the building. Dr. Hays mentioned that they have a sidewalk and a planter to the south side of the building which they would probably continue to keep the cars from coming in towards the building. Bobbie Jones said Dr. Hays was correct about the zoning being changed. She said the setbacks in the R-0 district can get ambiguous. R-0 is residential, which would make the side setback 15 feet instead of 10 feet. She said Residential includes R-1, R-2, and 1? -3. She said if he was abutting commercial he would only require a 10 foot setback instead of 15 feet. Dr. Hays said the property to the south and the north is office space and the school property is directly behind. There was no one present to oppose the request. The public hearing was concluded. The public hearing was opened on Appeal No. 76-37, APPEAL NO. 76-37 Mrs. Exie Hardy, 573 North Walnut Street, on an Exie Hardy application to vary setbacks; more specifically, 573 N. Walnut Street 5 feet in the front where the required is a 25 foot setback plus 5 feet for the Master Street Plan, 5 feet on the side yard, the required is 8 feet for a carport; and an addition on the back of the house which would leave a 5 foot setback on the side where the Ordinance requires 8 feet. Mrs. Hardy said the space where the car is parked all of the time is where she would like to build the carport. She said this is the only place she can park because in the back there are so many fences and trees that she couldn't turn around, or get in and out. She said in the winter there is ice on her car and she it? • • • Board of Adjustment Meeting December 6, 1976 -4- has a crippled knee and has trouble walking, especially on ice. She said there is a problem with a tree on the lot next to hers, which ruins the paint on her car. She said she needs to have the car inside and had talked with Mr. Laner who has the only house next to her and he said he didn't care what she built. She said that the last time she talked to Mr. Henderson he didn't object, and he only has a vacant lot next to her. She said the last time she tried to build the carport he signed a petition to try to help her. David Newbern asked if she is also proposing another addition and Mrs. Hardy said she may close the back corner of her house in but she isn't sure about that yet. Mr. Newbern asked if all of the property shown on the drawing is on her lot and Mrs. Hardy said she has a narrow driveway which goes all of the way back, which is a partnership driveway with the house Mr. Laner has. She said to tear down the fences and cut the trees down, it would still be hard to turn around and back out with the fence there and the cars parked at the house behind her. She stated that if everyone understood the seriousness of the problem, they wouldn't object. Mr. Newbern said the objection received by the Planning Office and copied in its entirety below would have to be taken into consideration. Dear Gentlemen: This has reference to your letter of December 1, 1976, addressed to members regarding application for adjustment. My clients, Mr. and Mrs. Henderson, own property adjoining that of Mrs. Exie Hardy, appeal number 76-37 filed by Mrs. Hardy request zoning district R-1, Low Density Residential District. Mr. and Mrs. Henderson in due of the fact that their property adjoins that of Mrs. Hardy, and will be materially affected and damaged by the provision or rezoning as requested, has asked that you note on your files their objection to Mrs. Hardy's request for rezoning. Thanking you kindly, I am Yours very truly, Carlos B. Hill Mrs. Mills asked if Mrs. Hardy had talked to Mr. Henderson about cutting the tree and she said he won't even let her cut one limb, so he wouldn't consider cutting the tree. The public hearing was concluded. Mrs. Mills asked how close Mr. Hawkins would come APPEAL NO. 76-34 to the utility poles on the east and west, and if there is Jess N. Hawkins a required distance the driveway would have to be back 2700 Block of Wyman Rd. from the poles. David Newbern stated that the utility poles are (or will be) on both sides. Bobbie Jones said, to her knowledge, there are no requirements on how far the driveway has to be from the utility poles. She said the Ordinance requires the Planning Commission to approve tandem lots and they approved Jess Hawkins on the condition the Board of Adjustment let him have the 41 feet, 6 inch driveway. She said there is no separation required for utilities other than what the utility companies themselves require. Mr. Newbern asked if Mr. Hawkins had 50 feet of access to Wyman Road if he would meet the requirements and Bobbie Jones said no, he would need 25 feet between the driveways but the Planning Commission may waive that. She said the Planning Commission looked at this as one mutual driveway. She said all they had approved was the request Board of Adjustment Meeting December 6, 1976 -5- for two tandem lots. She said tandem lots are limited to one single-family dwelling on each lot, and any building built on the lot would have to be 20 feet from the lot line. Mr. Newbern said it seems almost wasteful to require two 25 foot driveways to be built and yet the Ordinance requires some sort of physical hardship. He said Mr. Hawkins should have planned better 5 years ago when he started selling off the property. Larry Smith said he feels there is a hardship involved because the land will be wasted. He doesn't see any other way of acquiring extra property since he really needs 75 feet. Larry Smith made a motion that the variance be granted. Chester House seconded the motion, which was passed 3-1, with Mills, House, and Smith voting "Aye", and Newbern voting "Nay". Mrs. Mills stated that there seems to be room in other places APPEAL NO. 76-35 for the garage to be built and where it is proposed, it will W A Emerson be extremely close to the property line. David Newbern 617 N. Walnut Street said the thing that bothers him is that this could be done in so many other places on this property. Mrs. Emerson said it would be expensive for them to make another drive. She said they had just recently made a drive to the garage and if they had to curve around, it would make them still further from the street. David Newbern said they could build a shop on the back of the house or find another possibility. Mr. Emerson said all of the neighbors around have their garage about on the property line so they wouldn't be the only one. Mrs. Mills moved to deny the variance. Chester House seconded the motion. Larry Smith suggested that the Emerson's might like to reconsider the location of a carport and come back before the Board at a later date, but they refused The motion to deny was passed unanimously, by a vote of 4-0. David Newbern said they had a similar request from APPEAL NO. 76-36 Dr. Albright who is directly adjacent to Dr. Hays, J. B. Hays which the Board approved; however, Dr. Albright had 1915 Green Acres Road explained that much of his work is done with him in a wheelchair and he would have difficulty navigating offset hallways. Chester House moved to grant the variance as requested. Mrs. Mills stated that the hardship is not physical. David Newbern said the financial difficulty involved would be a problem. He said the asthetic thing is not considered a hardship in his opinion. He cited the fact that his property has been rezoned since his building was built and he could have moved the building and had room to add on to it. Larry Smith said a person who invests money in a business cannot anticipate growth or zoning changes. Mrs. Mills said that she didn't realize they had so much tunneling and Larry Smith said the tunneling was planned for expansion. David Newbern said the Ordinance does not prevent Dr. Hays from adding on to the building. Larry Smith said if someone needs to increase facilities, he may have to move to do it. He stated that there is no way you can rebuild for what the building cost a few years ago. David Newbern said you have to show some sort of physical hardship having to do with the lay of the land or a unique characteristic which will cause you to be in a different position from your neighbors. He said then it is necessary to show that you did own the property when it was zoned as it is now. He said most Board of Adjustment's want the person to show that they have not brought the hardship on themselves, and Dr. Hays does fit the last two requirements. He said zoning change is not generally considered a hardship. Mrs. Mills seconded the motion by Chester House to grant the variance. The motion failed to pass with Mills and House voting "Aye", Newbern voting "Nay", and Smith abstaining. �� J • • • 82 A • • • Board of Adjustment Meeting December 6, 1976 -6- David Newbern asked Mrs. Hardy what she plans to do in APPEAL NO. 76-37 the back of the property where she shows the addition. Mrs. Exie Hardy Mrs. Hardy said she wants to build a room. Chester 573 North Walnut Street House said he doesn't think the Board could consider passing this variance because of the Master Street Plan. He said she could come back in on the north side of the house. Mrs. Hardy said there is a fence and some big trees there she would have to cut down. Chester House said her carport would be exactly on the line of the Master Street Plan. Mrs. Hardy said there is additional space with a sidewalk and grass. She said she isn't a good enough driver to back all the way out and around. David Newbern said he would have been opposed to this even without the letter in opposition from Mr. Henderson. He mentioned to Mrs. Hardy that she could cut the limbs which overhand on her property. Mrs. Mills moved to deny the variance, with Chester House seconding the motion. The motion was passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. Chester House made a motion to approve the mintues as mailed. Mrs. Mills seconded the motion which was passed unanimously, by a vote of 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 5:13 P. M.