HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-09-19 MinutesMINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held at 3:45 P. M.,
Monday, September 19, 1977, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration
Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Carl Yates, Dr. James White, Mrs. Don Mills, Rick
Osborne, Chester House, Larry Smith, David Newbern.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
None.
Bobbie Jones, Angie Medlock, Rick Beye, Mr, H. H. Hudgens,
Richard Mayes, and other unidentified persons.
Chairman Carl Yates called the meeting to order.
The first item for consideration was a public
hearing on the Appeal No. 77-22, H. H. Hudgens,
833 Hall Avenue, on an application to vary setbacks
in order to enlarge his garage, or more specifically,
he is asking to build a new garage larger than the existing one on the south building
wall location of the existing garage which is 3 feet from adjoining property.
The roof overhang would be 2 feet 4 inches from the property line and the required
side yard setback is 8 feet.
Mr. H. H. Hudgens was present to represent himself.
Mr. Hudgens said there was no other way to build a two -car garage. He explained
that the south wall would be 3 feet from the property line, and the new garage
would be somewhat larger than the one which is there now. He said about 12 feet
behind the garage is a rock wall, 2 feet high or higher, and a garden area. He
said if he moved the garage back, it would entail considerably more expense. Also,
it would not line up with the present driveway. He said he had tried to turn the
garage sideways behind the house and back out and come down the driveway forwards but
there is a big walnut tree in the way. He would not have room to back a car out.
He said the way he is proposing is the only plan he was able to come up with.
Mr. Hudgens said he has owned the property for 17 years and it has been in his
family for approximately 50-60 years. He explained that the only alternative he
would have would be to put up a shed -type, L-shaped garage on the north side of the
present garage.
Chairman Yates asked if Mr. Hudgens had talked with the neighbors and Mr. Hudgens
said the neighbor to the north and to the south did not object.
Dr. Preston L. Hathcock, 909 Hall Avenue, was present and stated that he wanted
to be sure no apartment could be built over the garage. Bobbie Jones explained
that this was not included in the application and that the lot was not wide
enough to have two separate dwelling structures on it.
The public hearing was concluded.
APPEAL NO. 77-22
H. H. Hudgens
833 Hall Avenue
The second item for discussion was a public
-hearing on the Appeal No. 77-723, R. H. Mayes,
415 South Church Avenue, on an application to vary lot
width and to waive Article 4, Section 2, non-
conforming lots or record of Appendix A - Zoning, in order to sell a non -conforming
lot; or more specifically he is asking to be able to sell a 50 foot wide lot
and the Zoning Ordinance requires 60 feet lot width.
APPEAL NO. 77-23
R. H. Mayes
415 South Church
v-8
•
Board of Adjustment Meeting
September 19, 1977 -2-
Richard Mayes was present to represent his mother.
Richard Mayes said his parents bought these three lots in 1956.Rhen he bought them,
he had planned on selling the lot to the south. He said now it would be .convenient
for his mother to sell the lot since his father has passed away. He explained that
there is a stone retaining wall between each lot, 2-4 feet high. He also said the
sewer and water service lines are between his mother's house (on the middle lot)
and the retaining wall and if they made the south lot larger, it would cause
them to have to change the location of those lines. Also, a new retaining wall
would have to be built the full 142 feet depth if the lot size is changed.
Mr. Mayes said all of the lots in the neighborhood are 50 foot lots and many of them
have houses on them. There was no one present to oppose.
The public hearing was concluded.
Mrs. Mills stated that she feels Mr. Hudgens APPEAL NO. 77-22
has an answer to his problem without the variance-- H. H. Hudgens
to add onto the present garage. She said she doesn't see 833 Hall Avenue
a hardship.
Chairman Yates asked Mr. Hudgens what type of construction he is proposing and
Mr. Hudgens said the building would be 24' x 30' closed on the west and north
sides and would look better than what is existing.
Chairman Yates asked if Mr. Hudgens would be willing to accept a variance with
the condition that he would have to put doors on the garage. Mr. Hudgens said
he doesn't want to put doors on the garage because he is not planning on putting
any supports in the middle. He said the doors would necessitate a support in the
middle.
• Richard Osborne said he would be opposed to giving him this type of conditional
variance.
Dr. White made a motion to grant the variance as requested. The motion died for
lack of a second.
Larry Smith questioned the dimension from the house to the south property line.
Mr. Hudgens did not know the dimension but explained that he could not back out
with the garage as Larry Smith proposed it.
Mrs. Mills made a motion to deny the variance.
David Newbern questioned what Mr. Hudgens would do if he were not granted the
variance. Mr. Hudgens said he would put a structure up but it would not look
nice. He would attach it to the back of the existing garage.
David Newbern seconded the motion made by Mrs. Mills.
David Newbern said the property could be utilized as the owner wants to utilize
it without a variance. He felt this is a cosmetic problem and felt the Board
shouldn't get involved in cosmetic variances.
Chairman Yates did not agree with David Newbern. He felt you should look at the
overall effect.
Larry Smith questioned if there is a driveway on the north part of the adjoining
property to the south. Mr. Hudgens said there is, but there is approximately
8-10 feet from their property line to the south. His driveway and the one to the
south would be too close to put Mr. Hudgens driveway on his south property line.
Richard Osborne said he felt they should grant the variance. He noted that none
of the neighbors object. He stated that he is troubled by the percentage size of
the variance. Chairman Yates said there is an existing building which he can
expand with a variance and make it a better looking structure. Mr. Yates said he
felt this is completely different than someone just coming in and asking for a
• new garage.
121
•
•
Board of Adjustment Meeting
September 19, 1977 -3-
Larry Smith explained that there is no other way he could put the garage on the
property. He said he could not build the driveway against the south property
line, and with the walnut tree there, there is no other way he can put the garage
up.
The motion to deny, made by Mrs. Mills and seconded by David Newbern failed to
pass 2-4-1, with Mills and Newbern voting "Aye", Yates, Osborne, White, and Smith
voting "Nay" and House abstaining.
David Newbern said in a situation where a property owner comes before the Board and
tells them he can accomplish the purpose he wants to accomplish essentially without
a variance, he feels a variance should not be granted. He said this is not just a
question of hardship. It is a question of whether the Board should be involved
in only upholding the Zoning Ordinance unless there is a compelling reason to
grant the variance.
Chairman Yates stated that there is no question that Mr. Hudgens could build the
garage, but he could improve it by the granting of a variance.
Richard Osborne questioned if they would rather have a new structure there or
something tacked onto the old structure.
Mrs. Mills felt the cosmetic factor should not enter in to be the determining
factor. She said the Board tries to figure out a way to use the property so
they can do what they propose. She said she is not sure this should be their
primary concern.
Larry Smith made a motion to grant the variance. Dr. White seconded the motion,
which passed 4-2-1, with Yates, Osborne, Smith, and White voting "Aye" Newbern
and Mills voting "Nay", and House abstaining.
Dr. White questioned if it would be permissible to split APPEAL NO. 77-23
the center lot belonging to Mrs. R. H. Mayes. Bobbie R. H. Mayes
Jones said as long as the lot is split in such a way 415 South Church
that you are combining the north lot and the
remainder of the middle lot together, it could be done. This would give them two
lots instead of three.
Chairman Yates said the only remaining problem would be the water and sewer lines.
David Newbern said this could be taken care of with an easement for the water and
sewer lines.
David Newbern said there is some hardship involved since the land is divided with
the two four -foot high retaining walls. He said if Mr. Mayes cannot sell the
lot with this easement for water and sewer, the Board would be willing to rehear
the case.
Mr. Mayes was concerned about selling the lot with the easement and Richard Osborne
said he didn't feel it would make it that much harder to sell the lot. Richard
Osborne said he could also include an easement for the retaining wall. He noted
that there is an 8 foot setback from the side property line
Chairman Yates said if they had trouble selling the lot subject to the easement,
the Board of Adjustment would be willing to rehear it.
Chairman Yates asked if he could build a duplex on the lot and Bobbie Jones said
a 60 foot lot would be large enough to meet the minimum size requirements.
She explained that they would have to meet parking and setback requirements.
David Newbern made a motion to deny in view of the fact the property can be
dealt with in another way. He said if the lot turns out to be unsalable he
would be willing to listen to it then.
Dr. White seconded the motion, which passed 7-0.
The last item for consideration was Appeal No. 77-21,
Leo Peel, on an application to vary the requirement
for frontage on and access to a public street, tabled
August 29, 1977, in order for Board members to consult
with the City Attorney.
APPEAL No. 77-21
Leo Peel
College Avenue
130
•
•
•
Board of Adjustment Meeting
September 19? 1977
Chairman Yates said the City Attorney had told them prior to the meeting, they
could consider the request as if the Hudson property owners had made the request
without considering the fact that Mr. Peel may be in a bad position for buying
the lot.
Chester House asked 'when the property was purchased. Rick Beye said the offer
and acceptance was made July 16, 1975.
Chester House questioned if Mr. Peel has a real estate license and a broker's
license. Rick Beye said he felt he did and Richard Osborne said he was told that
Mr. Peel did have both.
Chester House questioned who the agent was who sold Mr. Peel the property and Mr.
Beye said it was Fidelies Real Estate.
Chester House said that knowing someone is in real estate and a broker, he feels
he should know what he is getting into when he purchases the property. He does
not have a great deal of sympathy for the situation. He said when you deal in
real estate every day, you should be aware of the law.
Richard Osborne said he felt Mr. Peel is entitled to equal protection under the
law.
David Newbern said he is troubled because the Hudson's do not need a building permit.
Bobbie Jones said they had failed to obtain a lot split but she would not have
been able to approve a lot split because they were land -locking a piece of
property. Bobbie Jones explained that they would not meet the frontage require-
ments of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Adjustment is the only one which
can waive bulk and area requirements.
David Newbern said the question is if a piece of land -locked property should be
granted a variance to the frontage requirements. The other factor is that Mr. Peel
has given a promise of an easement to get to the back piece of property.
Rick Beye said he felt the real concern is "if it would be appropriate to grant a
variance with a 25 foot easement roadway and not any actual frontage".
He said Mr. Peel is suffering a hardship by not being able to obtain a building
permit. He said the variance still accomplishes all the objectives which street
frontage does.
Mrs. Mills said she is still concerned that the Hudson's are not asking for the
variance.
Chairman Yates said he is not convinced the Board of Adjustment is the one who
should be granting the remedy.
Richard Osborne questioned if the 25 foot easement would not suffice for access to
Mr. Hudson's lot and Bobbie Jones said they would have to actually own the 25 feet
and then they could ask the Planning Commission for a tandem lot.
Bobbie Jones explained that Mr. Peel would not have any required side setbacks in
that zone but the building code may require certain setbacks. She said it would
vary with the type of construction used. Bobbie Jones said if he gave Mr. Hudson
-the 25 foot strip back to his property, he would still have 75 feet width of
buildable area.
David Newbern made a motion to deny the variance. Dr. White seconded the motion;
which passed 6-0-1, with Yates, White, Smith, Mills, Osborne, and Newbern
voting "Aye" and House abstaining.
Chairman Yates acknowledged the letter from County Judge LETTER FROM VOL LESTER
Vol Lester concerning the Hospital's plans not to close the
parking lot south of Washington Regional Medical Center. The lot is in the R-1
Zoning District and does not conform to the uses permitted in that zone.
David Newbern made a motion to approve the minutes of August 29, MINUTES
1977, as mailed. Dr. White seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 P. M.
131