Loading...
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