Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-06-19 Minutes.MINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held on Monday, June 19, 1978, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Vice -Chairman James White, Larry Smith, David Newbern, Richard Osborne, Mrs. Don Mills, Chester House. Chairman Carl Yates. Bobbie Jones, Angie Medlock, Attorney Tom Burke, Don Moore, City Manager Don Grimes. In the absence of Chairman Carl Yates, Vice -Chairman meeting to order. James White called the The only item for discussion was the public APPEAL NO. 78-11 hearing on Appeal No. 78-11, Don Moore, Don Moore 1793 Applebury Place on an application to 1793 Applebury Place vary setbacks, or more specifically, he is asking for a side property line setback of 4 feet, and 5 feet, 6 inches, and the requirement is 8 feet from the side line. Tom Burke and Don Moore were present to represent. Mr. Burke said Mr. Moore had entered into an agreement with Mrs. Edmiston to build the structure and he assumed she would comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. He said when the inspector issued the stop work order, it was apparent the permit had not been issued. Mr. Burke noted that the adjoining property owner does not object to the variance. He said the building is about 80% complete and would have to be substantially destroyed in order to meet the setback requirement. Dr. White questioned if the measurement shown is from the roof overhang and Mr. Moore said it is from the overhang. In answer to Mr. Newbern's question, Bobbie Jones explained that the 4 foot variance requested is to the storage shed from the property line and the 5 ft. 6 inches is from the carport to the property line. David Newbern said he thought most contractorsgenerally understood that they are to get a building permit before beginning construction. Bobbie Jones said she had talked to Helen Edmiston who said there had been a misunderstanding and someone who does work for her had undertaken to complete the job on his own. She said, however, when they issued the stop work order, someone from her office did come in for the building permit. David Newbern asked if Mr. Moore had bought the house or built it and Mr. Moore said he had bought it. Richard Osborne pointed out that no one was present objecting to the variance and there was a letter in the agenda from the adjoining property owner who said he had no objections. Chester House said he is in sympathy with the property owner, but felt they may be setting a precedent for this type of variance in the future. David Newbern said he felt they should consider this request just as if it had not been built. He said the fact it is already constructed should not be considered one way or the other. He said the Board of Adjustment's job is to consider if the variance is justified if the building permit were to be applied for -.today. _2 . • • • • • Board of Adjustment Meeting June 19, 1978 Dr. White asked what justification there would be for granting the variance with that in mind. Tom Burke said with the size of the desired improvement, it might not be possible to locate the addition on the lot. Dr. White questioned if the house sits parallel to the street and Tom Burke said it does not. David Newbern questioned what the applicant's course of action would be if the request were denied. Mr. Moore said he does not feel there is any way to build that structure on the end on the house, other than like they have done. He said the addition is 24 feet by 32 feet, and they would probably have to remove the entire structure. Dr. White questioned how this came to Bobbie Jones' attention and she said the inspector had seen it and noticed that there was not a permit. Larry Smith noted that this is not a 4 foot variance the uniform length of the house and it does get greater as you approach the street. Chester House said he feels the contractor on the building should be present at the meeting. Tom Burke agreed that they feel it is the contractor's responsibility to try to clear this up. David Newbern noted that the Board of Adjustment rules require that the property owner be present. Dr. White questioned if Mr. Moore has a written contract with Helen Edmiston and Mr. Moore said it was a verbal contract. The public hearing was concluded. Mrs. Mills said she felt there would have been no need for the variance had the permit been obtained. She said she felt with planning, this situation could have been avoided. She said she feels this is a problem which the Moore's have through no fault of their own. Mrs. Mills questioned if this is an unusual occurance and Bobbie Jones said this has happened before. Dr. White questioned what would have happened if they could have met the requirements and Bobbie Jones said they would have issued a permit. She said the Inspection Office may be able to charge a double fee for their failing to obtain a permit. Richard Osborne said he does not feel this would be setting a precedent. He said he feels they consider each case on a unique basis. David Newbern said he is trying to see if this variance is unique since it only requires a variance on the northerly line. He questioned if they would have granted the variance if he had applied for it before applying for the permit. He felt they would have suggested that he buildthe storage building behind the house, or build a smaller carport, if necessary, He said he felt they would not have granted the variance for cosmetic reasons. Mrs. Mills questioned if on an oral agreement the contractor would be responsible for obtaining the building permit and Chester House said it differs with different contractors. Richard Osborne said it isnotnormal for a contractor to go out and start driving nails without the property being posted with a site card showing that the permit has been issued. Larry Smith said he felt if the house had been parallel to the property line and there had been a request for a 4 foot variance, he felt he would have gone along with it. He said he still looks at the one corner as being the obstacle. He noted that this type of situation on this type of lot may never come up again. Mrs. Mills said she could understand if this were a new builder in Fayetteville. • • Board of Adjustment Meeting June 19, 1978 Richard Osborne made a motion to grant the variance due to of the lot and the placement of the house thereon, and the Larry Smith seconded the motion. The Board indicated they felt the builder should be assesse not obtaining the permit. The motion passed 4-2, with Mills, Osborne, Smith, and Whit Newbern and House voting "Nay". Richard Osborne made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 5, 1978 Board of Adjustment meeting. Mrs. Mills seconded the motion which passed unanimously. the peculiar shape direction of the street. d a double fee for e voting "Aye" and MINUTES City Manager Don Grimes explained a PROSPECT 4 GREGG problem which he has with a lot located on the corner of Prospect and Gregg Streets. He noted that the Master Street Plan calls for an 80 foot right of way on Gregg and there is only 25 feet existing right of way on the west side of this lot "and only 50 feet right of way on Gregg north of this lot. He said he is contemplating getting 25 feet right of way to make this a 50 foot street. He explained that the owner is wanting to get a lot split, but the City cannot issue the lot split without taking the needed right of way. He explained that he has a plan to split the lot into two usable tracts of land but they will not meet the zoning requirements. One of the lots will not have adequate lot area. He noted that whoever buys the divided lots would probably be back for a variance, since these are two corner lots, and they would have a difficult time meeting setback requirements. David Newbern said he would not want to consider this since it would create a situation where they would have to come back at a later date for a variance. Dr. White questioned what they could do with the lot as it is and Bobbie Jones said they could apply for a duplex, but it would have to be approved by the Planning Commission. Mrs. Mills said she felt the neighbors would object to the small lots. The other Board members indicated they would not be in favor of granting any variance to allow the lot splits. The meeting adjourned at 4:35 P.M.