Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-11-02 MinutesA meeting of November 2, 1981, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING the Board of Adjustment was held at 3:45 P.M., Monday, in the Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Chairman Chester House, Don Mills, Wayne Ball, Dr. David Crittenden, Robert Waldren, Larry Thompkins. None (one position. vacant). Gary Carson, Jeffery Dowers, Jon Schader, Jim McCord, Ronald Woodruff, Don Loftis and others. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 4:502P.M. There being no one present to represent, the Board went on to the next item on the Agenda. The next item for consideration was the Public Hearing on Appeal No. 81-16, Jeffrey Dowers, 1614 East Huntsville Road, application to have more than one principal structure on a single iot'of record thereby varying lot width and lot area requirements, also to vary setbacks. Gary Carson and Jeffrey Dowers were present to represent. Carson stated that Mr. Dowers purchased this property several years ago with a nonconforming shop building located on the property. The applicant would like to construct a single family residence to the rear of the building. The applicant wishes to be granted 1) a variance from the requirement that only one principal structure can be built on a lot; and 2) a variance from the rear yard setback requirements from 20 ft. to 10 ft. Carson said Mr. Dowers is in the process of changing occupations and needs to construct the.house. Mr. Dowers has been burglarized several times and feels that his living on the property will prevent future burglarizations. Carson stated that when Mr. Dowers changes occupations, the shop building will be torn down. Mr. Dowers is requesting the variance in setback requirements due to the fact that certain flammable materials are stored in the shop building, the further he can locate his house away from the shop building the better. Carson said there is a hill on the back of the lot and the construction of the home 10 ft. from the rear property line will not interfere with any of the neighbors' view. Carson stated that Mr. Dowers' neighbors have signed an affidavit stating they favor the building of the single family home on the lot. Carson said the requirement per lot in R-1 for square footage is 8000 square feet. Mr. Dowers presently has 15,000 square feet in his lot. Carson said there will be plenty of room on the lot for access by service and emergency vehicles. Larry Thompkins asked if moving the house further up the lot to conform with the rear setback requirement is impossible. Mr. Carson said it is not CALL TO ORDER APPEAL NO. 81-15 APPEAL NO. 81-16 JEFFREY DOWERS 1614 EAST HUNTSVILLE ROAD 3g J Board of:Adjustment Meeting November 2, 1981 Page 2 . impossible, but that would place the house less than 30 ft. from the shop building. This might create a dangerous situation with the flammables stored in the shop building. Also, it would limit the space behind the shop that is presently being used in connection with the shop. Don Mills asked what type of home the petitioner plans to construct. Dowers stated two stories with about 900 square feet per floor. Crittenden asked what was meant by removing the nonconforming. use. Carson replied Mr. Dower will tear down the shop and remove it from the property when he changes occupations. _ The Chairman asked if there was anyone present appearing in opposition to the request. There was no opposition. There now being a representative present, the Board considered Appeal No. 81-15. APPEAL NO. 81-15 JON SCHADER 130 EAST SPRING STREET The Chairman opened the public hearing on Appeal No. 81-15, Jon Schader, 130 East Spring Street, application to vary parking requirements. Dr. Crittenden stated this item was reviewed at a previous meeting; the petitioner requested a waiver of the minimum lot width for multifamily uses in R-2, and asked for a waiver of the parking requirements :'«__The Board granted the minimum lot width waiver and asked the petitioner to provide a plan showing parking to the additional unit. Jon Schader addressed the Board. He stated he his back yard and provide two parking spaces Bobbie Jones stated the spaces shown on the plan meet the code requirements. Crittenden asked if part of the fence would be removed. Schader stated he will clean up the back area to the alleyway. There a gate located there, it will be moved back and made easily accessible. Crittenden asked if surfacing is required. Bobbie Jones stated since this does not contain more than 6 parking spaces, and it it located in the rear yard, she will not require the parking spaces to be paved. The Chairman asked if there was anyone present appearing in opposition to the request, there being no opposition, the Chairman closed the public hearing on Appeal No. 81-15. is agreeing to open up are not large enough There being no one present to represent this appeal, the Chairman asked the Board to consider Appeal No. 81-15. -APPEAb-NO.-81-17 to is The Chairman opened appeal No. APPEAL -NO. -81-15 81-15 to comments from the Board. Larry Thompkins stated as far as he was concerned 6 parking spaces are required with this use. He said this is a nice neighborhood, it is well maintained. This particular block is a high intensity use with 34 Board of Adjustment Meeting November 2, 1981 Page 3 parking prohibited on the South side of the street. He stated he has a problem with the petitioner not providing the off street parking. He did not feel the street should be used as a parking lot. Schader stated that on the South side of East Spring Street, all the homes have drives into their lots. The existence of a retaining wall makes the drives on the North side of the street unfeasible. Crittenden said Mr. Schader is not required to provide parking for the units already in existence. Mr. Schader is providing parking to the proposed unit. Crittenden stated he did not feel it was reasonable to ask -Mr. Schader to provide 6 parking spaces. Crittenden asked if the people living in the neighborhood use the church parking lot. Schader stated so far it has not been necessary. House stated he would much rather see the gate removed, so that people parking in the rear of Mr. Schader's lot would not have to'open the gate to park inside the rear yard. Dr.) Crittenden moved approval of the request. Bob Waldren seconded. The motion failed to pass (2-3-1) with Crittenden:and Waldren casting the "Aye" votes, Mills, Thompkins and Ball casting the "Nay" votes and House abstaining, his abstention going with the majority. The Chairman opened Appeal No. APPEAL -NO -.-81-16 81-16 to comments from the Board. Bob Waldren stated he is having a little bit Of difficulty with the request. If the rear yard setback is varied, when the shop building is ultimately removed, it will have a very large front yard. Waldren stated he is not inclined to grant the rear yard variance. Crittenden stated he has no problems if Mr. Dowers wants to build his house in the rear of the lot. Wayne Ball stated he would like to divide this request into two different parts. He stated the Board is actually considering 1) the petitioner's request to construct two principal structures on his lot; and 2) a variance from the rear yard setback requirement. Ball stated on the two structures per lot, he felt if it could be assured in some way that the shop building will be torn down, he would have no problem with that request. He felt the removal of the shop building will bring the neighborhood more into conformity. Bobbie Jones stated this could be accomplished by a bill of assurance. She suggested it be made a condition of sale. Don Mills stated that could be circumvented by renting or leasing the shop building. Also, she stated that one nonconforming use would be torn down, but if the rear yard variance is granted, the new structure will be nonconforming, she did not feel it made sense to remove one nonconforming structure and construct another. She felt Mr.Dowers should be allowed to construct his house but that it should be conforming. Larry Thompkins agreed, he did not see the point in eliminating one nonconforming structure and placing another one on the lot. Gary Carson asked the Board consider the request in two parts as suggested by Wayne Ball. • • • Board of Adjustment Meeting November 2, 1981 Page 4 Waldren stated that if the assurance was placed on the removal of the shop building, he would not be opposed to the request for two principal structures on the lot. However, he did not feel he could go along with the variance in the rear yard setback. House stated the construction of the new home and the removal of the shop building would upgrade the area. Wayne Ball moved the:variance in respect to the construction of two principal structures per lot be granted with the submittal by the petitioner of a satisfactory bill of assurance whereby the shop building will be removed if the property is ever sold. Mills asked what happens if the building is leased. She felt the intention of the motion was if the house goes up the shop comes down. Gary Carson stated the petitioner would be willing to assure that if the business is rented, the shop building will come down. Wayne Ball stated he would like to amend his motion to include rental as a trigger to removal of the building. Thompkins seconded the amended motion. The motion passed (6-0). Wayne Ball moved that the rear yard variance be granted as requested. Crittenden seconded. The motion failed to pass (3-3) with Ball, House, and Crittenden voting "Aye" and Thompkins, Mills and Waldren casting the "Nay" votes. Crittenden stated that since there were not enough members present to create a majority, the petitioner should be allowed to reappear on this particular request. Crittenden moved that the petitioner be allowed to reappear before the Board of Adjustment on the question of rear yard setback variance without having to pay an additional fee and without having to readvertise. Don Mills seconded. The motion passed (6-0). Under other business, the OTHER BUSINESS Board of Adjustment received a letter requesting a modification of temporary variance of parking requirements for the Continuing Education Center and the Hilton Hotel. Jim McCord was present to represent. He stated the City Manager asked him to request that the Board of Adjustment not consider this item at this time. He stated he appreciated the concern of those who had shown up for this item, and that they will be notified when this matter comes up again. Upon a motion by Crittenden and a second by Mills, the minutes of the October 5, 1981 meeting of the Board of Adjustment were approved as mailed, (5-0-1) with Mills, Ball, House, Crittenden and Waldren voting abstaining. There being no further MINUTES "Aye" and Larry Thompkins business, the meeting adjourned at 4:35 P.M. 41