Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-07-16 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING The Fayetteville Board of Adjustment met at 3:45 P.M. on Monday, July 16, 1984 in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Chester House, Don Mills, "Butch" Robertson, Larry Tompkins, Dennis Becker and Dr. David Crittenden Robert Waldren Greg House, Mrs. Dowers, Jack Wilson, Attorney Wright, Attorney Carson, Mr. & Mrs. Grigsby, Mr. & Mrs. Slaughter, Mr. &Mrs. McBroom, Mr. &Mrs. Lacy, Dr. Larry Woodruff, Collins Haynes, Bobbie Jones, Paula Brandeis and others Chairman House called the meeting to order at 3:50 P.M. ELECTION OF NEW CHAIRMAN Chairman house reminded Board members that it was time to elect a new chairperson. Larry Tompkins nominated Chester House for another term and Dennis Becker seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0-1 with House abstaining. Chairman House expressed his appreciation to the Board members and advised that the Vice -Chairperson would be the Board member with the longest service; Larry Tompkins. MINUTES The first item on the agenda was the consideration of the minutes of the meeting of July 2, 1984. They were approved as distributed. APPEAL 84-10 REQUEST FOR PARKING VARIANCE AND INGRESS/EGRESS VARIANCE GREG HOUSE - 301 W. DICKSON The second item on the agenda was the consideration of Appeal 84-10; a Public Hearing on the request for variance of number of parking spaces and variance of ingress/egress requirements for property located at 301 W. Dickson; petitioner Greg House. This has been tabled at the last two meetings. Mrs. Jones referred Board members to a letter House submitted to the Planning Office indicating that he would like to withdraw his request because of his feeling that the previous uses at this address concur 107 Board of Adjustment July 16, 1984 Page 2 with his proposed use. He states in the letter that he believes that no improvements to the property are needed for occupancy. Jones said that there have been Certificates of Occupancy approved for an Art Gallery/Frame Shop, but she said the applications, which would state the stipulations attached to occupancy, are stored in a somewhat inaccessible place and will take some time to locate. She added that the proposed use is a change but it is not a change of zoning. Tompkins advised that House did not need permission to withdraw his request and Jones said that even though House is withdrawing his request for variance in parking, he still will not be able to back more than two cars into Locust Street. Tompkins suggested leaving this issue on table until next meeting because Rules of Procedure state that three meetings is the limit for which an appeal may remain tabled. Chairman House requested that the old applications for Certificate of Occupancy in this case be found for reference. APPEAL 84-14 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ESTATE OF JEFFREY DOWERS INTERPRETATION OF USE AND STATUS OF BILL OF ASSURANCE The third item on the agenda was a Public Hearing on property located at 1614 E. Huntsville Road, zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. Several neighbors have requested that the City exercise a Bill of Assurance granted in 1981 to permit two principal structures on a lot whereby the shop building on said lot would be removed if it were ever rented or if the property were sold. On January 31, 1984, the proprietor, Jeffrey G. Dowers, was murdered and since that time a caretaker has been instated whom the neighbors allege has "changed" the previous non -conforming use as conducted by Mr. Dowers. Mrs. Jones, Planning Administrator, explained that an interpretation is needed by the Board of Adjustment as to whether the non -conforming use has been changed by the caretaker, Jack Wilson. Jones stated, also, that the attorney for the Dowers estate is requesting a release of the Bill of Assurance executed by Dowers in 1981. Jones explained that, according to the Fayetteville zoning code, Use Unit 17 covers trades and services which includes auto repair. She said the repair shop has been non -conforming in an R-1 zone. Io8 • • • Board of Adjustment July 16, 1984 Page 3 Danny Wright, attorney representing the immediate neighbors, stated that the type of repair occurring in the shop at 1614 E. Huntsville Rd. is currently body work, including sanding and painting of autos, and that it was used only for mechanical auto repair under the operation conducted by Jeffrey Dowers before his death. He stated that the immediate neighbors are opposed to the current use which generates noise and fumes and is run under the guidance of Jack Wilson, caretaker of said property. Wright advised Board members that the advertising sign for this shop states "transmission work" and says nothing about body work which is what the neighbors contend is the main function of the shop at this time. In answer to Crittenden's question, Jones stated that the shop was in existence before the existing Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1970 and she felt that it is still an automobile repair shop. Becker expressed his confusion over the wording of the Bill of Assurance that goes with this property which states that the shop building will be removed from the property if the property is sold or leased to another individual (life and perpetuity). He said he remembered the Board of Adjustment action as being the allowance of a garage for short-term use. Gary Carson, attorney representing Mrs. Dowers, stated that although the main use of the garage under Dowers' management consisted mainly of mechanical repair, some painting and body work took place as well. He reminded Board members that Use Unit 17 specifies "...auto sales, service and repair including body shops...". Carson said the shop is still being used to repair automobiles. Attorney Wright pointed out that the code referring to auto servicing states "...sales, service and repair.." that he said suggests to the common reading would indicate the primary function being sales with service and repair being a minor part of that heading. He said the primary function of auto repair shops is listed under the main heading of Repair & Service. Tompkins interpreted this to mean that the separate use of "auto repair" is where environmental impact would occur and he said he would like to know which of the above uses is the primary function of this property. He added that the use of the building remains non -conforming Several neighbors wished to express their feelings on what they conceive of as a change of use: Chester Grigsby, 1620 E. Huntsville Rd., said the late Mr. Dowers had wished to build a house which Grigsby and the Slaughters (548 Sherman) had agreed to with the provision that if anything ever happened to Dowers, the garage building would be torn down. Grigsby stated that the caretaker, Wilson, is living in Dowers' house and using the garage as a body shop. log • • • Board of Adjustment July 16, 1984 Page 4 Russell Slaughter stated that the Dowers' house had been a single-family dwelling and is now, in fact, a duplex with access to the upstairs available only through an outside staircase. Carson said that Dowers had 6 children and step -children and because he needed some peace of mind, he had arranged the home dwelling to shelter the children upstairs and his wife and himself in the downstairs portion. He said it was not intended to be, and has not been used as, a duplex. Homer McBroom, 1615 E. Huntsville Rd., stated that the garage was never used as a paint shop, only a transmission shop. Another neighbor stated that others have lived in the Dowers' house as renting tenants. Jack Wilson, 1614 E. Huntsville Rd., stated that Dowers had allowed him to live at this property without paying any rent because he needed a place to live while he worked at Dowers' garage. In answer to Crittenden's question, Wilson said that he runs the body shop and takes care of the property for the Dowers estate and still does not pay rent here. He said the garage is set up the same as when Dowers was running it. Crittenden asked if the property belonged to Mr. Dowers at the time of his death and Carson replied that it did. Tompkins said he would like to have the distinction between the different types of auto repair made clear. James Lacy, 1321 E. Huntsville Road, stated that he works for Lewis Bros. Ford and that, in his experience, a paint and body shop is a very different operation from a mechanical repair shop because of the volatile fumes exuded by the paints and thinners used and stored in the business of painting autos which must be kept separate from welders and grinders to avoid combustion. Crittenden said he thought all auto repairs came under the same catagory. Tompkins agreed with Crittenden, adding that the intent of the Zoning Ordinance was to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public and that neither the old non -conforming use or the current, alleged non -conforming use were condusive to these objectives. Becker said he thought the use was a mute point and that the once the request for removal of the Bill of Assurance was dealt with, the use could be determined. He said he thought the Bill of Assurance should be called and acted upon. Mills agreed with Becker. ILIO Board of Adjustment July 16, 1984 Page 5 Robertson asked for clarification from Becker as to what portion of the Bill of Assurance had been violated and Becker said he thought that Wilson running the garage for his own benefit was a lease, even if conducted as a barter arrangement. Chairman House said his feeling was that when the property was sold or conveyed, the Bill of Assurance would take care of itself and that the use of auto repair shop remains the same. Jones, Planning Administrator, stated that, under the ordinance, she did not have the authority to approve a non -conforming use change. She said she did not see the difference in auto repairs as far as use interpretation. Mills said she thought there was a difference in type of repair as far as tools, equipment and manner of repair and Becker agreed citing fire code as a reason for separation of these services. Carson stated that he has requested removal of the Bill of Assurance for hardship reasons with regard to the minor children of the deceased Mr. Dowers. He said the children would receive more money for the property if the garage remained intact, and is worth very little without it. Carson said the Dower estate is using the property for legitimate purposes and is not in violation of the Bill of Assurance and he requested that this issue be tabled or withdrawn. Katherine Lacy, 1321 E. Huntsville Rd., stated that the estate of Dowers went to Dowers' mother and not his children. Carson replied that the estate did go to the children of Jeffrey Dowers. Chairman House closed the Public Hearing to discussion by Board members. Mills said if there has been a change in the status of this property, the City needs to take action. MOTION Robertson made a motion to approve the use as interpreted by Mrs. Jones as correct, without a change having been made Crittenden seconded and motion passed 4-2-0; Mills and Becker voting "nay". House asked the Board to consider the removal of the Bill of Assurance. Robertson said it appeared to him that the Bill of Assurance has not been violated at this point and that at such time as the property is sold, conveyed or leased, that the Bill of Assurance could be acted upon and the garage building torn down. 'Mills said she thought the Bill of Assurance had been violated because of the apparent change in repair service at the garage. Board of Adjustment July 16, 1984 Page 6 NOTION Mills moved to uphold the Bill of Assurance and not set it aside. Becker seconded the motion and it passed 4-2-0; Robertson and House voting "nay". Mills expressed her diappointment that the time frame had not been reflected in the Bill of Assurance or the minutes at the time the Bill of Assurance was granted. APPEAL 84-15 LARRY WOODRUFF — 1917 GREEN ACRES RD SECOND APPLICATION TO VARY BUILDING SETBACKS On June 4, 1984, the Board of Adjustment granted a variance to align the south wall of the proposed clinic with the southern most wall of Dr. Hays building and allow the construction of a brick fence within 1 ft. or less of the south property line contingent upon written approval from Dr. Albright for ingress/egress through his property. Dr. Albright denied access and the Board of Adjustment requested Woodruff re -submit his proposal. Dr. Woodruff was present to speak at this Public Hearing. Crittenden remarked that he has occassion to pass near this area very often and in his opinion there is always adequate parking and plenty of ingress/egress space. Woodruff said the proposed building will be a mirror image of Dr. Hays existing building with a connecting hallway and the parking will be contained entirely on Woodruff/Hays property as indicated on the submitted plot plan. Collins Haynes, architect for Dr. Woodruff, stated that the parking has been re -designed so as not to need access across Albright's property. Becker asked if this was the final plan and stated that parking spaces need to be 11 X 19.8 for angle parking; Haynes replied that he could arrange that. NOTION Becker moved to approve the new parking plan for Dr. Woodruff; seconded by Robertson, motion passed 5-0-0 with the removal of the condition of gaining ingress/egress from Dr. Albright. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:30 P.M. 112