Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-10-15 MinutesMINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING The Fayetteville Board of Adjustment met on Monday, October 15, 1984 at 3:45 P.M. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chester House, Larry Tompkins, David Crittenden and Dennis Becker MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHER PRESENT: Don Mills, Robert Waldren and "Butch" Robertson Mrs. Gilbert Baker, Timothy Klinger, Robert and Lucy Smith, Bobbie Jones and Paula Brandeis Chairman House called the meeting to order at 3:50 P.M. MINUTES The minutes of the October 1 meeting were approved as mailed by a motion from Tompkins and a second by Crittenden. PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL 84-22 MRS. GILBERT BAKER 1393 EAST FARMERS DRIVE The first item on the agenda was a Public Hearing on Appeal 84-22 for Mrs. Gilbert Baker of 1393 E. Farmers Drive. Requested is a setback variance from rear yard requirement of 35 ft. to allow 21.1 ft. and the side yard requirement of 20 ft. to allow on (or nearly on) the property line. Mrs. Baker was present to speak for this appeal and she stated that her mother presently lives in an 11 X 30 ft. building which she would like to enlarge by approximately the same number of feet. After some discussion add on to the existing of land (as she is the it was determined that Mrs. Gilbert wished to building on the north side where there is plenty owner of the adjacent lot). Crittenden asked if the building existed at the time Mrs. Gilbert bought this property and she replied that it did and that she had purchased the property at a time when it was not incorporated into the City. Crittenden asked who the owner of the property behind Gilbert's is and she replied that his name is Ezell, adding that his piece is so narrow it could not be built on. Jones said Ezell's property is zoned A-1 and the property just north of Gilbert's is R-1. 101 Board of Adjustment October 15, 1984 Page 2 Tomkins asked if the building in question is an Jones said if it was, she didn't have the date into a residence. Crittenden asked Baker if she in the front on the property and Gilbert replied stated that she was not aware that there were two structures on the same property as separate descriptions had been submitted. accessory building. that it was turned lived in the house that she did. Jones Crittenden inquired as to the owner of the property to the north and Gilbert replied that her brother-in-law owns both that piece and the piece to the south of her. Jones said that a waiver would be needed for lot width and area if there are two houses on this property. The Public Hearing was closed and House opened the discussion to the Board. Becker said he thought this had been an accessory building turned into a residential building on the property line and even though there is a lot of land available to the north for adding on, he thought approving this variance would perpetuate several ordinances and setback requirement violations. He added that he did not see any hardship situation and would be opposed to this appeal. Crittenden said he agreed with Becker in that he saw three separate identifiable restrictions that would be done away with by approving of it. He said he might approve of a waiver that would allow Gilbert to replace the entire building at a more centrally located site on her land. Crittenden said he mainly objected to allowing two structures on the same lot. Tompkins agreed and he added that he was also concerned about the lots to the west of this property, becuse, even though they are small, West Farmers Road could possibly be replatted to develop the entire subdivision. He said the ordinance has been developed to provide sideyards for fire protection, air, etc. and the moment a higher density is allowed the quality of life would not be what it is right now. Crittenden added that the people to the west of Gilbert's property have a right to expect that the ordinances are being followed. There was no one else present to speak either for or against this petition and House inquired if there was a motion. MOTION Tompkins moved to deny this appeal, seconded by Becker, the motion to deny passed 4-01-0. /30 Board of Adjustment October 15, 1984 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING ON APPEAL 84-23 TIMOTHY AND CHRISTINE MINCER 515 EAST REBECCA The second item on the agenda was Public Hearing 84-23 for Timothy and Christine Klinger of 515 East Rebecca to vary the rear yard setback of 20 ft. requirement to allow 8 ft. from the rear property line. Timothy Klinger was present to speak for this appeal. He referred the Board to a copy of a survey included in their packets which shows the configuration of his lot and he stated that he would like to add on to his house which would bring him to within 8 ft. of the property line. Klinger said that, in 1950, all of lots 2 and 3 were part of the east 50 ft. of lot 1 and at that time the east half of lot 3 was split off with its existing stone house. He said the stone house was, at one time, an accessory building to his home. Klinger said the stone house is 515 1/2 Rebecca and is accessed through the alley. Tompkins asked if there was a reason for the proposed deck to be as large as is shown and Klinger said he was not dependent on this plan. Crittenden asked if part of the present house was to be destroyed and Klinger said the portion of the house that began as a shed and later turned into a room, would be torn down. Becker asked how close the "alley house" was to this property and Klinger replied that it was at least 25 ft. Jones commented that the stone house is on a 50 ft. piece of landlocked property. Klinger explained the various setback requirements on his strangely shaped lot and stated that it amounted to about one third of an acre. Tomkins asked if there was presently any parking space and Klinger pointed out on his drawing the two places designated and currently used as parking. Chairman House asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak either for or against this appeal and Robert and Lucy Smith, P. 0. Box 6 Greenland, and owners of the property at 515 1/2 Rebecca said they were opposed to this variance. Mrs Smith said she was concerned that if this variance was granted, she would not have the opportunity to add on to her house at some time in the future. She suggested that Klinger consider turning his design to the west, away from the Smith/Klinger property line. In answer to Crittenden's question, Mrs Smith said if both Klinger and she added on, it would create a situation of two house butting up to each other. ' 3' • • • Board of Adjustment October 15, 1984 Page 4 Tompkins asked who the owner of Lot 4 is and Klinger explained that Lots 4, 5 and 6 are split down the center from north to south and owned by Henry Jones on the west and an unknown resident/owner on the east. Crittenden asked if Lot 3 was already split in this odd way (with Klinger owning the piece to the north) when the Smiths purchased it and Mrs. Smith replied that it was. Becker inquired whether a renter lives in the stone house at this time and Mrs. Smith replied that this was so. After discussion between Jones and Klinger, it was determined that an improved City storm drain runs across the west portion of Klinger's property. Crittenden asked Klinger if he was aware of his neighbors objections and Klinger replied that he was not aware until just now. Klinger added that if he maintains existing setbacks, he could only add on towards the south by an additional three or four feet and then turn west and south again creating a very unique building. Crittenden asked Jones about the status of 515 1/2 Rebecca and Jones replied that it is non -conforming as far as land area (8000 sq.ft. are required), it does not have frontage on a public street, and she was not sure about whether it meets building setbacks. Crittenden advised that, although the Smith's point was well taken, he felt her ability to enlarge or add on to her structure was very slim. Chairman House closed the Public Hearing to Board Discussion. Tompkins said when he views this appeal in terms of hardship, it is rather difficult because it means working with, perhaps the best example of why planning and zoning are necessary. He said, while he appreciates the owners in this neighborhood trying to improve their properties, it would mean contributing to a very high density if the lots were all developed or if this appeal was approved. Tompkins said he felt it was extremely significant to maintain the open space in the area. He said approving this appeal would be contrary to the spirit of zoning and intent to maintain quality of life in this area with regards to health and safety. Becker said he agreed in terms of massing but he said he also felt that Klinger's direction in gaining additional room was positive. He suggested the possibility of moving westward with an open atrium from the kitchen to the proposed addition, pushing it further to the west and maintaining the 20 ft. rear setback on Rebecca. He said he knew it would be more expensive but would comply with requirements. 132 • • • Board of Adjustment October 15, 1984 Page 5 Becker said that under the circumstances he would have to go along with a denial but did not feel that this had to be the end of this project. He said he didn't think a wall—to-wall situation would exist as Mrs. Smith suggested, because that is not what is being proposed and, also,the Smith's could not pursue an addition to their house. Becker said if Klinger were willing to pursue modified plans, he would be willing to table this appeal rather than deny it. Crittenden said he did not agree with Tompkins in terms of adding density to the neighborhood, but considering the fact that the Smith's home is set in stone, both literally and figuratively, with little chance of expansion, Klinger's home reaching on the setbacks would be reasonable. He said that, perhaps, eight feet from the property line was a bit too much, but he would be receptive to a lesser variance. He added that, because Klinger's neighbors object to the variance in setback, he could not go approve it. House asked Klinger if had considered the plan mentioned by Becker and Klinger said he was committed to living in his present house and he would appreciate tabling this issue to see what new plans he could develop that would be more acceptable. MOTION Crittenden moved to table this appeal until the next meeting (November 5, 1984). Seconded by Tompkins, the motion to table passed 4-0-0. OTHER BUSINESS Tompkins asked if the area of Farmers Drive could be studied and a common zoning reached, instead of the present piecemeal situation as presently exists. Jones replied that there is currently a study going on regarding the north side of Highway 62 and she said she would pass this request to study the south side) on to Ernie Jacks, the chairman of the committee. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 P.M. )33