HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-10-03 MinutesE
A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held on Monday, October 3,
1988 at 3:45 P.N. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West
Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Mills, Deane Davenport, Dennis. Becker and Robert Waldren
MEMBERS ABSENT: Larry Tompkins and Gerald Boyd
OTHERS PRESENT: Esther White, Wanda Blevins, Larry & Deborah Tuttle and
Elaine Cattaneo
IZ 11211 Y Y[C9
The minutes of September 19, 1988 were approved as distributed.
:i
II 1
isThe first item on the agenda
was an appeal for a variance in
the required
building setback
submitted by
Wanda Blevins of 16 South West.Avenue.
Application
was to vary the
setback on the south side of the property.
This item was tabled at the September 19th meeting.
NOTION
Bob Waldren moved to remove this from the table, seconded by Davenport. The
motion to remove from the table passed 4-0-0.
Chairman Mills stated that there is some discrepancy in what setbacks are
required for this lot. She noted that it is a non -conforming structure and
according to Don Bunn's (the City Engineer) sketch, he shows that they should
work with the 15.5' setback as the required setback.
Esther White, legal representative for Wanda Blevins, stated that at the time
the bay window was added, Mrs. Blevins thought that it was o.k. Also, at the
original hearing, Mr. Allred had expressed concern because there had been so much
work going on there for so long. She advised that as it stands now, the outside
is completed as far as it can go until this decision is made. She noted that
once this decision is made, the siding company can put the siding up and the
outside will be complete.
Dennis Becker asked when the porch was built and if it had been all finaled`and
approved. Mrs. Blevins answered that it was built in 1983 and yes it was all
approved.
107
Board of Adjustment
October 3, 1988
Page 2
• Mrs. Blevins stated that when she called to find out about getting a building
permit for the bay window, she was told that if it didn't extend past an already
existing structure, there is no problem. She clarified that this is a one -family
dwelling, not an apartment house, and it only has one kitchen although her nephew
who attended the first meeting had given them the impression that it had two.
The kitchen was moved from upstairs to downstairs.
Robert Waldren stated that this looks more like an extension to a room than a bay
window.
The public hearing was closed and discussion took place among the Board members.
Chairman Mills stated that the concern is that she is adding to a non -conforming
structure, but Mrs. Blevins has had conflicting comments and information coming
from all directions.
Dennis Becker stated that there were extenuating circumstances here. The first
inquiry was over the telephone so the fact that it was a non -conforming use and
the setbacks could change doesn't come to light. That shows all things aren't as
easy as yes/no answers over the phone.
GCiI*ti 11
Dennis Becker moved to approve this variance, seconded by Davenport. The motion
passed 4-0-0.
SETBACKis APPEAL 88-8 - VARIANCE
1' I;A:/' N: DRIVE
The second item on the agenda was an appeal for a variance in the required
building setback submitted by Dr. Larry & Deborah Tuttle of 4 Ranch Drive. The
request was to vary the setback on the south side of the property from 8' to 4'.
NOTION
Robert Waldren moved to remove this appeal from the table, seconded by Davenport.
The motion passed unanimously.
Dr. Larry Tuttle stated that they are proposing to build a carport and they want
a variance on the setback on there south side. He noted that there was a
question as to whether they could get a 5' variance such as on non -conforming
structures.
Chairman Mills stated that she had not been able to get a meeting with John
Merrell, the Planning Director, to discuss this with him.
Robert Waldren stated that it makes no sense to him that on a non -conforming
structure they can have a 5' setback, but if it is a conforming structure the
required setback is 8'. He noted that it would seem that there is no consistency
to it at all.
. Mrs. Tuttle stated that since the last meeting they have had some cement poured
and essentially what they want to do now is cover this cement.
zo
Board of Adjustment
October 3, 1988
Page 3
IsRobert Waldren stated that the problem that they had at the last meeting was a
ruling where on an open carport which is open on three sides attached to a non-
conforming structure, the setback required is only 5'. He advised that this
structure happens to be a conforming structure. He asked why the rules should'be
less stringent for the non -conforming structure than for a conforming structure.
Deane Davenport
stated that
they
would still need a
variance because they are
wanting only a
4' setback.
Mr.
Waldren noted that
the Tuttles have said that
they would build
it so they
would
have a 5' setback.
Dr. Tuttle clarified that their original request was for a 4' variance and if it
were a non -conforming structure that would have allowed them to build where they
wanted to. Mrs. Tuttle noted that they wouldn't have the V roof overhang'if
they could build within 5'. She clarified that they were originally asking to
build within 4' of the property line so they would have a foot overhang on the
roof.
Robert Waldren
noted that
there are a couple of
others in the same neighborhood
that are within
4' or 5' of
the property line,
but he didn't know if their
structures were
conforming
or not.
MOTION
Davenport moved to grant a 3' variance to build there carport which would make it
• a 5' setback, seconded by Waldren. The motion to grant the variance passed 4-0-
0.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
•
IOP