Loading...
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