Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-02-20 MinutesA meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held on Monday, February 20, 1989 at 3:45 P.M. in Room Ill of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas, MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Mills, Dennis Becker, Larry Tompkins, Dee Wright and Robert Davis ¢+i:u u OTHERS PRESENT: Freeman Wood, Wade Bishop, John Ragland, Sam Witt and Elaine Cattaneo MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting of December 19, 1988 were approved as distributed. • APPEAL NO. BA89-2 - WADE BISHOP 1537 THORNHILL - VARY SETBACKS The first item on the agenda was an appeal for a variance on the building setbacks submitted by Wade Bishop for 1537 Thornhill which is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. Request was for a variance on the yard setback requirement. Wade Bishop stated that this is a mistake that he feels was deliberately perpetrated upon him. He stated that the letter he had submitted with his application explains the problem. He advised that Freeman Wood, Inspection Superintendent, is aware of the problems that he has been having for the past six months. He stated that he was not aware of this mistake until the City called it to his attention. Someone from the City Planning Office came out and they measured the setbacks and then he had a professional engineer come and give them a lot survey on it. He stated that to his knowledge none of the neighbors had objected to this error. It is in a cul-de-sac where it wouldn't be as pronounced as it might be otherwise. Mr. Davis asked if there was 8,000 square feet in this lot. Mr. Bishop answered, yes, there is probably more than 8,000 square feet. Mr. Davis asked if they count the utility easement. Mr. Bishop answered, yes, the easement is counted. Mr. Becker stated that the engineer's drawing and the staff report indicate that the deficiency here is 5.21' which he believes was determined from a measurement . to the building and not to the overhang. He stated that he double-checked and the measurement shown is the outside wall measurement and it has been his experience that surveyors measure from the wall of the building unless you tell 1�� • Board of Adjustment February 20, 1989 Page 2 them to measure from the overhang. Therefore, instead of 5.21' in deficiency, it is probably closer to about 6.5'. Also, he stated that he had measured the slab that has been poured across the street directly North of this and it is off about 4'3". Also, down the street on Breckenridge Drive, the garage is closer than''the measurement on the one they are discussing today(about 6'11" off) when measuring from overhang to back of curb. So if he has had sabotage, it has been a good job. Whoever prepared this sketch which shows that the deficiency is 6.5' instead of 5.21' is correct according to his measurements. Mr. Becker stated that he thinks the setbacks are wrong all over the place on these cul-de-sacs Ms. Wright asked what bearing sabotage would have on a case. Chairman Mills stated that she feels that this is not the Board of Adjustment's problem to solve. The Board's problem is going to deal with the fact that the house is not in compliance. Mr. Tompkins stated that he feels that this is a violation and this is the problem they are faced with and they have nothing to do with the reasoning in that respect. that the East aware of that In answer to a question from Mr. side yard is also off about 6". Mr. until the Planning Office staff pointed Tompkins, Freeman Wood Bishop stated that he it out. stated wasn't • Chairman Mills asked if the measurement of the back yard on the survey which shows 9' from the easement is measured from that wall or from the jutted out area that is 2' farther and was it from the wall or the overhang. Mr. Bishop stated that it was measured from the 2' jutted out area. Mr. Wood stated that he was filling in for John Merrell, City Planning Director, and Mr. Merrell's recommendation is that this does not meet any of ';the requirements for a variance and he recommends that the variance be denied. Chairman Mills asked at what point do the City people go out and measure these things. Mr. Wood stated that the City does not go out and measure, it is up to the builder & owner. The City Attorney drew up a contract sometime back for'Ithe owner to sign that states that the proposed setbacks given and the site plan submitted are correct and accurate and they take responsibility if it is wrong. He advised that the inspectors do look when they are out there and if they think it is wrong, they mention it to them but the City does not go out and measure to try to determine whether it is or is not correct. Chairman Mills commented that the builder submits a plan, signs off on it and at that point it meets specifications. Then if there is an error, the builder is responsible. Mr. Wood agreed that is correct and that is what they had worked out with the builders in public hearings because that is what the builders wanted in lieu of a survey required prior to building a structure. Chairman Mills asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak for or • against this appeal. John Ragland stated that he wasn't going to speak today, but he feels that in • Board of Adjustment February 20, 1989 Page 3 self-defense, he will have to. He noted that this is the very first time that Mr. Bishop has indicated that there was any sabotage on his part. He stated that Mr. Becker was very observant to check on those other houses and he is correct about the house at 3306 Breckenridge which has just been started about one month ago. He advised that he has not been with Bishop Homes since the first of August; therefore, he had nothing to do with this Breckenridge home. These particular plans are quite deep and these lots are quite shallow and Mr. Becker is correct about the overhangs not being included in the measurements. Mr. Ragland commented that he would like to relate to them what exactly happened with this particular plan on Thornhill. Chairman Mills advised that they need to keep this pertinent to the variance and his reasoning for or against it. Mr. Ragland stated that Mr. Bishop told him that it was a shallow backyard and to go ahead have the carpenter to put it where they did because the City has never caught him yet. He stated that the City did come out three different times and they could not determine if the house was encroaching. He added that he lives in the subdivision and he was concerned about it because it affects his property value also. Again, he explained that he had nothing to do with the house across the street so if there has been sabotage, there were at least two instances where he wasn't even there. He noted that he is just speaking in his self-defense to clear his name. He added that there are numerous homes in Regency North Subdivision that are encroaching too. He stated that he would like to point out • one more thing, that those little eyebrows on the cul-de-sacs, the property line is only 5' back from the curb whereas in normal streets they are 9.5' back from the curb which puts you another 5' closer to the street than you normally would be. He asked for a copy of the letter that Mr. Bishop had submitted th11 at accuses him of sabotage. Chairman Mills asked if anyone else wished to speak for or against this. Mr. Bishop asked if he could respond to Mr. Ragland's comments. Chairman Mills answered only if it applies to the variance. She noted that they would prefer not to have these items that they have no control over. Mr. Bishop stated that Saturday Mr. Ragland had called him and said if he didn't receive such and such a document by 3:00 o'clock this afternoon, he would appear before the Board and say that he had asked him to set the building forward so that he could have a bigger backyard. Chairman Mills stated that this does not apply to his request for a variance and it is something they will have to iron out elsewhere. The Public Hearing was closed and discussion took place among the Board members. Mr. Tompkins stated that the houses in this subdivision are excellent quality houses and it is a compliment to the developer for providing this kind'of housing. It is only too bad that they have this error which violates the present code which was designed for a 25' setback for reasons of health, safety and welfare of not only the present owners but future owners. He stated that'he feels it is such that it would create problems and he does not see a hardshiplso • he is opposed to it. In answer to a question from Chairman Mills, Mr. Wood stated that he assumed that `� t • Board of Adjustment February 20, 1989 Page 4 when the plans for this house came in for a building permit, they met all the specifications for setbacks, although the Planning Office staff checksithe setbacks instead of the Inspection Department. Elaine Cattaneo, City Planning Secretary, stated that according to the site plan that was submitted when the building permit was obtained, the setbacks were in compliance. p Ms. Wright stated that basing this on meeting the four requirements that they have to go by, granting a variance here would be giving them a special privilege. She stated that if they said "yes" to this, then they would be saying "yes" to other houses that fall into this category. Mr. Davis stated that he didn't see any other alternative except to go along with the staff's recommendation. MOTION Mr. Tompkins moved that the request be denied as submitted, seconded by Wright. The motion to deny passed 5-0-0. APPEAL NO, BA89-1 - VARIANCE ON PARKING REQUIR1NENTS FIRST ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH - 550 E 15TH The second item on the agenda was consideration of a variance request for a delay in providing the total number and the paving of required parking submittediby First Assembly of God Church and represented by Sam Witt for property locatedl,at 550 East 15th Street and zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. Mr. Witt stated that the letter he submitted with the application explains their request. He stated that they are not trying to create a problem but there was some misunderstanding at the outset of their construction. He noted that they felt confident that they could probably get a waiver on the paving of the parking lot for a short period of time. The letter also states that they would like"to request a waiver on putting in the sidewalk at this time. Chairman Mills stated that according to the information available, the City had approved this Large Scale Development with the requirement that they do their paving and spaces so she was curious as to why they thought they could get a waiver on it. Mr. Witt stated that they were under the impression that most churches that were built prior to their construction, had gotten a waiver when they requested it from the City to delay paving their parking lot. Therefore, they felt they would be able to obtain a waiver also. Because of this, they did not take this cost into consideration in their initial budget for the building. Now if they have to come back and pave all of the parking lot, then they are talking $25 or $30,000 that they were not expecting to have to have immediately': Mr. Tompkins suggested that they break this down into categories. The Board of Adjustment can't do anything about the sidewalk. The other two requests can be • split into two parts: 1) number of parking spaces and 2) the surfacing of the parking lot. He commented that although they only have a congregation of 150 • Board of Adjustment February 20, 1989 Page 5 people, they are a dynamic church so they could have 300 people in the future. Mr. Witt stated that they feel like they will and they would certainly come into compliance when it was needed. They would be happy to sign a Bill of Assurance or whatever is required to come into compliance the moment that they overcrowded this present parking lot. They are not opposed to eventually having the number of parking spaces but they would like to only pave 40 spaces now. Mr. Tompkins stated that his concern is basically to have space available for 73 parking spaces which is in conformance. The question to be answered would be whether they would be required to pave the entire lot. Mr. Witt stated that they are asking to pave phase one now (40 spaces) and asked for a waiver on the second phase. They were under the impression that they could have a year of waiver to pave any of the parking area. Chairman Mills advised that at each of the meetings this project went through, they were told that they must have the spaces required and they must be paved.l' Mr. Becker asked if the 73 parking spaces requirement was discussed when the engineer, Mel Milholland, drew up the plans. Mr. Witt answered, yes, but it was drawn out in two phases. He stated that they were under the impression that the parking spaces required would be comparable to the number of people in the congregation not the size of the building. • Freeman Wood stated that he has been with the City for,15 years and it is true that most of the churches built during that time got waivers for a year or some cases it was longer than that before it was paved. Due to this history, it was probably in their mind that this church could get a waiver also. In answer to a question from Chairman Mills, Mr. Wood stated that he wasn't sure who the waivers had came from but probably were handled administratively by the Planning Director. At that time they had Bills of Assurances and other waivers that they could sign. The new Planning Director is trying to change this and cut back,on these waivers because if we don't start now enforcing these regulations, they will be at the same point they are now 20 years down the road. In answer to a question from Chairman Mills, Mr. Witt stated that if they were given a waiver of one year, they would be willing at the end of that periodl,of time to pave the remainder of the parking. Mr. Wood stated that probably the way to handle it would be to have the BoardGof the Church sign the contract so that they would be responsible for it. Chairman Mills asked if anyone else in the audience would like to speak to this. Janie Kelly who lives directly across the street from the new church stated that she is concerned about the dust problem which is a hazard on that highway so the parking lot needs something done to it. Joe Kelly stated that teenagersldo doughnuts on the Drake's Cafe property when the Cafe is closed. Therefore, if • they don't hard -surface that church parking lot, the kids will do the same thing over there. • Board of Adjustment February 20, 1989 Page 6 Mr. Wood advised that John Merrell's recommendation is to deny this request because he doesn't think they meet the conditions for a variance. Mr. Becker asked how many cars they have presently coming to their church. ',Mr. Witt stated that they have somewhere between 25 and 30. The Public Hearing was closed and discussion took place among the Board members. Mr. Tompkins stated that the plan has been approved by the Planning Commission. They are only talking about an implementation phase here and he would hold fast to the 73 required spaces. With the location of the dumpster, it is essential that they have a hard surface to drive on. The neighborhood has a point with the dust problem, but he doesn't see a problem with the idea of phasing the paving of the parking. The second phase looks like it is around 100' back from the street. Chairman Mills advised that if they approved a waiver, she would like it specified that at the end of that one year period, it be paved and not continue on and on because she agrees with the new Planning Director. She added that it surprises her that there are waivers that were signed in the past that should have been paved and have not been picked up on. Possibly the turnover in the • City Office is at fault. Mr. Wood explained that is one of the reasons Mr. Merrell prefers to have it done up front so that they don't have to worry about it. Also, enforcement is a problem in some cases because they might not have the money to do it at the end of the year. Ms. Wright asked if it is up to the Board of Adjustment to go out and make someone comply. Mr. Wood stated that the City should be doing that without anyone telling them to do it. Ms. Wright stated that the same person that checks for signs not in compliance could look at parking lots at the same time. Motion Mr. Tompkins moved that the total number of parking spaces be required as stipulated in the ordinance (73 spaces), seconded by Becker. The motion passed 5-0-0, u Motion Ms. Wright moved to require the paving of the first 40 spaces (Phase I) now with a Bill of Assurance to be signed by the Board of the Church to require Phase II to paved at the end of one year, seconded by Davis. The motion passed 4-1-0 with Chairman Mills voting "no". • In response to a question from Chairman Mills, the City Planning Secretary stated that they may have a Bill of Assurance already written up for a waiver of this sort. If not, they will have the City Attorney's office make one up and it will l� • Board of Adjustment February 20, 1989 Page 7 be taken care of through the Planning Director. She added that they will get in touch with Mr. Witt when they have it ready for him to take to the Board of the Church for signatures. • • 0 PAGE SUBJECT DATE 125 BA89-2, Wade Bishop, IS37 Thornhill 2-20-89 128 BA89-1, First Assembly of God, 550 E. 15th 2-20-89 BA89-2, Wade Bishop, 1S37 Thornhill 4-3-89 .32 V37 BA89-2 Rehearing, 1S37 Thornhill 4-17-89 145 BA89-4, Karl Thiel $ John Lewis 7-3-89 150 BA89-6, Packaging Specialties, 1663 Armstrong 8-7-89 159 BA89-8, Don Ward, 20150 Huntsville Rd. 11-6-89 161 BA89-9, Dave Letsch, 313 IV. Dickson 11-6-89 16S BA89-9, Scott Lunsford, 513 N..Washington 12-18-89 171 BA90-1, John Watkins, 669 Cliffside Dr. 1-15-90 175 BA90-2, ERC Properties, 40S2 Cambray Dr. 1-15-90 179 BA90-2, ERC Properties, 4053 Cambray Dr. 2-S-90 182 BA90-3, Leslie Goodman, 2-19-90 183 Discussion of 2010 2-19-90 187 BA90-4, Clyde Iglinsky, 931 Shrewsbury 3-5-90 188 ERC Violation Discussion 3-5-90 190 Discussion of 2010 3-S-90 194 BA90-6, Mildred Gracian, 221 E. Lafayette 4-2-90 197 BA90-8, Jeff Roberts, 2000 N. Crossover 5-7-90 198 BA90-9, George Faucette, 3208 Wroxton 5-7-90 201 BA90-7. Kern Jackson, 235 Baxter Ln. 5-21-90 206 BA90-7, Kern Jackson, 23S Baxter Lh. 6-4-90 208 BA90-10, Floyd Barris 6-4-90 211 BA90-11 Through BA90-14, BMP Development, Fiesta Park Ph. I 6-18-90 21S BA90-15, Patricia O'Leary, 352 Rollston 7-16-90 219 BA90-12- DENNIS CAUDLE - 4559 WEDINGTON 8-20-90 212 BA90-18- GEORGR'S MAGESTIC LOUNGE - 519 WEST DICKSON ST. 10-1-90 BA90-20- DAVID KERWIN - 1000 SOUTH COLLEGE AVE. 10-15-90 �24 27 BA90-21- Katherine Gay - 324 Sutton ST. 11-19-90 228 BA90-22 -JOE PAUL -668 GRAY AVE. 11-19-90 230 BA90-23- DENNIS HARPER - 1645 SOUTH SCHOOL AVE. 11-19-90 233 BA90-25- DAVE $ JUDY STEVENS - S OF CATO SPS, W OF 71 BYPASS 12-3-90 238 BA90-26- RICHARD PAKMER - 818 POLLARD AVE. 1-7-91 241 BA90-27- GEORGE FAUCETTE - W OF GREGG AVE, S OF DOUGLAS ST. 1-7-91 242 INFORMAL PRESENTATION BY RICHARD SHEWMAKER ABOUIPOLK BUILLDING 1-7-91. ON DICKSON ST. 0 l ii L$A � C\\1 c\\\\\ D .f