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