Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-11-04 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held on Monday, November 4, 1991, at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: AGENDA Dennis Becker, Gerald Boyd, Tompkins, and Marion Orton Lonnie Meadows Don Mills, Robert Davis, larry Becky Bryant, Sharon Langley, Cy Sutherland, Mr. Newhouse, and Roger Koeppe Mr. Larry Tompkins called the meeting to order. He suggested the following additions to the agenda: Old Business - a review of the first draft of the bylaws of the Board of Sign Appeals and also discussion of any new ideas the Board might have regarding enforcement of the Board of Adjustment decisions; New Business - staff report on search for new Planning Director. The Board unanimously approved the agenda as presented. Mr. Tompkins explained it was the function of the Board to apply the discretion to decisions or requests where interpretation and strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause undue physical development hardship to the individual property owners and to grant only minimum variances when it was demonstrated that such action would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance. APPEAL NO. BA91-17 - REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS WASHINGTON COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY - 118 E. DICKSON Ms. Bryant explained the owners of the historic Archibald Yell law office had donated the building to the Washington County Historical Society, which planned to move it to 118 E. Dickson, behind the Headquarters House. She further explained that, to make room for it, the Historical Society removed an outbuilding at the northwest corner of their lot. She stated they proposed to locate the Yell building on part of the foundation of the former outbuilding. Ms. Bryant explained the subject lot is partially zoned C-2 and partially R-1. The portion on which the Yell building would be located is C-2, requiring a rear yard setback of 20 feet. The removed outbuilding had been located 6 to 7 feet from the property line and the Yell building is proposed to be 8 to 9 feet from the property line. She further explained there would be no side yard setback since the property was zoned C-2. Ms. Bryant pointed out this request met all statutory requirements. She also explained the subject neighborhood had special character and could be not treated as other neighborhoods in the city. She stated the area was historic, it was one of the centers of residential development in the original City of Fayetteville, there were numerous nonconforming lots and structures as well as setback violations under the present zoning ordinance. She recommended approval of the variance. Me. Bryant also mentioned the Fayetteville Historic District Commission had recommended the variance be granted. She explained the Commission was attempting to become an integral element of city government and would start looking at requests for conditional uses, variances, rezonings, etc. that impact National Register properties. • • • Board of Adjustment November 4, 1991 Page ' 2 In response to a question from Mr. Tompkins, Ms. Bryant explained the property line was divided almost equally between the C-2 and R-1 zoning. In response to another question, she explained the Planning Administrator could, at the property owners' request, move a property line 50 feet in either direction which was basically an administrative property line adjustment. She stated she did not believe that was germane. Mr. Boyd asked why the building could not be moved forward. Cy Sutherland, representing the Washington County Historical Society, explained they wished to maintain the space between the subject building, the house and the smokehouse as it presently was. He stated they had done some paving and created an elaborate landscaping plan between the existing garage, smokehouse and house. He further explained that moving the Yell law office to comply with setbacks would encroach into that area, further decreasing the space they needed to keep at a maximum for social functions. He also pointed out they would be using two sides of the existing foundation and would not be able to do so should they have to move the building forward. He stated he did not believe the location of the building would have any intrusions upon any of the neighboring property. Mr. Roger Koeppe, 305 N. Washington, appeared before the Board to object to the granting of the variance. He explained that two years earlier he had requested a variance of two feet in order to construct a two -car garage. He stated that variance had been denied. He further stated he did not believe larger groups with more special interests should receive preferential treatment. He stated there was sufficient room on the subject property to put the Yell law office without a variance. He asked that the Board be consistent in their rulings and deny the request. In response to a question from Mr. Becker, Mr. Sutherland stated parking was in front of the proposed building. He explained it was used for Headquarters House staff and maintenance vehicles. He further stated the present request was different than that made by Mr. Koeppe two years earlier because that was new construction and the present case related to a building that had been present for at least 70 years. Ms. Orton stated she believed this was a unique situation of getting the historical buildings together. She further stated she believed it was a public service. She explained she needed to think further regarding the possibility of another location for the building. Mr. Tompkins stated this was an accessory use tot he other. He explained there was not a master plan for the historic district. He stated he did not know what the unique environment was for the total district. Ms. Orton agreed that having an overall plan would allow them to administer the area more fairly. In response to a question from Mr. Boyd, Mr. Sutherland explained the Headquarters House was used as a museum and office space for the Historical Society. Mr. Becker asked the distance between the proposed south face of the building and the beginning of the existing parking area. Mr. Sutherland stated he didn't know the exact distance but there was a sidewalk, a short hedge and then the parking area. He stated he would guess it would be approximately six feet. • • • Board of Adjustment November 4, 1991 Page 3 Mr. Tompkins pointed out that, if the proposed building was moved in to meet the setbacks, it would be even with the smokehouse. Mr. Newhouse, a member of the Washington County Historical Society, agreed that it would be in line with the smokehouse but would eliminate some of the space they valued very highly. He explained the history of structures to the Board. Mr. Tompkins asked if they were of the opinion that the character of the Yell law office fit in with the present site plan. Mr. Sutherland stated it did to a degree. He further stated the most significant factor was being able to preserve one of the most historically significant buildings in Fayetteville that would not be preserved in its present location. MOTION Mr. Boyd moved to approve the variance. Ms. Orton seconded the motion. The motion failed with Mr. Boyd, Ms. Orton and Mr. Becker voting "yes" and Mr. Tompkins, Ms. Mills, and Mr. Davis voting "no". Mr. Tompkins explained the only recourse to the Board's decision was suit filed in Circuit Court. He suggested they could also speak with the staff. MINUTES Ms. Mills moved the minutes be accepted as distributed. Mr. Davis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. COMMITTEE REPORTS Bylaws for Board of Sign Appeals Mr. Tompkins stated he believed the Board of Adjustment had the appropriate duly of looking at the bylaws of the Board of Sign Appeals. He asked for comments regarding the bylaws. Mr. Boyd stated the Board had received a new draft of the bylaws. After discussion, it was agreed the members would review the bylaws and make any recommended changes they might have at the next meeting. The Board further discussed wither an abstaining vote was a vote in favor of the proposal or a null vote. Mr. Body stated the city attorney in 1977 had ruled that a person who refused to vote for a proposition was regarded as having voted affirmatively. Planning Administrator Position In response to a question from Mr. Tompkins, Ms. Bryant reported the position for planning administrator was being advertised in house. She explained that, after advertising in house, the position could then be advertised at large. Upon motion by Don Mills, seconded by Dennis Becker, the meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.