Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-05-04 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND SIGN APPEALS A meeting of the Board of Adjustment and Board of Sign Appeals was held Monday, May 4, 1998 at 3:45 p.m., Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Gerald Boyd, Marion Orton, Robert Nickle, Thad Hanna, Paul Wilhelms, and Michael Andrews. MEMBERS ABSENT: Larry Perkins STAFF PRESENT: Tim Conklin and Debra Humphrey APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 6, 1998 Minutes were approved as distributed. BA 98-14.00; VARIANCE (BRADBERRYI 310 WEST MOUNTAIN STREET This request was submitted by John & Hope Bradberry for property located at 310 West Mountain. The property is zoned C-3, Central Commercial, and contains approximately .52 acres. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested encroachments into the rear and side setbacks for the existing structure and proposed addition as shown on the elevation drawings and survey submitted as part of this application. Mr. Conklin stated this is a request for two variances. The first variance request is on the side property line which requires a 10' side setback. The second variance is for the back property line which requires a 15' setback. He referred to the survey which reflected an existing building previously used as a laundromat. The applicant intends to renovate the building by adding a 2nd and 3rd story. The side setback from the existing structure is currently 2' off the side property line. On the rear setback, the existing building at its closest point is .7 feet from the property line (approximately 8") and approximately 2.1 feet at the east. Elevation drawings were presented that reflected what the proposed addition would look like. Mr. Conklin added staff has recommended an additional 6" setback variance to account for the overhang. The elevations indicated the building would have a slight overhang where they would have to put up the siding. The applicant indicated a 2x4 with siding or finishing on the exterior of the building would be installed. Mr. Boyd inquired about the zoning of the property to the rear of subject property. Mr. Conklin responded he believed it was zoned Residential Office on the adjacent property to the rear of this building. • • • Board of Adjustment and Sign and Appeals Minutes May 4, 1998 Page -2- He further noted the requirement for this property is that this property could not be split because it had a commercial zoning and the residence was an access way to the radiator shop on the property. Applicant has prepared the necessary papers to ensure that no future lot splits can occur on this property. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. Mr. Bradberry brought some drawings for the board to review which might give them a better idea of the proposed building. Ms. Orton inquired if the structure would cover tract 2 also. Mr. Conklin responded it would not; it would be above the existing laundry. Mr. Boyd inquired if the applicant owns tract 2. Mr. Conklin responded, yes, the applicant does own tract 2. Ms. Orton noted there was a garage door between the lots. It was noted that the fire department (adjacent property owner) was notified. The architect stated he had spoken with Bert Rakes in Inspections. Mr. Rakes asked them to make this a 3 hour wall and they have met this requirement. Mr. Howard Halperin, who is the owner of the property to the west of subject property, appeared before the board. Mr. Halperin noted his presence was not because of the setbacks, but he was concerned about the zoning change of commercial to residential. He inquired if this was correct. Mr. Conklin stated the property is presently zoned commercial. However, residential uses are allowed as accessory use in this zone. Mr. Halperin stated his concern was how this would affect the rest of the block. He stated he is zoned R -O. Mr. Conklin stated it would not change his zoning. Mr. Halperin stated his property is zoned R -O and contained a store front. His concern was how this would affect his property. Mr. Conklin responded the existing use of his property, if it was conforming, could still be used in this manner. If it was not conforming, a person could not change their zoning. He stated he would be glad to discuss this further with him at a later time. Mr. Halperin inquired since the subject property was commercial, and would be developed to residential, would this have any bearing on his property. • Board of Adjustment and Sign and Appeals Minutes May 4, 1998 Page -3- Mr. Conklin responded he did not think this development would have any effect on his property. Mr. Halperin stated the original purpose for purchasing his property was because it did contain a store front and was zoned R -O. Mr. Boyd inquired if this property would be rezoned. Mr. Conklin responded the property would not be rezoned. . Mr. Boyd stated since they were allowing this property to be built right up to the back edge of the property line, he would request an agreement that tract 1 front would not have any additional building. Mr. Bradberry noted the design is for a small swimming pool in front and a parking lot in front. Mr. Boyd stated his concern was for additional living space. He inquired if the applicant would have any objection to a requirement for a contract stating that there would be no further construction in front of Tract 1. Mr. Bradberry inquired if the requirement was for the area which is currently the parking lot. Mr. Boyd responded, yes. Mr. Bradberry inquired if a swimming pool would be allowed. • Mr. Boyd noted a swimming pool would be allowed. Mr. Bradberry stated the overhang, as it currently exists, would not be extended in any way by the new facade. Mr. Boyd inquired about the posts hanging down. • Mr. Bradberry stated the overhang reflected in the picture would be equivalent to the proposed overhang on the building. Mr. Hanna moved to accept the variance request with the stipulations that no structure would be built on the south side of the property and the development would match the original drawing presented. Ms. Orton seconded said motion as stated. The roll was called and said motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 6-0-0. Mr. Bradberry inquired if they could build a fence on the front property line or would it have to be 5' from the property line. Mr. Conklin responded if it was over 30" in height, which it would probably be, it would have to be set back 5'. • • • Board of Adjustment and Sign and Appeals Minutes May 4, 1998 Page -4- Mr. Boyd noted the board would need to nominate a chairman for the upcoming year. By acclamation, the board nominated Mr. Larry Perkins for the chairman. They will hold the election at the next meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m.