Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-06-02 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment was held on June 2, 2008 at 3:45 p.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ACTION TAKEN BOA 08-2959 (MARKS/1224 HENDRIX, 404) Approved Page 3 BOA 08-3001 (TEAFF/508 FOREST, 445) Approved Page 5 BOA 08-3002 (NORMAN/1240 N. LEWIS, 404) Approved Page 7 BOA 08-3015 (NEWELL/MORTON/1141 HENDRIX, 404) Approved Page 8 Robert Kohler Sherrie Alt Bob Nickle Mark Waller Steven Bandy STAFF PRESENT Jesse Fulcher Andrew Garner David Whitaker MEMBERS ABSENT James Zant William Chesser STAFF ABSENT Dara Sanders 1 Board of Adjustment Chair Bob Kohler called the meeting to order. Approval of the May 5, 2008 Board of Adjustment meeting minutes. Motion• Board Member Nickle made a motion to approve the minutes from the April 7, 2008 BOA Meeting. Board Member Bandy seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion passed with a vote of 5-0-0. 2 Old Business: BOA 08-2959 (MARKS, 404): Submitted by RANDY RITCHEY STEADFAST, INC. for property located at 1224 HENDRIX STREET. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.50 acres. The request is for two lot width variances to allow for a lot split. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, recommending approval of the two requested 19' lot width variances based on findings and the City Council policy decision referenced in the report to deny a rezoning of RSF-8 on a nearby property. Board Member Nickle asked about ownership of surrounding parcels depicted on pg. 10, noting that the parcel info may indicate that the owner does not live at the property. Garner agreed that the mailing address for many of the surrounding property owners is not the same as the physical address for the parcel. Board Member Kohler offered clarification, stating that infill development is good for this neighborhood and City as a whole. Board Member Waller asked about the City policy and City Council input on rezoning and how it affects this request. Garner clarified the infill mentioned in City Plan 2025, and that in this project part of staffs recommendation was based on the City Plan 2025 policy to encourage infill development. Board Member Bandy asked about setbacks. Garner confirmed that if approved, the two new lots would have to conform to RSF-4 setbacks. Public comment: Joyce Richards, neighbor, stated that it does not seem appropriate to have two houses. City Council decision to deny the rezoning means to deny the variance. Terry Phelan, neighbor, stated she had a conversation with Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, and that the conversation concluded that the Board of Adjustment was an inappropriate avenue for redevelopment; now hearing comments to the contrary. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, described the process for this item to initially be heard at the Board of Adjustment. Staff recommended that the variance request be tabled until after the City Council had voted on a rezoning request across the street. After the City Council made the policy decision to deny the rezoning, the variance procedure was the only remaining mechanism to accomplish a lot split on the subject property. 3 Phelan stated that variance increased density, and the smaller lot changes the character of the neighborhood and integrity of neighborhood. Does not believe it is appropriate infill. Andrew Marks (applicant) described the land uses and lot sizes and why it is compatible. Phelan stated that the increase in density is not desirable. Clay Morton, public, stated that this lot and neighborhood were a perfect case for revitalization and infill. Phelan stated that just because City Council said "no" to the rezoning does not mean yes to the Board of Adjustment. Marks stated it was not a unanimous decision that the neighborhood is against it. No more public comment was received. David Whitaker, City Attorney, clarified that all the Board of Adjustment is deciding is lot width. Board Member Waller stated that the findings cannot be made. Board Member Kohler stated that infill mitigates sprawl is his main consideration, and he does not believe it would threaten the continuity of the neighborhood. Board Member Bandy stated that the RSF-4 setbacks would be maintained. Motion: Board Member Waller made a motion to deny based on a lack of special conditions, no deprivation of rights, the variance is a result of the applicant's actions. The motion died due to a lack of a second. Board Member Bandy discussed that the finding on pg. 6 discussed that the variance would comply with the harmony and purpose of zoning regulations and would not be injurious to the neighborhood. Board Member Nickle stated that as discussed in the findings on pg. 6, staff recommends that this is an exception, an overriding consideration. He asked about City Council response that led to staff to making the determination that a policy decision had been made. Garner explained the City Council decision for the proposed RSF-8 rezoning on a nearby property. He discussed that City Council was not opposed to two residences on the lot but was opposed to a rezoning, because of the neighbors' concerns and the zoning 11 history of the neighborhood. City Council discussed that infill on this lot could be accomplished through the Board of Adjustment variance procedure. The City Council did not specifically state they would be in favor of a variance. Staff viewed this decision and discussion as a policy decision that infill and development in this neighborhood is not encouraged by rezoning but by the variance process. Board Member Kohler stated the lot size is not incompatible. Motion: Board Member Nickle made a motion to deny the request. Board Member Waller seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion failed with a vote of 2-3-0 (with Board Members Alt, Bandy, and Kohler voting no). Motion: Board Member Nickle made a motion to approve the request. Board Member Alt seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 4-1-0 (with Board Member Waller voting no). E New Business: BOA 08-3001 (TEAFF/FOREST AVE., 445): Submitted by MATT CHAMPAGNE for property located at 508 FOREST AVENUE. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY — 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0. 14 acres. The request is for reduced front and rear setbacks to bring an existing non -conforming structure into compliance and for new additions to the structure. Planner: Andrew Garner Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, recommending approval of the requested front and rear setback and lot area variances to bring the existing nonconforming house into compliance and to allow for the proposed additions, with conditions as listed. Tim DeNoble and Matt Champagne, applicants, stated that the house is in immaculate condition. Lot is 21' wide. The additions to the house do not go any further into setbacks. They wish to maintain character of house and make improvements to make it more livable and updated. Board Member Alt asked if the variance was to bring the house into compliance. Garner confirmed that yes the variance was to bring the house into compliance and to allow for additions as shown in the site plan. DeNoble stated the additions were sent to the neighborhood association for review. Motion: Board Member Alt made a motion to approve the request. Board Member Bandy seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion was passed with a vote of 5-0-0. 0 BOA 08-3002 (NORMAN/1240 N. LEWIS, 404): Submitted by MELANIE NORMAN for property located at 1240 N. Lewis Avenue. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY — 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 1.20 acres. The request is for a variance from lot width requirements to split the property into two parcels. Planner: Jesse Fulcher Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave the staff report. Board Member Waller asked if the storage building would be located on the proposed property line if the property was split. Fulcher stated that the building would have to be relocated or removed and would be addressed with a lot split request. Melanie Norman, applicant, stated the existing house is only 25' wide and there is plenty of room to provide an adequate side setback for the existing house. Al Rahm, applicant, stated that the shared drive would eliminate tree removal. Board Member Nickle stated that the variance is appropriate and a good use of the property - Motion: Board Member Nickle made a motion to approve the request. Board Member Alt seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion was approved with a vote of 5-0-0. 7 BOA 08-3015: (NEWELL/MORTON/1141 HENDRIX, 404): Submitted by JAKE NEWELL for property located at 1141 HENDRIX STREET. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY — 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.37 acres. The request is for variances from lot width and lot area requirements to split the property into two parcels. Planner: Andrew Garner Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, recommending approval of the two lot width variances and the lot area variance. Board Member Kohler asked about the lot area variance, and if they can move the lot line over to make 8,000 sq. ft. to reduce lot area variance. A discussion between staff, the applicant, and the Board of Adjustment ensued regarding lot area. After discussion with various board members, staff and the applicant, it was confirmed that the lot area variance could be eliminated by adjusting the lot line. Garner confirmed that if lot A had a width of 54' and lot B had a width of 59', both lots would comply with lot area. Public Comment: Joyce Richards, neighbor, asked what lots are compatible. Garner named off four adjacent lots to the east and south that are 50'. Terry Phelan, neighbor, repeated her comments from the previous Marks variance request, that not all infill is good. Planning should look at infill. She doesn't agree with the City Council's denial of the rezoning and staff s recommendation for the variance. No more public comment was received. David Whitaker asked if neighbors will be notified when the lot split of this property goes through. Garner stated that only adjoining property owners would be notified, but that staff would make sure that an email was sent to Ms. Richards and Ms. Phelan (or the PAO) to notify them of the meeting date. Board Member Nickle stated that the facts seem the same as the previous request on Hendrix, and he supports due to City Council goals and policies. A condition of approval is to notify the Maxwell/Stevens neighborhood association of the lot split. Motion: Board Member Nickle made a motion to approve the request with conditions, including additional notification for the lot split, with lot widths of 54' and 59'. Board Member 3 Alt seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion was approved with a vote of 4-1- 0, with Board Member Waller voting no. All business being concluded, the meeting adjourned at 5:15 PM. 0