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