HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-06-04 MinutesBoard of Adjustment Meeting
June 4, 2012
Page 1 of 6
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
A meeting of the Board of Adjustment was held on June 4, 2012 at 3:45 p.m. in Room
111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
ACTION TAKEN
MINUTES: May 7, 2012 Approved
Page 2
New Business:
BOA 12-4131 (397 E. Dogwood Ave./Lewis, 485):
Page 3 Approved
ADM 12-4133: Administrative Item (BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BYLAWS):
Page 6 Approved
Robert Kohler
Jeff Hagers
Matthew Hoffman
Tim Stein
Evan Niehues
STAFF PRESENT
Andrew Garner
Quin Thompson
Jason Kelley
MEMBERS ABSENT
Kristin Knight
Board of Adjustment Chair Bob Kohler called the meeting to order at 3:45 PM.
Board of Adjustment Meeting
June 4, 2012
Page 2 of 6
Approval of the minutes from the May 7, 2012 Board of Adjustment meeting.
Motion•
Board Member Stein made a motion to approve the May 7, 2012 Meeting Minutes.
Board Member Hagers seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a
vote of 4-0-0.
Board of Adjustment Meeting
June 4, 2012
Page 3 of 6
BOA 12-4131 (397 E. Dogwood Ave./Lewis, 485): Submitted by STACEY PARK for property
located at 397 EAST DOGWOOD AVENUE. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE-FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 0.24 acre. The request is
for a variance from setback requirements to allow for the construction of a new garage.
Staff comments were read by Quin Thompson, expressing staff finding that there is no
hardship imposed by zoning on this lot; that the desire to build a garage addition inside
setback is not in itself a hardship.
Board member Kohler commented that the applicant is requesting a 9' variance to the
setback in order to build the submitted project.
Board member Hoffman asked if the [proposed] design would conform with nearby
properties in the neighborhood.
Thompson answered that garage or covered parking a typical in the neighborhood, and
that lack of a garage or covered parking in this zone is considered a hardship, and that in
staff opinion there is adequate area within the setback to allow a garage to be built.
Brett Park summarized the nature of the request, noting that his clients hoped to make
additions to the existing home without re -tooling the entire floor plan. Due to site
constraints, it is necessary to encroach into the setback on the East in order to
accommodate the proposed addition. Mr. Park said that it is important to him to request
reasonable variances when he comes before the Board of [Adjustment]. Alan Reid
provided a survey showing a 30' Right -of -Way (R.O.W.) , the City GIS map showed a
30' R.O.W. which seems reasonable for Dogwood Ave.
Mr. Kohler asked the current with of the street.
Mr. Park replied that the street width is 18'. And continuing said that he had two
conversations with city staff in which a larger R.O.W. was never mentioned. The larger
R.O.W. was first mentioned in a phone call from Quin [Thompson] and Andrew [Garner]
last Thursday (May 31). He stated that in his opinion the hardship is that there is an
unnecessarily large R.O.W. on Dogwood Ave.
Mr. Kohler agreed that the R.O.W. seemed large given the nature of the street, asking
staff what type of street a 43' R.O.W. would typically be applied to.
Mr. Garner noted that building setbacks are always measured from the Master Street
Plan R.O.W., adding that the street is classified as a residential street, which has the
narrowest cross-section and R.O.W. requirement of 43'.
Mr. Kohler said that the cross-section and R.O.W. seemed unduly large for this
particular street, which was causing the applicant to request a 9' variance to the building
setback.
Board of Adjustment Meeting
June 4, 2012
Page 4 of 6
Mr. Hoffman asked for clarification of the site plan, which indicated a 3' variance was
needed to build the proposed project.
Mr. Park responded that until Thursday (May 31) he expected to ask for a 3' variance,
and that he was surprised to find that the R.O.W. was larger than his research suggested.
Board member Hagers asked for a description of the existing non -conformity shown on
the site plan.
Mr. Park responded that it was an existing attached carport that would be removed with
the proposed project and confirmed that the non -conforming condition would be
eliminated.
Mr. Hagers asked for a description of the space between the existing house and proposed
garage.
Mr. Park described it as expanded kitchen, stairs, laundry room, and living room area.
Mr. Hagers asked if there was a concern that the proposed addition might reduce a view
from adjacent properties given the steep angle of the street, given the height of the
proposed second story addition.
Mr. Park said he thought that there would not be a problem with obstruction of views.
Mr. Kohler asked staff if it was the case that the City [of Fayetteville] website had not
been updated to reflect the increased R.O.W. requirement imposed by the Master Street
Plan.
Mr. Kelley responded that the site is up to date, that the Master Street Plan R.O.W. is a
reference line which is intended to keep development out of the way of future expansion.
Board member Niehues asked for clarification that the submitted site plan was showing
existing R.O.W. rather than required Master Street Plan R.O.W.
Mr. Park replied that it was.
Mr. Niehues asked Mr. Park if there was room between required setback and the existing
house to construct a garage. He noted that not being able to have a garage in which to
park cars due to setback requirements is considered a hardship, but that the desire to have
a laundry room is not necessarily a hardship.
Mr. Park agreed that no person has a natural right to a laundry room, but countered that
the project was intended to increase the size of the home such that the owner's growing
family of 5 could live in a house that would accommodate their needs, and be able to park
2 cars, adding that the proposal was not unreasonable, but that the setback was
Board of Adjustment Meeting
June 4, 2012
Page 5 of 6
excessively large and preventing the applicant from a reasonable use of their property.
Mr. Hoffman asked Mr. Park if the issue was that the Master Street Plan R.O.W.
requirement was different than he understood it to be.
Mr. Park answered that the issue was in fact that an unreasonably wide R.O.W.
requirement was preventing the home owner from executing the project design goals and
using their property in a way that would accommodate their needs.
Mr. Hoffman asked if it was appropriate for the Board [of Adjustments] to grant
variances to the Master Street Plan.
Mr. Kelley responded that the Master Street Plan is outside the jurisdiction of the Board.
Mr. Hagers asked whether or not it is common knowledge that the Master Street Plan is
used for permitting.
Mr. Garner said that it is common knowledge with developers, and that staff checks for
conformance with the Master Street Plan with every permit application.
Mr. Thompson noted that the request was for a variance to the setback, rather than an
adjustment to the Master Street Plan, which is within the power of the Board to grant.
Mr. Kelley commented that issues relating to the R.O.W. can be considered when
deciding whether to grant a variance to the setback.
Mr. Kohler stated that having visited the site, in his opinion, the R.O.W. is excessive
given the conditions at Dogwood Ave, and that the Garage would still be well out of the
R.O.W. and that the proposal is not out of character with structures in the area. He added
that for those reasons he would support granting the request.
Mr. Hagers commented that he also visited the site, and that he felt that Dogwood Ave
would not ever be made wider nor would sidewalks be constructed due to topography and
site conditions. He added that he would support the variance.
Motion:
Board Member Hagers made a motion to approve with all staff recommended
conditions. Board Member Stein seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion
passed with a vote of 5-0-0.
Board of Adjustment Meeting
June 4, 2012
Page 6 of 6
ADM 12-4133: Administrative Item (BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BYLAWS): Submitted
by CITY PLANNING STAFF to amend the bylaws of the Board of Adjustment to reduce the
number of required members from seven to five.
Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report.
Board Member Hagers asked about quorum in the interim until there were only five members.
Jason Kelly, Assistant City Attorney, discussed that the board might want to consider adopting
some rules in the interim. Whatever the bylaws currently state is the requirement. The bylaws will
now say three members is a quorum.
Motion:
Board Member Kohler made a motion to approve. Board Member Stein seconded the
motion. Upon roll call, the motion passed with a vote of 5-0-0.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 PM.