Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-04 - Agendas FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:501-575-8264 AGENDA FOR A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment will be held Tuesday, September 4, 2001, at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, AR, 72701. The following items will be considered: Approval of minutes from the meeting of August 6,2001. 01dBusiness: 1. Discussion item requested by Board of Adjustment chairman. Review of action taken by Board of Adjustment on June 4, 2001 concerning VAR 0 1-8.00: Variance (Harden, pp 610)was submitted by Roderick W. Harden for property located at 5169 Cattail Court. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.34 acres. The requirement is a 20' rear setback. The request is a 10'rear setback(a 10' variance). New Business: 2. VAR 01-16.00: Variance (Collins, pp 445)was submitted by Jeffery Collins for property located at 725 N. Vandeventer. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The requirement is for a 8' side setback. The request is for a 5' side setback(a 3' variance). 3. VAR 01-18.00: Variance (Roberts, pp 435) was submitted by Cory Roberts for property located at 6321 El Paso. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.20 acres. The requirement is for a 25' front setback. The request is for a 23.7' front setback (a 1.3' variance). 4. VAR 01-19.00: Variance (Hilker, pp 446)was submitted by Ronnie & Christine Hilker for property located at 311 E. Prospect. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.344 acres. The requirement is 25' front setback. The request is for a 22'.11" front setback (a 2'.1" variance). 5. VAR 01-20.00: Variance(Stokenbury, pp 445) was submitted by James Key on behalf of Scott Stokenbury for property located at 7 Prospect Avenue. The property is zoned R- 2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 0.22 acres. The requirement is for a 25' front setback and an 8' side setback. The request is for a 13' front setback(a 12'variance) and a 6' side setback(a 2' variance). 6. VAR 01-21.00: Variance (Rice, pp 443)was submitted by Robert Sharp, Architect on behalf of Brooks Rice for property located at 639 N. Oliver Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.42 acres. The requirement is for a 8' side setback. The request is for a 2' side setback(a 6'variance). All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. A copy of the proposed amendments and other pertinent data is open and available for inspection in the Office of City Planning (575-8264), City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD for hearing impaired are available for all public meetings. 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter,please call Don Bunn at 575-8330. Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 15 VAR 01-8.00: Variance(Harden, pp 610)was submitted by Roderick W.Harden for property located at 5169 Cattail Court. The property is zoned R-1,Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.34 acres. The requirement is a 20'rear setback. The request is a 10'rear setback(a 10' variance). Perkins: That brings us to the second appeal on the agenda 0 1-8.00 submitted by Roderick W. Harden for property located at 5169 Cattail Court. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.34 acres. The requirement is a 20'rear setback. The request is a 10'rear setback(a 10'variance). Warrick: This property is located in the Sequoyah Meadows Subdivision which is on the south side of 16 East, headed out towards Elkins. It's an R-1, single family residential subdivision. The subject property is constructed, the house is existing. It has a privacy fence surrounding the rear yard. In this particular case,the applicant is requesting the variance to the rear setback requirement in order to erect a storage and shop building at the 10 foot setback line. In the submittal materials the applicant states his request for the variance is based on aesthetics and the preferred siting on the property. Staff is recommending denial of the request. We were unable to make several of the required findings in order to recommend approval.-There are no special conditions unique to this property such as terrain,vegetation or other features or circumstances which would require the placement of the structure closer to the rear property line. There is adequate land available on the lot in order to site the project in an area that complies with setback requirements. Therefore, staff is making the recommendation that we have. I believe that the applicant is here and I'll answer any questions you may have. Perkins: Mr. Harden, do you have any input on this appeal? Harden: I do. I don't know how well I articulated my request, in writing,when I sent it in I was a bit hurried getting it prepared to meet the deadline so I could make this particular meeting. It is true, the way my backyard is structured, I could place the building in a different location. However,the primary reason that I wanted the building back there was to have a storage facility for my boat,which under the covenants of our subdivision cannot set forward of a privacy fenced back area. There are several that do, I don't want to be one that is not in compliance. The double drive gate sits on the east side of the property. In order to back a boat and everything into that particular building, it would need to be set on that side of the property because I don't want to be trying to maneuver a boat backing through the back yard. If we move the building forward to the 20 feet,that gives me 17 feet from the front entrance of the gate to the northern edge of the proposed structure. 17 feet is not enough room to go through a narrow double drive gate with a full sized vehicle to gain access to the rest of your yard with a vehicle, if you needed to get back there to do yard work or bring in trees or whatever. If you move over to what would be the southwest comer and come out the 20 foot,there is established a planter and tree and then on this particular area right here there is another established tree right there. The Board ofAdjustment Septemher 4, 2001 VAROJ-8 Harden Page 1.1 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4,2001 Page 16 only way that I can see to get a boat into that particular building with any ease without tearing the boat up, I can't move the double drive gate on this side because I have a single walk gate on this side but the bulk of my property is on the eastern edge of that side and I have lots of room here to be able to back through. That was the whole reasoning behind wanting the building. There is a 7 V2foot utility easement to the south edge of the property, on the back line. I was proposing 10 feet,which is actually 15 feet and the fence sits right on the property line when it was surveyed, it splits the middle of that 15 foot easement that goes in the back. There is no gas that runs through there, it's just electrical lines. That's the whole reasoning behind what I was wanting to do. Yes, I did site aesthetics because if you look at the property too,that's the only place that it looks right within the property. If you place it somewhere else of you move it 20 feet out, you lose all of the ground area behind that which is hidden which you cannot landscape or anything to that nature. The lots out there are oversized lots for a residential subdivision. I think mine is listed at.34 acres, 150 deep by 100 wide so it's not exactly a postage stamp but if you place it anywhere else within that lot,to me, it even further causes a hindrance to someone who lives behind you if you move over to the other side. I simply can't move it forward and still be able to get into my back yard. Perkins: You made mention of a storage building on the property to your immediate east? Harden: There is. Perkins: Staff, can you help me here? On this drawing on page 2.9, the subject property is lined out and to the east there is what looks like that building represented on the print. Harden: I have a photo that you can see. Perkins: These three dotted lines to the immediate south of that small building on the print, what do those represent? Warrick: The centerline is the property line between the lots, the north and south lines are the edges of a utility easement. Perkins: That does not represent a setback requirement off the back property line? Warrick: No. The small storage building on the lot adjacent to Mr.Harden's is most likely in violation,we would not have been able to issue a building permit for that structure. Harden: The structure that's there,of course I didn't walk into my neighbor's yard and measure it, it is actually a 20 foot long by 14 to 16 feet wide and it's slab construction, Masonite siding, 3 tab comp shingle roof, it's a permanent structure and it sits within the utility easement. It's 5Y2feet from my property line to the edge and from the back area, which there is a 7V2foot utility easement which continues to run across that property as well, he Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROJ-8 Harden Page 1.2 0 0 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 17 is sitting 6V2 feet so he is actually I foot into the utility casement. Perkins: You are not wanting to line up on that one? Harden: No. I'm going to be 10 feet this way and 10 feet from all edges of my property line. There is an 8 foot setback in the R-I zoning from the side to that adjacent east property. I was going to be 10 feet that way and 10 feet back this way,which allows ample room for utility access. You could get a vehicle backed into a 10 foot area if you needed to back in to do something, and still make use of the bulk of my yard area. Conklin: I just want to make sure the Board is aware, the drawing on page 2.8 that shows the proposed 600 square foot garage is not to scale, it should be larger than that. I just want to bring that up. Perkins: Larger in all directions? Conklin: Yes. If you look at his house, hisexisting garage looks like 21.8 and 18 feet,you are talking about a building that is 20 feet by 30 feet, so it's larger than the garage. Perkins: T'he existing shed will be removed? Harden: Yes. It's an 8 by 12, one of those portable storage buildings. I was a bit disappointed, I too found that nothing on this particular plat,that I paid for when I closed on that house, is to scale and nothing is listed correctly on several of the drawings. They show the south side as the north side and the west side as the east side. When I started doing this, I was wondering what I paid for when they did my survey and everything on my house. That's correct, I attempted to make it to scale to the best of my ability but was unable to do so. There is ample space for the building back there but if you move it another 10 feet forward it does make a difference. Perkins: Is this the appeal you said you were running power only to the building? Harden: Eventually yes. In the initial request, it's just going to be a finished shell on the outside of similar construction to be in compliance with my subdivision covenants. Vinyl siding, architectural shingle roof, slab construction, fixtures on the outside and I will have electrical service ran to it but it won't be probably six or so months after I get it built. I'm trying to build it out-of-pocket rather than do it and have to incur any interest being paid against the building. I can do that but I can't do that with electrical service without strapping myself a bit. It will be finished on the inside once the electrical service is done. From the exterior minus electrical service, it will be absolutely identical to the type of construction that the house is within the subdivision. 01szewski: Does the 10 feet include the overhang? oard ofAdiustment Septemher 4, 2001 V4RO1-8 Harden Page 1.3 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 18 Harden: Yes. Olszewski: The actual foundation... Harden: Yes or I could move it out. It doesn't matter. It can either be I I feet out if you want to include the overhang. On this particular building the contractor and I discussed a one foot overhang rather than a 2 foot like you would probably find on your dwelling. It would actually be I I feet and I don't have a problem with that. You can set out I I feet, 12 feet but when you are talking about adding another 8 or 10 feet, it doesn't make it possible for me to get the vehicle pulled into the back. I didn't even realize that when I wrote the letter. This last weekend I was in the back yard with my pickup doing some additional yard work back there. I have it staked where I want it to be minus the setback provision. As I pulled in, I had plenty of room but if it was much tighter I might not be able to do that. I measured back out and drove stakes again and when I drove in the second time, there was no way to make the turn with a full size pickup and be able to clear the gate. I actually have to fold the mirrors in on the side to go through that thing. When they build that fence,they make those gates about as narrow as they possibly can. I realize that the building to the east of me does not constitute approval by the Board but that building was there when we moved there three years ago. They obviously did not get a permit to build that particular structure. No one has complained, it's not been a hindrance, it looks right, it's in the right place. If you moved it 20 feet forward it would sit right in the middle of the back yard which would be completely out of place when you looked at it. That's the only thing I can comment on that particular building. That's pretty much all I have to bring to the Board in the interest of being brief. PUBLIC COMAMNT: Perkins: Anyone else present have a comment on this appeal? BOARD DISCUSSION: Perkins: Does the Board have any questions? Harden: Not that this is a concern of the Board but I'm tired of paying $75 a mont h to have my boat stored when I can have something of my own and on my property that I have equity in,value to my property. I am not going to set my boat in my front yard like several of my neighbors do because I take pride in where I live and I want it to look right. That was the whole reasoning behind wanting the structure. If I can't place it where I want to place it, I won't build the building because it will not fit my needs. I want it to look good in the neighborhood, I want it to be accessible for use. That's the reason I'm not putting up a metal structure or something like that, I want it to look right in the neighborhood. Orton: In looking at why staff turned it down... Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-8 Harden Page 1.4 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 19 Harden: It was most likely a poor narrative on my part. Perkins: There were no special conditions. Harden: I understand that. Conklin: The applicant can't cause the need for the variance. There is obviously adequate room on the property to build it. You are basically building a garage, it's not a storage shed. It's larger than your existing garage. Staff, everyday it seems like, we have people that want to put sheds in the setbacks. I've had to have people move them out of the setbacks. It's difficult for us to support a variance of this type when it's not even a shed, it is a permanent foundation garage that you are building. Harden: Indeed and I can only say that if my boat would fit in my garage, that's where it would be. It won't fit in the garage and I've tried every way imaginable to put it there and still have room to park at least one vehicle within the garage. I understand why they recommended denial but I simply wanted to express my concern to the Board. To me,I guess this is the underlying factor in my mind, the person who has the structure to the east of my property, none of the neighbors within that particular subdivision have filed a grievance or complained about that building being there. If they had, some action would have taken against that particular building. Either it would have to have been moved,-tom----- down or relocated. At least they would have had to come in front of you for a variance after the fact. With that in mind, they are able to enjoy the use of their property and the full use of their back yard as a result. By my trying to do the right thing and getting a building permit and coming to the Board and requesting that, that was my only concern is that when I saw the letter recommending denial, because of that I can't enjoy the same right that they are with their property because they didn't follow the law. Granted, I know that is not reason to grant but I had to get that off my chest. That being said... Olszewski: Did anything happen out of that? Conklin: No. We haven't received any complaints. Typically on outbuildings like that, it's a complaint basis. A few years ago we had to have a jungle gym thing moved out of somebody's backyard. Once again,my point was this is not a typical storage shed, it's a fairly substantial building. Harden: It's not, by square footage or size, that building is 20 feet long or 16 or 18 feet wide and I'm proposing a 20 by 30. There is a little bit difference in the size of the structure but in the grand scheme of things when you are sitting within the utility easement already... Hanna: I'm just curious,you said the boat will fit in your garage,you can't get a car in there. If the garage is 18 feet deep how come this is going to be 30 feet? Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-Marden Page 1.5 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 20 Harden: My garage is oversized, it's 21 foot deep if I'm correct. Conklin: It says 18 but it may go further into the house. Harden: It does. It's actually 20 or 21 feet. My boat is 19 feet with the motor hanging off the back of it plus the tongue sticking out,which is not one of the collapsible fold-away types. It takes about 26 feet to get the boat under cover straight. I can stick it in the garage but I have to unhook it and run it sideways. It sets just like this in my garage and it goes from tip to tip. I can barely fit it in there. Olszewski: You want to go 10 feet in, 2!/2 feet past the utility easement? Harden: That's correct. Olszewski: If you were on the utility easement... Harden: If that whole drawing is to scale which we are not certain. Olszewski: There is a 30 foot building. Harden: Let mejust ask you this. On that,just to see if we are to scale with that particular drawing the appraiser did, exactly from the fence here, if we moved it out to be within the zoning requirement, there is 17 feet from here to the front edge of the building. Olszewski: From your house? Harden: From the fence. That's the double drive gate. From this fence, if we had it sitting within what we proposed which is the 20 foot setback from the rear,there is only 17 feet from here. I don't know that this whole lot is to scale. I wish you would have been able to have looked over because you would have seen the stakes as they were set on the lot itself Olszewski: If you did it that big and you moved it over here... Hanna: Getting back on the size, is there any way you can make that 25 foot deep? That�s all you are going to be putting in there right? Harden: I measured my boat from the top of cowling even with the motor down, from the top of the cowling to the very tip of the tongue and it's 26 feet. You've got to have a little fudge factor when you are backing that into a building so you don't stick the prop through the back of the wall. That's even letting the motor down, that's not having it kicked up on the motor toter which you would normally travel. In the interest of trying to keep it as small as I could but still not punch a hole through what will be finished sheet rock on the Board ofAdjustment Septemher 4, 2001 VAROJ-8 Harden Page 1.6 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4,2001 Page 21 inside and still have a little room getting the door shut without having to grad a hold of the tongue and drag it sideways,which defeats the whole purpose of building the building. Olszewski: How tall is it? Harden: It's going to be 16 feet, it's going to have a 6/12 pitch on it. It has to be at least 6/12 for the shingle manufacturer to warranty the shingle for runoff. I don't want to have a big monstrosity of a structure back there. I want to keep it as low profile as I can in the back, for my benefit, so that when I look at the front of my house I don't see a huge shop building in the back and for everyone else's benefit. I also want it to look like the house. I currently have it staked in my backyard where I propose putting it. You can get a visual representation of where it's at. Perkins: Certainly if the appeal is granted it would be restricted to just that building, it would not run the whole east west direction of that property line. Harden: I don't intend to build any other. I guess one more difficult things for me to understand, this is to the layperson,why there is 20 feet to the rear of the property yet only 8 feet to the sides? I cart build that building 8 feet from my neighbor on either side but I have to be 20 feet from the rear of my property which there is more space to the rear of my property than there is to the adjoining sides. To the layperson, when I stand in my backyard and I walk around with a tape measure and measure all the proposed places that this building could be and still have use of it, I look at the 8 foot to the sides and 20 foot to the rear and I just scratch my head and say"Why?". There is probably a reason that I'm not privy to. Perkins: In a lot of cases it does have to do with the utility easements. Their vehicles and fire trucks need at least 16 feet, so it would be 16 feet from your neighbors overhand to your overhang and they can get through there. Harden- I'm looking at it in my subdivision, from that perspective. Between the two houses from back to back there is probably 150 feet between the two. Perkins: It seems like the fence makes a funny jog. Harden: I actually own that jog. Perkins: I couldn't figure out who's yard that was. Harden: I'm glad that they made the little jog there because they covered up the utility pedestals that belong in the other person's yard back here. In my plat that's actually mine. Hanna: Are you going to pour a concrete drive? Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-8 Harden Page 1.7 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 22 Harden: No. The frequency with which I use my boat these days is probably 10 or so times a year. Last year I had it out three times. I don't use it a great deal, but I also want to keep it because it's paid for. It's not eating anything so when I do get the chance to use it, I want to use it. It's not going to require a daily trip back and forth. The occasional trip over your grass is not going to cause a problem. Hanna: When you were talking about locating it back farther, are you talking about backing it to the existing gate,right? How that was a problem with the angle? Harden: Yes sir. There is no other place to put the gate and have access to the front of the property- Hanna: That boat, from wheel well to wheel well has to be wider than your truck. Harden: Actually, it's about the same width as full size pickup but the opening to that is 7 or 8 feet wide and I think the beam of my boat is about 84 inches, then you've got the fenders that sit under it. It's going to be about 7V2 foot wide. The fenders actually sit under it. I've backed it through the back of my gate but I'll tell you I've got 3 or 4 inches on either side. When I first bought the boat I parked it back there for a few weeks until I found a place to store it and get it out of my back yard. The covenants say it can't set in the grass, it has to be set on a concrete foundation. Perkins: There are plenty of covenants on the parking of sport and recreational vehicles, what covenants do you have in your neighborhood regarding outbuildings? Harden: All it says is,they cannot be used at any time for a principal residence and they must be of like construction to the primary residence. I have that if you would like to see it. Perkins: I take your word for it. We've heard his reasoning for wanting to position the building there, which is to enjoy the maximum of his back yard and asks for a 10 foot variance on his rear setback. Do we have any further discussion, questions or input? Do we hear a motion? MOTION: Hanna: I'll make a motion that we grant the variance requested. Orton: I'll second. Perkins: We have a motion to grant as requested and a second, any further discussion? Call the rollplease. Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-8 Harden Page 1.8 Board of Adjustment Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 23 ROLL CALL: Upon roll call VAR 01-8.00 is approved by a unanimous vote of 5-0-0. Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-8 Harden Page 1.9 0 0 FAYETTEVILLE TBE MY OF FAYETTEMLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:(501)575-8264 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Board of Adjustment FROM: Dawn T. Warrick, Planner THRU: Tim Conklin, A.I.C.P., City Planner DATE: June 4, 2001 VAR 01-8.00: Variance(Harden,pp 610)was submitted by Roderick W.Harden for property located at 5 169 Cattail Court. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.34 acres. '1he requirement is a 20'rear setback. The request is a 10'rear setback (a 10'variance). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested 10' rear setback variance as shown on the attached site plan. Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request Rear setback 20' 10' (10'variance) BACKGROUND: The subject property is located in the Sequoyah Meadows subdivision and is surrounded on all sides by other single family homes. The applicant is requesting a variance in order to erect a storage/shop building 10' into the required rear setback. In the submittal materials, the applicant states that the reason for the variance request is aesthetics and the preferred site on the property. Staff was unable to make several of the required findings in order to recommend approval of this request. There are no special conditions unique to this property such as terrain, vegetation or other features or circumstances which would require the placement of the proposed structure within the rear setback of the site. There is adequate land available on this lot to erect the proposed 600 s.f. structure in a manner which complies with current zoning requirements. Also, the need for this variance is caused by actions of the applicant H.-I USERSICOWONDA ff MWEPOR TSTOA 16-4-011 harden.wpd Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-8 Harden Page 1.10 Comments: SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North: Single family residence, R-1 South: Single family residence, R-1 East: Single family residence, R-1 West: Single family residence, R-1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Residential FINDINGS: § 156.02 ZONING REGULATIONS. Certain variances of the zoning regulations may be applied for as follows: A. General Regulations/Application. A variance shall not be granted unless and until an application demonstrates: 1. Special Conditions. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Finding: Unable to make finding. 2. Deprivation of Rights. That literal interpretation of the provisions of the zoning regulations would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the zoning regulations. Finding: Unable to make finding. 3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Finding: Unable to make finding. 4. No Special Privileges. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by Zoning, Chapters 160-165, to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. H.-IUSEIMCOAMONDAWN7U?EPORTSIBOA16-4-011harden.wpd Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-8 Harden Page 1.11 Finding: Unable to make finding. 5. Nonconforming Uses. No nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no permitted ornonconforming use of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. Finding: No nonconforming uses or structures were used as a basis of staff findings or this report § 156.02 C. Consideration by the Board of Adjustment. 1. Bulk and Area. Applications for variances of bulk and area requirements shall be considered by and may be approved by the Board of Adjustment. 2. Public Hearing. A public hearing shall be held. Finding: A public hearing is scheduled for June 4,2001. 3. Findings. The Board of Adjustment shall make the following findings: a. Mnimum Variance. That the reasons set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance, and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land,building, or structure. Finding: Unable to make finding. (I.) Harmony with General Purpose. The Board of Adjustment shall further make a finding that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of Zoning, Chapters 160-165, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Finding: While granting the requested variance will not be injurious to the neighborhood, it is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of zoning regulations which were designed to provide for open space, air circulation,visual distance and access between structures on adjacent lots. (2.) Reasons set forth in the application justify granting the variance, and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land,building, or structure. Finding: The requested variance is not necessary to make possible the reasonable use H.�USERSICOWONDAWMW-PORYYBOA t6-4-01 Iharden.wpd Board ofAdjustment Septeniher 4, 2001 VAROI-8 Harden Page 1.12 0 0 of the subject property. An addition to the existing building for the proposed use or the erection of the proposed building in compliance with current setback requirements is possible in this location. b. Conditions and Safeguards. In granting any variance, the Board of Adjustment may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the zoning regulations. Finding: N/A C. No Variance Allowed. Under no circumstances shall the Board of Adjustment grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under Zoning in the district involved, or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of the zomng regulations in said district. Finding: N/A H.I USERSICO&MONDAWNTWEPORTSIBOA k&4.01 Iharden.wpd Board ofAdjustment Septemher 4, 2001 VAROI-8 Harden Page 1.13 § 161.04 DISTRICT R-1: LOW D. Bulk and Area Regulations. DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. Single- Two-Family A. Purpose. The Low Density Family Residential District is designed to permit Lot 70 ft. 80 ft. and encourage the development of low Minimum density detached dwellings in suitable Width environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types. Lot Area 8,000 sq. ft. 12,000 sq.ft. Minimum I B. Uses. Land Area 8,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. Per 1. Permitted Uses. Dwelling Unit I City-Wide Uses by Right unit Unit 26 Single-Family Dwelling E. Yard Requirements (feet)., 2. UsesPermissible on FRow SIDE REAR Appeal to the Planning Commission. YARD YARD YARD Unit 2 City-Wide Uses by Conditional 25 8 20 Use Permit F. Building Area. On any lot the Unit 3 Public Protection and Utility area occupied by all buildings shall not Facilities exceed 40% of the total area of such lot. Unit 4 Cultural and Recreational Facilities (Code 199 1, §160.03 1) Single-Family and Two- Family Dwellings C. Density. SINGLE- TWOFAMILY FAMILY DWELLINGS DWELLINGS 4 or Less Families 7 or Less Families Per Acre Per Acre H I USERSACOAAIONDAWNYV?P-PORT"OA16-4-011horden wpd Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-8 Harden Page 1.14 Chair of the Board of Adjustment May 16, 2001 City of Fayetteville Dear Sir or Madam, This request is to receive a variance to the 20-foot rear(south)setback at lot 44, Sequoyah Meadows, 5169 Cattail Court Fayetteville,AR 72701. There is currently a 7.5-foot utility easement at the south edge of the property line. The setback would require the south overhang of the proposed structure to be 20 feet from the south property line. We request this setback be granted an exception to place the south overhang at 10 feet from the property line,which is well outside of the utility easement. The size and shape of the rear yard area are not conducive to the 20-foot setback. This required setback places the purposed structure too close to the primary residence and is not aesthetically pleasing to the landscape. Placing the structure 10 feet from the south property line is much more pleasing to the landscape and would be less intrusive on the east neighboring property. This purposed site would also not interfere with any other existing structure or adjacent lands. Conforming to the south setback as it is directed, wfll not allow us to build the purposed structure without disrupting the aesthetics of the property. The east adjoining property has a 20' X 20' wood frame shop structure that sits well within the 20-foot setback and is not a hindrance to any adjacent properties. If the aforementioned structure were conforming to the directed setback, it would cause my rear yard area to be restricted. Placing my purposed structure in the directed setback would do the same to this east adjoining property. Two other locations in our rear lawn area were considered; however, these were in the south center and southwest comers, which are less appealing to us and in all likelihood our neighbors. These latter locations will not suffice due to existing landscape and are unattractive to the neighboring properties. Granting this variance Ail] not place me in any other condition not enjoyed by others in my subdivision, as demonstrated by the other detached structures in the neighborhood. Thank you in advance for your consideration and we hope you will favorably consider this request. —141 /�" � PI'L&� Rod and Rhonda Harden 5169 Cattail Court Fayetteville, AR 72701 501-582-4079 Home 501-530-5936 Cell Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-8 Harden Page 1-15 0 0 Description of Request Construction of a 20' X 30', (600 SF), detached storage/shop building on a 4" thick concrete slab. Wood frame walls and roof structure with blandex sheathing and white vinyl 4" shiplab siding. Roof structure will have a I foot overhang and the roof material will consist of matched architectural shingles to the residence. Structure will contain a single metal garage door, one steel exterior door and three 3' X 4' windows matched to the residence. Exterior approach lighting will be placed at the door entrances,with the interior wired for basic electrical service. There will be no plumbing in the proposed structure. Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-8 Harden Page L 16 C/L CATTAL COURT ---RlW WEST 100.00, &S,S.S.S.a I.I.E. 1: .5 Rix I STORY BRICK 5169 !�j L 0 T 4 4 30 z C)'pejKcs+j vff�A�6 ------------- -- --- ---- _X_t 7.5'UTILITY EASEM T 00 EAST 100. jo be-Ke^ov4 pWop, 4� e_OPSJ'&-ci;C`0 LOT FORTY—FOUR (44) OF SEQUOYAH MEADOWS, PHASE 11, TO THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS, AS PER PLAT OF SAID SUBDIVISION ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CIRCUIT CLERK AND EX—OFFICIO RECORDER OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS. BUYERS: RODERICK & RONDA HARDEN SELLERS: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION ADDRESS: 5169 CATTAIL COURT FAYETTEVILLE, AR ........ 0: I rAl t� KAN I .......... .......... ....... LEGEND 30 0 30 60 90 0 F7�=IRMPIN 1 0 SET IRON PIN GRAPHIC SCALE - FEET 10 r"D CONC. + CAI.CJLATEO POINT ARA Alcin Rej BRONSON ABSTRACT d CITY I I&$. COLLEGE AVE. 8. ASSOCIAT S FAYETTEVILLE COLNTY WASHINGTON FAYETTEVILLE. AS 72701 PROfESSICKAL STATE ARKANSAS DATE 02/16/1998 SO' 444 8784 LASID SCALE Fax 444 M64 SURVEYMS I' - 30' jCS so' 90038 Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR014Harden Page 1.77 VAR01 -8 19ARDEN CL*OSE UP "ITT V. ----------- 'Al < - ---------- > R-1 - - - - ------- R-1 L—LJI I ----------- Subj I eat Property I CATTAIL- ----------- R-1 -- ---- ------- - -------- - ------------------------- R-1 ----------------- ------ -- ------ -------------------------- ------- ------- -I ----------- ----- - ----- Master Street Plan Freeway/Expressway N Principal Arterial Minor Arterial W E Collector Historical Collector S Streets sea" Fayetteville City Limits 200 0 200 400 600 Feet Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-8 Harden Page 1.18 VAR01 -81-IARDEN ORE MILE R4 A-1 z i 01 W zi R-1 0 Z I CO T Z j 01 UJI Master Street Plan Freeway/Expressway IV Principal Arterial Minor Arterial /Collector Historical Collector Streets S Fayetteville City Limits 0.5 0 0.5 Miles Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-8 Harden Page 1.19 Board ofAdjustment Septemher 4, 2001 VAROJ-8 Harden Page 1.20 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:(501)575-8264 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Board of Adjustment FROM: Dawn T. Warrick, Planner THRU: Tim Conklin, A.I.C.P., City Planner DATE: September 4, 2001 VAR 01-16.00: Variance (Collins, pp 445)was submitted by Jeffery Collins for property located at 725 N. Vandeventer. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The requirement is for a 8' side setback. The request is for a 5' side setback(a 3' variance). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested 31 setback variance as shown on the attached site plan with the following condition: 1. Any variance granted shall only apply to the existing(original) structure and shall not be conferred on new construction or additions made to the structure in the future. Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request Side setback(R-1) W 51 (a 3' va BACKGROUND: Originally,this applicant approached the City with a request for a building permit for an addition of 510 s.f. for a new bedroom, bath and laundry area. Based on the code section which addresses nonconforming structures, an owner occupied nonconforming residence may be enlarged up to 25% of the square footage as it existed on the date it became nonconforming. With this provision, the applicant chose to reduce the size of the proposed addition in order to obtain a building permit for the desired addition. The site plan included with this report is the plan submitted for permitting. H.'IUSER,�ICOMMOAqD.4WNnMPORMWOA19-4-011collins.doc Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-16 Collins Page 2.1 Because the original structure remains nonconforming,the applicant has chosen to proceed . with this variance request in order to allow for possible future additions and to protect his investment in this property. The site is located within the Wilson Park area and is a part of this well established neighborhood. Permitting records for this address date back to 1965 when an addition was made to the existing single family home. The structure predates the City's current zoning regulations which were adopted in 1970. A portion of the original garage(which was later remodeled and made into living space) encroaches the required 81 side setback along the north property line by 31. Staff is recommending that the requested variance.be grantedwith the condition that it only accommodate the existing structure and that any new construction must comply with current zoning regulations. Comments: The"CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL"listed in this report are accepted in total without exception by the entity requesting approval of this conditional use. Name: Date: SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North: Single family home,R-1 South: Single family home, R-I East: Single family home, R-I West: Single family home, R-I GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Residential FINDINGS: § 156.02 ZONING REGULATIONS. Certain variances of the zoning regulations may be applied for as follows: A. General Regulations/Application. A variance shall not be granted unless and until an application demonstrates: H.,IUSERSICOMMOMDA WN7WPORTSABOA W-4-01 lcoffins.doc Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-16 Collins Page 2.2 1. Special Conditions. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Finding: Special conditions and circumstances exist which are unique to this site. The original structure (which encroaches current setback requirements)was erected prior to the City's adoption of current zoning regulations. 2. Deprivation of Rights. That literal interpretation of the provisions of the zoning regulations would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the zoning regulations. Finding: Literal interpretation of the provisions of the zoning regulations would not permit the applicant to expand the structure more than 25% of the original square footage of the home as stated in §164.07 (H) Owner-occupied Nonconforming Residences. 3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Finding: Special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant. cial Privileges.-T- -at- 4. No SpM- h granting the variance sted will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by Zoning, Chapters 160-165, to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. Finding: Granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by current zoning regulations to other lands,structures or buildings in the same district. No change of use is proposed. Granting the variance will permit the property owner to make future additions to the existing structure and to maintain the existing footprint of the building should something happen to destroy the building. 5. Nonconforming Uses. No nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no permitted or nonconforming use of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. Finding: No nonconforming uses were used as a basis for staff findings or recommendations. H.,IUSERSICOMMONOA WNTREPORMBOA 19-4-01 Icollins.doc Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAROI-16 Collins Page 2.3 156.02 C. Consideration by the Board of Adjustment. 1. Bulk and Area. Applications for variances of bulk and area requirements shall be considered by and may be approved by the Board of Adjustment. 2. Public Hearing. A public hearing shall be held. Finding: A public hearing is scheduled for September 4,2001. 3. Findings. The Board of Adjustment shall make the following findings: a. Minimum Variance. That the reasons set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance, and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. Finding: The requested variance is the minimum variance necessary to make the existing structure compliant with current zoning regulations. The reasons set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance. (L) Harmony with General Purpose. The Board of Adjustment shall further make a finding that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of Zoning, Chapters 160-165, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Finding: The granting of the requested variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of Zoning, Chapters 160-165, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Approval of this request will ensure compliance with current zoning regulations for an existing structure which has been in this location since before 1965. The neighborhood is an older,well-established area which has a variety of styles of homes. Many of the structures within this area of the City predate current zoning regulations however, the character of this single family neighborhood is intact and should not be detrimentally affected by the granting of this variance. (2.) Reasons set forth in the application justify granting the variance, and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. Finding: The reasons set forth in the application do justify granting the variance and the requested variance is the minimum variance needed to allow the reconstruction of the existing structure in whole should it ever be destroyed. H.-�USERSICOMMOMDA WNnREPORTSIBOA 19-4-01 Icollins.doc Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-16Collins Page 2.4 b. Conditions and Safeguards. In granting any variance,the Board of Adjustment may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the zoning regulations. Finding: Staff recommends that this variance only apply to the portion of the structure which currently encroaches the side setback. Any future additions shall comply with current zoning regulations. C. No Variance Allowed. Under no circumstances shall the Board of Adjustment grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under Zoning in the district involved, or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of the zoning regulations in said district. Finding: N/A H.-i USERSICOMMOMDA WNTUREPORTSIBOA W-4-01 1colfins.doc Board ofAdjustment Septemher 4, 2001 VAROI-16 Collins Page 2.5 § 161.04 DISTRICT R-1: LOW SINGLE- TWO FAMILY DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. FAMILY DWELLINGS A. Purpose. The Low Density DWELLINGS Residential District is designed to permit 4 or Less Families 7 or Less Families and encourage the development of low Per Acre Per Acre density detached dwellings in suitable environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types. D. Bulk and Area Regulations. B. Uses. Single- Two-Family Family 1. Permitted Uses. Lot 70 ft. 80 ft. Unit I City-Wide Uses by Right Minimum Width Unit 26 Single-Family Dwelling Lot Area 8,000 sq. ft. 12,000 sq.ft. 2. Minimum Uses Land Area 8,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. Permissible on Appeal to the Planning Per CommIssion. Dwelling Unit 2 City-Wide Uses by Conditional Unit Use Permit Unit 3 Public Protection and Utility E. Yard Requirements (feet). Facilities FRONT SIDE REAR Unit 4 Cultural and Recreational YARD YARD YARD Facilities 25 8 20 Unit 8 Single-Family and Two- F. Building Area. On any lot the Family Dwellings area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40%of the total area of such lot. C. Density. (Code 199 1, §160.03 1) H.IUSERMCOMMONDA WNMEPORTSWOA�94-01 lcoffins.doc Board ofAdjustment September 4, 2001 VAR01-16Collins Page 2.6