HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-11-05 - Agendas NOV-01-2001 07:19 N W A TIMES 501 442 5477 P.01/01
01572717.ad 1001101 4 �WhPm Page 1
Y Job* 11046662
QTY oF FAYETTEviLLE
AGENDA NOTICE
101'��Ouav oF ADJUSTMENT
Monday, November 5, 2001
City Administration Building, Room 326
113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas
PUBLIC MEETING - OPEN TO ALL
The following items will be comidered:
+ Approval of minutes from the meeting of October 1,2001.
NewBuyinesv
VAR 01�25.00 Variance (Pancake,pp 522) was submitzed by Colleen
M. Pancake(or property located at 302 S.(3regg Street.The Property B
zoned RS,Residential Small Lot and contains approximately 0.16 acres. +
The requirement i.,for A 25'firont setback-The q.e&L is for an I I'serbock
(a 14'variance).The required lot width for a singiv(omily home is 60'.the
reque&L i�for a 50'widc lot(a 1V variance).
VAR 01-28.00 variance (Crandall, pp 484) was uhinitted by Marc
Crandall for property 1pe"reil at 110 N. School Street.The ptoperEy is
Zoned R,O,Residential C)ffice and contains approximately 0.29 acres.The
requirement is for K lot width of 90'for 3 or more dwelling units. The
request is i 77'widc lot(a 13'variaritc)-
All intctested parties may appear and ba 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 petitiom.
Interpreters or TOD for hearing impaired are available forA)public meer-
ings.72 hour notice is required.For further information(it to request an
interpreter,please call Orm Bnn at 575,8330,
TOTAL P.01
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 Monday,November 5, 2001, at 3:45
p.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, AR,
72701.
The following items will be considered:
Approval of minutes from the meeting of October 1,2001.
New Business:
1. VAR 01-25.00 Variance (Pancake, pp 522)was submitted by Colleen M. Pancake for
property located at 302 S. Gregg Street. The property is zoned RS, Residential Small Lot and
contains approximately 0.16 acres. The requirement is for a 25'front setback. The request is for
a I F,setback(a 14'variance). The required lot width for a single family home is 60', the
request is for a 50' wide.lot (a 10' variance).
2. VAR 01-28.00 Variance (Crandall,pp 484)was submitted by Marc Crandall for
property located at 110N. School Street The property is zoned R-0, Residential Office
and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The requirement is for a lot width of 90' for 3 or
more dwelling units. The request is for a 77wide lot (a 13' 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.
hyterpreters 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.
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, Senior Planner
THRU: Tim Conklin, A.I.C.P., City Planner
DATE: November 5, 2001
VAR 01-25.00 Variance (Pancake, pp 522) was submitted by Colleen M. Pancake for property
located at 302 S. Gregg Street. The property is zoned RS, Residential Small Lot, and contains
approximately 0.16 acres. The requirement is for a 25' front setback. The request is for an
1 l'setback(a 14' variance). The required lot width for a single family home is 60', the request is
for a 50' wide lot(a 10' variance).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested 14' front setback variance and the 10' lot
width as shown on the attached site plan with the following condition:
1. The front setback variance shall apply to the existing structure only. Any additions
or alterations to the original structure shall comply with required building setbacks.
Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request
Front setback(RS district) 25' 111 (a 14' vairiance)
Lot width (RS district) 601 501 (a 10' variance)
BACKGROUND:
This application is being processed by the City of Fayetteville on behalf of Ms. Pancake,the
property owner. The subject property is developed with one single family home and is currently
zoned 1-1, Heavy Commercial /Light Industrial. The zoning of the property causes the use to be
nonconforming even though the site has existed with a residential for many years and
surrounding properties are in the same condition. Most of the properties in this area contain
H.IUSERSICOMMOMDAWNTMPORTSWOAIII-5-OIIPANCAKE.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAR01-5 Pancake
1.1
small single family residences. A rezoning request is currently being considered by the City
Council to change the designation of this property to RS, Residential Small Lot(second reading
is scheduled for the Council meeting of November 6, 200 1). The Planning Commission voted
unanimously on October 8, 2001 to recommend the rezoning in order for the use of the property
to be conforming.
The owner is working with the City's Community Development Division to obtain CDBG
(Community Development Block Grant)money in order to perform needed repairs which will
bring the structure into compliance with building code regulations. A City Inspector has looked
at the structure and has stated that it is basically sound. As long as zoning (district and bulk and
area requirements) is made compliant, a permit can be issued for the needed improvements
repairs.
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: Residential,1-1
South: Residential, 1-1
East: Residential, 1-1
West: Residential, 1-1
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: General Plan 2020 designates this site Mixed Use.
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.IUSERSICOMMONWA WnREPORYMBOA11 1-5-01 UPANCAKEDOC
Board ofAdjustment
Novemher 5, 2001
VAR01-5 Pancake
1.2
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: This is a platted lot in a subdivision which was developed prior to the
adoption of the City's current zoning regulations. The dimensions of this lot
do not meet bulk and area regulations for any current zoning districts within
the City. The RS Residential Small Lot designation most closely reflects the
current lot configuration and the established uses surrounding this property.
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: Without a variance, this structure would not be able to be rehabilitated. The
necessary repairs exceed the monetary amount permitted for improvements
and repairs to an existing nonconforming structure. Since the building is
sound enough for a building inspector to approve construction activity, it is
reasonable that the project be completed and the structure be brought up to
building code as well as zoning code requirements.
3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result
from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: The applicant did not cause the need for these variances.
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.
Finding: Granting the variances will not confer on the applicant any special privilege.
The variances will allow the improvement of an existing structure and will
make the structure as well as the site compliant with current zoning
regulations.
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.IUSERSICOMMOND-4WNTIREPORTStBOA111-5-OIIPANCAKE.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-5 Pancake
1.3
§ 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 November 5,2001.
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 reasons set forth in the background ofthis report represent the status of
this application and the need for variances in order for the Community
Development Division of the City to perform needed repairs to this structure.
These reasons justify the granting of the variances which are the minimum
variances necessary to make possible the reasonable use of the land, building,
or structure.
(L) Harmony with General Purpose. The Board of Adjustment shall further make a
finding that the granting of the variance mill 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 these variances will be in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of current zoning regulations and will not be injurious to the
neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
(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: Reasons set forth in the application justify granting the variances and they
are the minimum variances necessary to make possible the reasonable use of
the land and structure.
b. Conditions and Safeguards. In granting any variance, the Board of Adjustment
may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the
zoning regulations.
H.'IUSEPSICOMMONIDA WNTIREPORTSIBOAIII-5-01 WANCAKEDOC
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-5 Pancake
1.4
Finding: The recommended condition that the front setback variance only apply to the
existing structure will ensure that nothing is built closer to the public right of
way than what is already constructed.
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 tenns of the
zoning regulations in said district.
Finding: N/A
H.'I USERSICOMMOMDA WWREPONSIBOA 111-5-01�PANCAKEDOC
Board ofAdjustment
Novemher 5, 2001
VAROJ-5 Pancake
1.5
§161.11 DISTRICT RS RESIDENTIAL D.Bulk and Area Regulations.
SMALL LOT.
Single- Duplex Town-
A. Purpose. The Residential Small Lot Family house/
District is designed to permit and encourage the no more
development of detached dwellings in suitable than 2
environments. units
attached
B.Uses. Lot Width 60 ft. 60 ft. 30 ft.
Minimum
1. Permitted Uses.
Unit I City-Wide Uses by Right Lot Area 6,000 6,000 3,000 sq.
I Minimum sq. ft. sq. ft. ft.
Unit 26 Single-Family Dwellings
Land Area 6,000 3,000 3,000 sq.
2. Uses Permissible on Appeal Per sq. ft. sq. ft. ft.
to the Planning Commission. Dwelling
Unit 2 City-Wide Uses by Unit
Conditional Use Perm it
Unit 3 Public Protection and Utility E. Yard Requirements(feet).
Facilities SIDE REAR YARD
YARD
Unit 4 Cultural and Recreational
Facilities 08 20
Single-Family, Two-Family, Cross Reference: Variance, Chapter 156.
and Townhouse Dwellings F. Building Area. The area occupied by
all buildings shall not exceed 50% of the total lot
area.
C. Density.
By Right Conditional G. Height Regulations.
Use Building Height 30 ft.
Single-Family 7 or Less 8.5 Maximum I
Dwelling (Code 199 1, §160.046; Ord.No. 3 792. §4, 5-17-
Units Per
Acre 94)
Duplex and/or Option: 15%
Townhouse of the Lots,
Maximum
H."I USERSICOMMONIDA WNYIkEPORTSIBOA If 1-5-01 6-ANCAKE.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAR01-5 Pancake
1.6
30�4
32'
L:Ir
Y3" /"-5
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-5 Pancake
1.7
5 3d' 6
3C
C)"
30
2 y 9 Is n,6
3 L
3
3-6
T
36
C.14,5e*
3�,
3 CIG '36 Y54
Pore(, 3 6,,q IJ,-e
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROJ-5 Pancake
1.8
31 Y56 -36Y-41,
3L
y
3�1
3L
3�
'31,
057 LO
7'6
OU
Board (Adjustment
Noveinher 5, 2001
VAROJ-5 Pancake
1.9
FAYETTEVI&E
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
MEMO
TO: Dawn Warrick,Planning
FROM: Steve Cattaneo, Inspections
RE: 302 S. Gregg
On Sept. 7, 20011 investigated the property at 302 S. Gregg per your request. Here is the reply
to your 3 questions.
1. Is the building sound?
The main structure appears to be in good condition. The front porch has been enclosed at some
p,oint and is close to the ground. The back porch has been underclosed and converted into a
bathroom and storage closet. This porch did not have a foundation and has settled. The back
porch is by far the worst part of this house.
2. What kind of shape is the house in?
As mentioned above the main structure is in good shape but the back porch and bathroom need
aftention.
3. Should a Building Permit be issued.
As far as inspections is concerned, we would issue a permit to repair this building.
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAR01-5 Pancake
1.10
VAR81-25.00 PANCAKE
Close Up View
R,a
.... ......
R,3
00
..........
4
R'l
_3
Overview Legend
S
ubject Property Boundary Master Street Plan
ME varGI-25.00 '-%,, Planning Area 0�FreewaylExpressmy
CP00.%
Overlay District 40%,,o Principal Arlefial
Streets
Minor Arterial
lzy-J, Existing City Limits
L—J
..............
0% Collector
1 Outside City
'44R,Planned Histonc Collector Board ofAdjustment
0 25 50 100 150 200 November 5, 2001
Feet VAR01-5 Pancake
VAR01-25.00 ;
PANCAKE
One Mile View
I illy
V
F-A
FR4 R-J,
ZD 7
Lwrw �0111110i,
r
_§s
J
c, *,j 7,
J
4
2-T.-
__F d�j
..........�*
'Fit --------
if
FL`fi Subjgbl ZOO j
n.7
J ---
..........
28 R-3i
-R
42 IF-
FlP
A
I,.F2
Jrj
i ii- , / , �. _.,;i if I J
_�I 1 _I_._—F,-'-4 1� �fi. 'J,,i L;i-, -.1 Fr
Wilt .......
t,2 ......
f 4V.
-.3
A>�
k
);T,
_3i?THs
1.2
_4
137H r, F
1-1 C
Fit 2 A4
if�
c-z
R-I
<
A
5�NCHASI _J� �:1 i
14
.......... ------
. . ... .....
1-2
F 10,'
lv a-
Fir�.s
Overview Legend
Subject Property Boundary Master Street Plan
Z-i,rr�] VAR01-25.00 '%, Planning Area 6%er FrsaWaYJEXPreSSwaY
Overlay District *"%so Principal Arterial
"u—
Streets City Limits Minor Arterial
Existing L——1
Collector
LI 11%\Planned DUtSlde City OF%, Historic Collector Board ofAdjustment
Novemher 5, 2001
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
VAR01-5 Pancake
Miles 1.12
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, Senior Planner
THRU: Tim Conklin,A.I.C.P., City Planner
DATE: November 5, 2001
VAR 01-28.00: Variance (Crandall,pp 484)was submitted by Marc Crandall for property
located at I 10 N. School Street. The property is zoned R-0, Residential Office and contains
approximately 0.29 acres. The requirement is for a lot width of 90' for 3 or more dwelling units.
The request is for a 77' wide lot(a 13'variance).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested 13' lot width variance as shown on the
attached site plan with the following condition:
1. Compliance with the conditional use permit for this project as approved by
Planning Commission October 8,2001 (see attached minutes).
Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request
Lot width (R-O district/3 90, 77' (a 131 variance)
or more units)
BACKGROUND:
There is currently a single family home on the subject property which is in poor condition and is
proposed to be removed if this project is approved. The site is located on the east side of School
Street between Meadow and Spring Streets. On October 8, 2001, Planning Commission
approved a conditional use permit for the construction of a four unit multi family development in
this location. One condition of approval for the conditional use was that the applicant would also
need to request a variance of the required lot width minimum for three or more units from the
Board of Adjustment.
H.IUSERS�COMMONDA WN71REPORTSWO,4111-5-01 1CR4ADALL.DOC
Board ofAdjusanent
Noveinher 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.1
A similar request was presented to the Planning Commission August 27, 2001 and then
withdrawn by the applicant. That request was to develop 6 one bedroom apartments. The main
difference in the two requests was the appearance of the structure and parking.
The approved conditional use reflects a building which is similar in character and materials to
surrounding properties. It has a main facade which addresses School Street and has an
appearance which is more reminiscent of a single family home than the previous request. The
project also includes balconies and porches and multiple gables to the roof line.
School Street is designated an Historic Collector on the City's adopted Master Street Plan. The
current right of way in this location is 40'. The applicant is accommodating the required 50' right
of way by setting the structure back an additional 5' from front property line. Access to this and
several other properties is from a rear alley. There will be no curb cut on School Street for this
project.
Surrounding properties reflect the mixed use nature of the downtown area(office, retail, salon,
multi-family, single family).
Neighbors did voice concern about parking and the appearance of the original project proposal.
Before submitting the final conditional use request, the applicant approached neighbors with his
plans. Suggestions from the previous Planning Commission review and from public comment
were incorporated in the new plans. Staff has not received comments from the neighborhood to
date on the proposal which was approved by Planning Commission.
On-street parking is permitted on the west side of School street. The applicant will provide the
required 8 parking spaces for the 4 two bedroom apartments proposed plus two extra spaces as
permitted by ordinance. Additional parking is available in the area in several nearby municipal
parking lots (West and Spring St., Walton Arts Center, School St. north of Spring).
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:
H.IUSERSICOMMONIDA WNYIREPORTSIBOAIII-5-011CRANDALL.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
Novemher 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.2
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North: Office,R-0
South: Residence, R-0
East: Residential (mixed), R-0
West: Multi-family residential, R-0
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Mixed Use
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: This is a lot which is relatively narrow but has alley access in the rear. The
subdivision predated current zoning regulations. The lot has sufficient width
to accommodate the existing single family home, however, an increase in
density above three units requires additional lot width. In order to achieve
the City's stated objective of increasing density in the downtown area and
promoting mixed uses,variances in certain situations may be recommended.
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 density in excess of a duplex in this location.
3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result
from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: The applicant has requested increased density in this location. The Planning
Commission approved a conditional use permit to allow four multi family
units on the lot.
H.�USERSiCOMMONVD.4WNTIREPORTMBO,4111-5-O]ICRAND,4LL.DOC
Board of Adjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.3
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.
Finding: Granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege
that is denied by zoning. Property owners in this zoning district have the
right to request Planning Commission approval of a conditional use for multi
family dwellings.
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.
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 November 5,2001.
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 reasons set forth in the application (see attached)justify the granting of
the variance and the requested variance is the minimum necessary to
accommodate the conditional use approved by the Planning Commission.
(I.) Harmony with General Purpose. The Board of Adjustment shall ftirther 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.
H.-IUSERSICOMMOAnDA WiVnREPORYWOA 111-5-01 ICRANDALL.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.4
Finding: Granting the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of City zoning regulations and will not be injurious to the
neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
(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: Reasons set forth in the application justify granting the variance(see
attached narrative from applicant) and the variance requested is the
minimum variance that will allow the development as approved by Planning
Commission on October 8,2001.
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: Conditions and safeguards were addressed by the Planning Commission at
the time of conditional use approval. These same conditions and safeguards
are appropriate for any variance on this property. Staff has recommended
that compliance with the conditions of the conditional use stand for the
requested variance.
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.1USERSICOMMONDA WNTIREPORTSIBOA 111-5-01 ICRANDALL.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
Noveniher 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.5
§161.12 DISTRICT R-O RESIDENTIAL Lot Mobile Home Park 100 ft.
OFFICE. Minimum
A.Purpose.The Residential-Office District Width:
is designed primarily to provide area for offices Mobile Home Park
without limitation to the nature or size of the office,
together with community facilities,restaurants and OneFamily 60 ft.
compatible residential uses. Two Family 60 ft.
B.Uses. Three or More 90 ft.
1. Uses Permitted. Lot Area Mobile Home Park 3 acres
Unit I City-Wide Uses by Right Minimum:
Lot Within a 4200 sq. ft.
Unit 5 Government Facilities Mobile Home Park
Unit 8 Single-Family and Two-Family Row Houses:
Dwellings
Unit 12 Offices,Studios and Related Development 10,000 sq.
Services ft.
Unit 25 Professional Offices Individual Lot 2500
i sq.ft
2. Uses Permissible on Appeal to Single Family 6000 sq.ft
the Planning Commission.
Unit 2 City-Wide Uses by Conditional Two Family 6500 sq.ft
Use Permit Three or More 8000 sq. ft
Unit 3 Public Protection and Utility Fraternity or I acres
Facilities Sorority
Unit 4 Cultural and Recreational Land Area Mobile Home 3000 sq.ft.
Facilities Per Dwelling
Unit 9 Multi-Family Dwelling-Medium Unit:
Density Row Houses
Unit 10 Multi-Family Dwelling-High &Apartments:
Density Two or More 1200 sq.ft.
Unit 13 Eating Places Bedrooms 1000 sq. ft.
C. Bulk and Area Regulations. One Bedroom 1000
(Per Dwelling Unit for Residential Structures) sq.ft
Lot MobileHomePark 10011. No Bedroom
Minimum
Width: Fraternity or
Sorority
Lot Within a 50 ft.
H.-I USERSICOMMOAWA WNMEPORMBOA 111-5-01 ICRANDALL.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.6
D. Bulk and Area Regulations/Setbacks.
Setback lines shall meet the following minimum
requirements.
From Street ROW 30 ft.
From Street ROW if Parking is 50 ft.
Allowed Between the ROW and the
Building
From Side Property Line 10 ft.
From Side Property Line When 15 ft.
Contiguous to a R-1,R-2 or R-3
District
From Back Property Line Without 25 ft.
Easement or Alley
From Center Line of Public Alley 10 ft.
E. Building Area. On any lot the area
occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 60%of the
total area of such lot.
F. Height Regulations. There shall be no
maximum height limits in R-0 Districts,provided,
however,that any building which exceeds the height
of 20 feet shall be set back from any boundary line of
any R-1,R-2,or R-3 District an additional distance
of one foot for each foot of height in excess of 20
feet.
(Code 1991,§160.041;Code 1965,App.A,Art.
5(x);Ord.No. 1747, 6-29-89;Ord.No.2414,2-7-78;
Ord.No.2603,2-19-80;Ord.No.2621,4-1-80)
H-JUSERSICOMMOMD.4WNTIREPORTStBOA111-5-O]ICRANDALL.DOC
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2-7
October 20, 2001
To: Chairman,Board of Adjustments
From: Marc Crandall
Re: Variance Request for I 10 N. School St
I hereby request a 13' variance of the required 90' of lot width for the above referenced
property. On October 8, 2001 the Fayetteville Planning Commission unanimously
approved CUP 01-26.00, a conditional use permit for a four-unit apartment building in an
R-0 Zone. Zoning Ordinance requires a 90' frontage for three or more units in this zone.
The existing lot contains only 77' frontage. The proposed development meets all other
zoning and development restrictions including side, front and back setbacks, density and
lot area requirements and parking requirements.
The proposed development fits in well with the existing neighborhood, which consists of
a mixture of multifamily and single residences and office uses. It also conforms to the
City's policy of encouraging higher density, infill uses in the downtown area.
Unfortunately, few, if any, of the lots in this area can fulfill the frontage requirement for
multifamily use without the requested variance.
Thank you for your consideration.
Marc Crandall
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.8
ui
EMN (n
U)
0
En
.0
z
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
V4ROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.9
fu
>
r
r
(n
i
70
ru
LO MIT
rn
r-
Fill,
,............... Board ofAdjustment
77" November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.10
Planning Commission
October 8, 2001
Page 13
CUP 01-26.00: Conditional Use(Crandall,pp 4841was submittedbyMarc Crandall for property
located at I 10 N.School. The property is zoned R-0,Residential Office and contains approximately 0.28
acres. The request is for a multifamily dwelling(use unit 9)containing four two bedroom units in an R-0
zone.
Estes: The next item of business that we have is a conditional use request submitted by Mr.
Crandall for property located at I 10 N.School. The property is zoned R-0,Residential
Office and contains approximately 0.28 acres. The request is for a multifamily dwelling
(use unit 9)containing four two bedroom units in an R-0 zone. Staff recommends
approval ofthe conditional use subject to certain conditions of approval. Mr.Conklin,do
we have signed conditions of approval?
Conklin: Yes we do.
Estes: Those conditions of approval are:
1)Conditional use approval shall be contingent upon the Board ofAdjustment approving
a 13'variance ofthe required 90'of lot width. The subject property is 77'wide and for
three or more units 90' of frontage is necessary.
2)The project shall comply with tree protection and preservation requirements for the R-O
zoning district. A tree preservation plan shall be approved by the Landscape
Administrator prior to the issuance of a building permit.
3)The retaining wall along School Street shall be reconstructed to eliminate the dirt and
debris which falls onto the sidewalk. The engineering Division must approve plans for any
retaining wall prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proj ect. Material for this
wall shall be decorative stone or block, standard CMU shall not be permitted.
4)Thestructure shall be built using materials compatible with surrounding properties and
shall reflect elevations submitted by the applicant for this request.
5)Any outdoor lighting installed in the parking lot or on the building shall be shielded and
directed downward and away from adjacent residences.
6)The parking area shall be screened from adjacent properties. The applicant shall install
a woodenprivacy fence 6'tall or a continuous row of shrubs between the parking lot at
the rear ofthe proposed structure and adjoining properties to the north and south. Shrubs
shall be installed to screen the rear ofthe parking area adj acent to the alley,however,they
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
MR01-28 Crandall
Page 2.11
Planning Commission
October 8, 2001
Page 14
shall not block visibility of vehicles trying to access the alley or this side.
7)The parking lot layout shall be modified to include one ADA accessible,van accessible,
parking stall and all standard stalls shall be 9' wide.
8)This conditional use approval shall be valid for one calendar year. Mr.Conklin,are
there any additional conditions of approval?
Conklin: No there are not.
Estes: Is the applicant present and does he wish to make a presentation?
Crandall: Yes Sir,I'm here and have a short presentation. We went back to the drawing board and
tried to incorporate most of the comments we heard from the neighbors and the
Commission the last time we were here. I think we've done a pretty goodjob and came
up with a pretty good project so I'm hoping we can get approval this time. Thank you.
Estes- Is there any member ofthe audience who would like to provide public comment regarding
this Conditional Use request 0 1-26? Seeing none I will bring it backto the Commission
for discussion, motions. Commissioners?
Marr: A question for Timor Dawn,I know that the last time this came before us we had quite
a bit ofneighborhood comment. I am assuming we did the posting again for Conditional
Use. I noticed that in the notes it says nothing was received from neighbors to date on the
new proposal is that true through this time?
Warrick: Itisstilltrue. Since Thursday we've not received comments,or specifically complaints,
from any ofthe adjoining property owners. Mr.Crandall did do his homework before
submitting this application and worked very hard to talk with several ofthe neighbors
specifically before he made his application and reviewed his revised proposal with them.
Since Thursday he has provided additional information to staff and to the Planning
Commission with regard to proposed elevations ofthe three sides ofthe structure that you
did not have previously and arevised site plan. Thatmaterialshould have been submitted
to you Friday. Today Mr. Crandall also provided to us some more information with
regard to the materials proposed for the structure. I am going to pass down a couple of
brochures that he has given us. I would like these back,so ifyou'lljust keep passing them
around. This reflects the proposed siding material for the structure and that was one ofthe
issues that was previously raised from some of the neighbors,the type and quality of
materials that were being proposed for the structure.
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.12
Planning Commission
October 8, 2001
Page 15
Ward: Crandall,I know you were pretty frustrated with us at the last meeting. We couldn't
tell you what we wanted designed or what we wanted but we wanted something different.
It seems like now you have a structure that is very compatible. I'm very impressed with
it with all the balconies and roof lines that have changed and so I think it is goingto be a
fantastic property that you are going to put there compared to what you originally brought
to us and I hope you are very successful with it.
Warrick: I would also like to add that since Thursday in our agenda session,I have spoken with the
Solid Waste Division. Several ofthe Commissioners were concerned aboutthe plans for
waste disposal and pickup for Us site. This particular site is relatively unique. Tlie Solid
Waste Division does not necessarily want to drive its trucks down alleys that don't have
the required 20'clearance. They also don't necessarily wantto drive their trucks down
residential alleys at 5:00 in the morning and disturb the neighbors and deal witlithose sorts
of complaints. We in the Planning Division do not want to deal with those complaints
either ifit is not necessary.They can maintain their vehicles on the main thoroughfares
wherever possible. 'Me division prefers that anything that contains more thantwo dwelling
units, anything over a duplex, have containerized waste disposal- They do have
exemptions for that. Ifthis particular lot were to have containerized disposal and pick up
off'of School Street the retaining wall in front ofthe structure may pose a problem because
the tracks actually lift the containers and they would not be able to maneuver the trucks to
the location necessary to pick up off of School Street. Representatives from that division
are still looking at this and will work with the owner as to the preferred method ofpickup.
At this point in time it looks like it may be a bag pick up situation but I can't guarantee that
that will be the final consensus ofthe Solid Waste Division. They are not really enthusiastic
about the idea of coming through the alley to do waste pickup. Staffat this point would
recommend that they do bag pickup off of School Street,the main thoroughfare. I don't
have a final answer as to the way that the trash pickup will flinction but they did tell me that
iftrash pickup is paid for by the owner as opposed to an individual payment by each ofthe
different units that the owner can typically work with the Solid Waste Division to determine
how the pickup will be carried out.
Estes: Thank you Dawn, any other discussion? Any motions?
Marr: Just so I know what I'm looking at here. There are two pamphlets,one is hardy plank and
hardy panel,one is hardy soffit. Are you deciding between these two? How are you going
to use these?
Crandall: That is a total example ofthe whole product line that they have. They do make panelized
where it looks like it comes three or fourpanels on a sheet. What we typically use though
Board ofAdjustment
Noventher 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.13
Planning Commission
October 8, 2001
Page 16
is the individual pieces that are about 6"wide and then they overlap so they are actually
individual pieces of the hardy plank is what we use.
Mam Ahight, one other question. On the south and north elevations, was there any
consideration given to awnings or anything that makes those two elevations sized? I think
you've done a great j ob compared to the last time you were here on the east and west
side. I realize you don't have it perfect on every side of the building.
Crandall: Ok,obviously we tried to get the east and west because those are the two sides that are
actually seen. On the north and south we didn't try very much because we do have the
other gable that is on that side that kind of breaks up that facade. On the backside ofthe
building,both the north and the south are very close to the sides ofthe property within the
setbacks and it is fairly heavily wooded. We didn't do a whole lot on those two faces
because I don't think you're going to be able to see them very much. You can hardly see
the existing house that is there now. We don't plan on doing much on the sides. Weare
going to keep that screened pretty much with natural vegetation as it is so we really
concentrated on the two visible sides of the building.
Marr: Am I reading this right now that there are 10 parking spaces?
Crandall: Yes. These are two bedroom units,we have two per unit and then I put in two extra
spaces because ofthe concerns that were raised the last time we were here about people
having guests and people parking in the alley. I'll be honest,I still foresee these to be units
that are rented to single people. I foresee the need for four or five parking spaces at most
and then the rest is going to be overflow and guests and things like that. Again,tryingto
satisfy the neighbors' concems about alley parking and street parking.
Marr: Tim,one last question. Are there any landscaping requirements in a parking lot with ten
spaces in this case?
Conklin: Not in this situation. Along the street since they are placing the parking lot behind the
building and allowing the parking to be screened by the building. There are not any
landscaping requirements. Talking with Mr.Crandall today,he did talk about allowing the
cane that is growing out there right now to remain in that open area of parking and the
alley. I think even if it is removed as a part of this construction it will come back and
provide some screening.
Marr: So there is no adjacent property owner to this parking that would actually have this parking
lot in view?
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.14
Planning Commission
October 8, 2001
Page 17
Warrick: Across the alley to the rear is the rear yard of another single family home. They have a
garage or utility building back in the area ofthe alley and a parking space that would be
adjacent to this proposed parking area.
Marr: I appreciate your work on this this time.
Bunch: On the question ofthe refuse since that is one of our findings,how do we need to word our
finding on the refuse and solid waste and recycling situation?
Conklin: I think that the Solid Waste Division has indicated to staffthat they will work with the
applicant to provide an acceptable method of receiving the trash from this project.
Bunch: When we make a motion relative to this then the findings as stated need to be altered?
Conklin: Staffvrill be working with the Solid Waste Division,it is a part ofthe City ofFayetteville,
the City Planning Division will be working with our Solid Waste Division and the applicant
to ensure the waste pickup can occur acceptable to all parties.
Hoffman: I have a couple of questions for Mr. Crandall. With regard to the front elevation
everything really looks great. You have some kind of a Cape Code shingle effect. Is that
the hardy soffit or is that another material?
Crandall: I can't remember ifthey actually make that product but I've seen other projects where
they actually take the hardy product and cut it up and overlap it and make it look like that.
Hoffman: One thing that strikes me that might be an opportunity to get a little bit more interest on this
south elevation, are you going to continue that same treatment?
Crandall: We ran into this on Friday morning so the architect worked real fast. When he gave it to
me thi s morning he said"Make sure they know we're going to put that same shingling
effect on there."
Hoffman: Ok,Ijust wanted to clarify that. You've got the four a/c units on the north property line
lbelieveitis. Are those going to be naturally screened? I'm wondering,you said you
were going to leave a lot ofthe vegetation on either side ofthe building. Are there fairly
thick covers when they all four kick on at once we're not going to hear them?
Crandall: That entire property line is pretty heavily vegetated and we're not going to be disturbing
that too much as we take out the building. So yeah,I don't think that is going to be a
Board ofAdjustment
November 5, 2001
VAROI-28 Crandall
Page 2.15