HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-03-04 - Agendas To'd -1Hi0i
01588739.ad 2/2,7/02 aqe I
Job 4 0303s599
AGENDA NOTICE
PLANNING COMMIRRON
Monday, March 4, 2002- 3;45 pan.
City Administration Building,Room 326
113W,estMOUntainPayeffeville ArkanSaS
PUBLIC MFETING- OPEN 16 ALL
The Following items wiff be coiLsidered.
Approvld of minu" from the February 4,2002 meeting.
Old ausmesv
VAR 02-5.00: Variarice (Alpha Delta P1, pp 444) was �iihinirted by
Many Buricli,PE of EB Lindworks,Inc..on I)elialt of Delta Delta Of Alplia
Delta Pi House Corporation fol PropelTy located n535 Wlikind Avenuc.
Tbe properly is xoned R-3,High Dcrisity Kcsiduitialand conutins ltl)Pfox-
nnawly 0,15 acics.11w reqttijernent is for a 15'frontsetback on Douglas
Strcet ond Oakland Avenue(a 10'valunce).
VAR 02-6.00; Variance (Renegari pp 447) WAi sub,iiii(ed Wnry
Renegar for properry located at 925 Rockwood Trail 'I'lic pv,,periy is
zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains arproxinritety 0.85
acres.The.requirement is foil a 8'side selback oil the east.lbe ir(Ilitlit is
for:i 167' side letback (a 3-33' variance)
VAR 02-7.00:Variance(Washington County Sales Co. Inc., ply 562)
was skibrvilied by Washington Counry Sales Co. file. for piopoiy loc:itcd
it 510 W It" Sneet The. pri-ifieny i�70"ed T-1. licavy Currimerdol/Light
Industrial and comanis approxitnite.ly 9 4,3 ai:rn. I 11C MIMUCCIML is for
a 50' frow wrl)Ack. ]lie vqoc�i i,, for ;, U' From wrback (a W ,aiiance).
Alt irlln�lit&d 1).1aieS M"Y 'PPe.11 And be hC3103t the f)U11hC 11CA6118s, A mpy ill
[lie Proposed aillundineats iind 011ie, ixitinvit duo aic opvri andavail�jhlc for
Zbe officeol City Flonning UU-8264),Ci(yAdai;nistrlidon 13uildtny�
113 Wcst Moiinrain.;vccr, FlyrlWvdl(�, Aikrop.�,At jisleitsir.i.1 p�uo�� ,it invi(cd
co rcview t1v petmons lnrcrprmss or Trir)for lieving ijopairedat iivaibblv for
all poblic ivcriogs, 72 tioui noue is iteviml For lorlin infornlifflon Or it)
qilcst in miopolev,ple,,se oll 1.1kigil liallieSt ill 575-8.i3l)
TO/To'd L�Itls Et7t, TOS S3WIi U M N W:�T E00E—K-133J
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
Telephone:479-575-8264
AGENDA FOR A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
A regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment will be held Monday, March 4, 2002, 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 February 4,2002.
New Business:
I. VAR 02-5.00: Variance (Alpha Delta Pi, pp 444) was submitted by Mandy Bunch, PE
of EB Landworks, Inc. on behalf of Delta Delta of Alpha Delta Pi House Corporation for
property located at 535 Oakland Avenue. The property is zoned R-3, High Density
Residential and contains approximately 0.15 acres. The requirement is for a 15' front
setback for parking on Douglas Street and Oakland Avenue. The request is for a 5' front
setback on Douglas Street and Oakland Avenue (a 10' variance).
2. VAR 02-6.00: Variance (Renegar, pp 447) was submitted by Henry Renegar for
property located at 925 Rockwood Trail. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density
Residential and contains approximately 0.85 acres. The requirement is for a 8' side
setback on the east. The request is for a 4.67' side setback(a 3.33' variance).
3. VAR 02-7.00: Variance (Washington County Sales Co. Inc.,pp 562)was submitted
by Washington County Sales Co. Inc. for property located at 510 W. 11' Street. The
property is zoned 1-1, Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial and contains approximately
9.43 acres. The requirement is for a 50' front setback. The request is for a 0' front
setback(a 50' 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, 1]3 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
lim-ther information or to request an interpreter,please call Hugh Earnest at 575-8330.
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
Telephone:(479)575-8264
PLANNfNG DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Fayetteville Board of Adjustment
FROM: Dawn T. Warrick, Senior Planner
THRU: Tim Conklin,A.I.C.P., City Planner
DATE: February 26, 2002
VAR 02-5.00: Variance (Alpha Delta Pi,pp 444)was submitted by Mandy Bunch, PE of EB
Landworks, Inc. on behalf of Delta Delta of Alpha Delta Pi House Corporation for property
located at 535 Oakland Avenue. The property is zoned R-3, High Density Residential and
contains approximately 0.15 acres. The requirement is for a 15' front setback for parking on
Douglas Street and Oakland Avenue. The request is for a 5' front setback on Douglas Street and
Oakland Avenue (a I O'variance).
RECONEUENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variances for landscaping along front
and side property lines as shown on the attached site plan with the following conditions:
1. Approval of a parking lot permit for the proposed development.
2. Installation of landscaping and sidewalks according to current regulations and the
recommendations of the Landscape Administrator and Sidewalk Coordinator in
conjunction with their reviews of the parking lot permit application.
3. Grading and drainage plans and improvements as required for a parking lot
permit.
4. Remove white striped area at southeast corner of proposed parking lot and install a
curbed landscaped area in its place.
5. Install a continuous row of shrubs along both street frontages to provide a screen
for the proposed parking area.
Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request
Front setback(parking area) 15' 5' (a 10' variance)North and
West sides
Side setback(parking area) 5' 0' (a 5' variance) South side
H.-JUSERSiCOMMONIDA ffNnREPORTSIBO.412002-REPORTSL4LPHADELTAPI-VAR02-DOC
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
FAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.1
BACKGROUND:
This request is for reduced setbacks for landscaping in a parking lot at the southwest
corner of Douglas Street and Oakland Ave. There is one house located on the site currently
which is proposed to be removed. This area is very near the University of Arkansas and
this parking lot is to serve the Alpha Delta Pi sorority house. This group currently has a
home with 65 beds and only enough parking on-site for 33 vehicles. For this parking lot, a
permit will be required which will be reviewed by the City's Landscape, Sidewalk,
Planning and Engineering Divisions. Due to the narrow configuration of this site and the
applicant's willingness to preserve larger trees on the property,variances are being
requested in order to provide additional parking for the sorority.
Surrounding properties include various types of residential units as well as several parking
lots. The area is zoned R-3,High Density Residential.
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, R-3
South: Existing parking lot, R-3
East: University parking lot, R-3
West: Residential, R-3
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
H.-WERSICOMMONIDA WVTIREPORTS�ROA12002-REPORTSL4LPHADELTAPI-VAR02-DOC
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.2
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 site is located at the intersection of two streets and therefore there are
front setback/landscaping requirements on two sides. Installation of
sidewalks will be a part of this development and preservation of existing
mature trees will also be required as shown on the applicant's site plan.
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 zoning regulations would not allow
for the best utilization of space for this parking lot.
3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result
from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: The configuration of this lot was determined well before the applicant
purchased it. The property housed a residential structure which will be
removed for the proposed parking lot. Adjacent properties are not available
for combination with this lot to create a more useable space.
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: The use of this property for parking to serve established uses also within this
zoning district is permitted by right under 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 shA be considered grounds for the
issuance of a variance.
Finding: No nonconforming uses were used as a basis for staff recommendations
pertaining to this request.
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.
H�USERSICOMMOMDAWnUPORYYBO,412002-REPORTSLILPHADELTAPI-VAR02-DOC
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.3
Finding: A public hearing is scheduled for Monday,March 4,2002.
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 justify granting the requested
variances. The variances requested are the minimum variances necessary to
make possible the reasonable use of the land as a parking lot.
(1.) 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: Granting the variances 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.
(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 justify granting the variances.
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 has recommended several conditions and safeguards for this project
which are designed to mitigate the impact of a parking lot in this location by
providing landscaping, sidewalks and proper reviews of this proposed
development.
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 USERSICOMMOAWA WVTIREPORTSIBOA M02-REPORTSULPHADELTAPI VAR02-DOC
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.4
EB LandWorks, Inc.
758 Fowler Avenue
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Voice 501.444.7769
Fax S01.444.7793
February 18, 2002
To: Board of Adjustment
City of Fayetteville
RE: Alpha Delta Pi
Expanded Parking Facility
Oakland Avenue at Douglas Street
Legal Description:
Lot 16, Block 3 of H. C. Evins Subdivision
Project Description:
The Alpha Delta Pi sorority is proposing to construct a I 6-space parking lot in the
Southwest quadrant of the intersection of Oakland Avenue and Douglas Street. There is an
existing brick structure on the lot that is to be demolished. The subject lot is zoned R-3. The
tenants of the sorority house currently use on-site parking, adjacent on-street parking and
on-campus shared parking facilities. The primary objective of this project is to provide more
on-site parking stalls to provide safer, more accessible parking facilities for the tenants of the
Alpha Delta Pi sorority house.
The sorority currently uses 33 parking stalls on their property. Per the'City of
Fayetteville standards I space/ bed is required. This translates to a required 65 parking stalls.
With the addition of 16 stalls, the sorority is within the parking standards if an administrative
waiver of 25%of the requirement is granted. The design objectives of the parking facility as
presented are to maximize parking, minimize tree removal, and.to meet the City development
requirements, including sidewalk construction.
By ordinance, the City requires that parking lots in resioqntial districts to belset back
25' from street right-of-ways. Using the "Screening Reduction-.0ption", the setback reduces to
15' with the addition of a 3' high screen of landscaping, bermi -walls or a combination of the
three. Taking this option still precludes the construction of,-,�,ays of parking witk"a drive.
VARIANCE REQUEST: Based on the above, the variance request is to reduce the,required
parking lot setback of 25' to 5' adjacent Douglas and Oakland. Please note thle�$`orority is
proposing to install the 3' high screen required per the "Screening Recluction:Op'tion".
Attachments:
• Two sets of typed, mailing labels listing the names and addresses of the adjacent property
owners.
• A copy of the recorded plat with the names of adjacent property owners and parcel
numbers.
Copies of the Site Plan
A letter to the Chair demonstrating the 4 criteria required by ordinance.
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.5
EB LandWorks, Inc.
758 Fowler Avenue
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Voice 501 .444.7769
Fax 501 .444.7793
February 18, 2002
TO: Chair of Board of Adjustment
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
RE: Parking Lot Setback Variance Request
Alpha Delta Pi
Expanded Parking Facility
Oakland Avenue at Douglas Street
In accordance with the requirements for variance request, I offer the following to address the
criteria required by ordinance for the approval of a variance for your consideration:
a. Special conditions and circumstances do exist which are peculiar to the land and
proposed parking facility which are not applicable to other lands in this same district. The
subject property is located on the fringe of"University-Owned" land. Adjacent parking facilities
do not meet City ordinances regarding stall dimensions, drive widths, setbacks, etc.. The
adjacent facilities were not required to install sidewalks on both of their adjacent street
frontages and were not subject to the tree preservation ordinance.
b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the parking lot setback ordinance would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enloyed by other properties in the same district. The
subject property is located on the fringe of"University-Owned" land. Properties owned by the
University are not subject to City ordinances. Construction within the University land is
commonly more dense than is allowed by the City. Other similar organizations have developed
outside of the City ordinances, and have been able to construct more adequate parking
facilities for their tenants.
C. The special conditions and circumstances have not resulted from the action of the
applicant. The applicant has taken a proactive stance by not donating their property to the
University and proposing to meet all city ordinances except the parking lot setback.
d. Granting this variance request will not confer any special privileges that is denied by
ordinance to other lands in the same district. Please reference the attached exhibit showing the
characteristics of adjacent parking facilities. With approval of the variance requested the
proposed facility will still exceed the setbacks of the adjacent facilities.
Respectfully Submitted:
Mandy R. Bunch, PE
Representative for Applicant
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.6
WEST PARKINGMMACK:
3-FROM STREET-NO 51OEWALK
(PO551BLY IN P.O.W.If IT 15 DEDICATED)
SOUTH PARKING 5ETBACK,
12.51 FROM STREET(�1 1 FROM R.OW.)
4-51DEWALK WTH 3'GREEN SPACE FROM CURD
EX15TING HOU5E EX15TING PARKING LOT
DOUGLAS STREET
PROP05ED PARKING LOT
DOSTING PAPnNG LOT
PROPOSED EAST PARKING SMACK: VVE5T PARKING SMACK:
I I-FROM STREET(�5'FROM R.O.WJ 8'FROM STREET(�OFROM R-O.W.)
4-WALK ADJACENT CUR13
4'WALK ADJACENT CUR13 NO"PARKING 5ET15AM
PROP05ED NORTH PARKING SMACK:
13.91 FROM 5TREEr(�5'FROM R.OW.) 9.5-FROM STREET(�I I mom R.Ow.)
4'51DEWALK ADJACENT CURB NO 51DEWALK
LOOKING AT EXISTING
PARKING LOT AT
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
INTERSECTION OF DOUGLAS
AND OAKLAND
LOOKING AT EXISTING
PARKING LOT AT
NORTHEAST CORNER OF
INTERSECTION OF DOUGLAS
AND OAKLAND
..........
LOOKING AT EXISTING
HOUSES NORTH OF SITE
FROM SE CORNER OF
INTERSECTION OF DOUGLAS
AND OAKLAND
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.7
ORDINANCE NO. 412 A41CROFILMED
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 172,PARKING AND
LOADING, SECTION 172.01, OFF-STREET PARKING LOT
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, OF THE CODE OF
FAYETTEVILLE, TO PROVIDE PARKING LOT
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVELLES
ARKANSAS:
Sectinn 1. That Chapter 172,Parking and Loading, Section 172.01, Off-Street Parking Lot
Design Requirements, Subsection F.,Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements, and Subsection G.,
Perimeter Landscaping Requirements, of the Code of Fayetteville, are hereby deleted and the
following shall be inserted in their stead:
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 15' day ofAzawme, 1998.
W
APPROVED:
FA.'
By:
I. %T. Fred Hanna, Mayor
By-7��Hea�erWoo�drtiff, City�Cerk
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.8
4127 ord .
Exhibit "All
§172.01 OFF-STREET PARKING LOT DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
F. Parking Lot LandscapingRequirements.
1. Submittal Requirements: A landscaping plan shall be submitted for all parking
lots containing five(5) or more spaces. The Landscape plan shall indicate the species of all plants,
size of each species at the time of planting, spacing requirements for each plant, and the type of
edging and mulch to be used for the planting beds. The planting plan may be incorporated with the
site or grading plan.
2. General Requirements:
a. Separation of Landscaped Areas and Vehicles. All landscaped areas
shall be protected from potential damage by vehicles by placing concrete curbs or wheel.barriers
adjacent to the landscaped area except as provided in §F.2.b.
b. Vehicle Overhang.Except when exercising Option 3.,F.3.a.(3).,a portion
of a standard parking space may be landscaped instead of paved to*meet part of the landscaping
requirement. The landscaped area may be up to two feet of the front of the space as measured from
a line parallel to the direction of the burnper of the vehicle using the space. Landscaping may only
be ground cover plants in the overhang area.
c.Maintenance. The current owner of the property shall be responsible for
the maintenance of all required landscaping.
(1). Irrigation System. Some method of irrigation shall be required
in landscaped areas. An automated irrigation system is encouraged to ensure adequate moisture to
plant material. In landscaped areas without an automated irrigation system the installation of hose
bibs (water spigots),installed one for every 100 foot radius,will be required.
(2). planting Ileds. All landscaping shal] be planted within areas
designated as planting beds, this includes tree lawns,tree islands, and tree pits. Planting beds shall
have amended soil to ensure the health of the plant material. All sod shall be removed within the
planting bed and mulch shall cover the bare soil to ease maintenance. Sod will be allowed in tree
lawns and tree islands if no other plant material is included within these areas.
(3). Replacement Landscaping. Landscaping that dies or is
damaged shall be removed and replaced by the current owner of the property. The owner shall have
60 days from the receipt of written notice issued by the City of Fayetteville to remove and replace
any required landscaping that dies or is damaged.
d. Timing of Installation. Landscaping shall be provided prior to the
issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. A 90-day temporary certificate of occupancy may be
issued once the owner deposits,with the City,U.S. currency or an irrevocable letter of credit in an
amount equal to 150%of the estimated cost of the uninstalled plant material. The letter of credit
must be from a bank or banking institution doing business within the State of Arkansas which is a
member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.9
ORD. 4127
e. Size and type of plant material. All plant material shall meet the
requirements established by the American Standard for Nursery Stock. Trees shall have a mmi'mum
2 inch caliper at the time of installation. Shrubs are to reach an average height of 3'within two Years
of installation. Plant species installed in vehicular use areas are to be approved by the Landscape
Administrator. Suggested species of trees are available within the City of Fayetteville Landscape
Manual.
Requirements for landscaping between the Right-of-Way and parking areas
are intended to lessen the effect of extensive paving. A minimum 50% of shrubs selected shall be
evergreen.
Cnliper-A measurement of general tree size taken at a point loc�ted six inches
above natural ground or root ball surface.
3. Interior Landscaping Requirements.
a. Amount of Landscaping. Parking lots containing ten or more vehicles
shall be landscaped utilizing one of the following options:
(1). option 1. Narrow Tree Lawn-a continuous strip between rows
of parking. The minimum width of a tree lawn is 8'; however, if large tree species are used the
minimum width is 10'. One tree shall be planted for every 12 parking spaces with this option. If
planting a W wide tree lawn, only large tree species shall be used and one tree shall be planted for
every 15 parking spaces.-Trees Tnpv be grouped or spaced within the lawn area. (Figure 1.)
Eli
OPTION 1
(2. option 2. Tree Island - 150 sq. Ft. minimum, minimum width
of 8'. Only Medium tree species are allowed within landscape islands. One tree shall be planted for
every 12 parking spaces with this option. (F igur.e 2)
8.
>
opTION 2
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
(D Page ].10
ORD. 41Z7
(3). Option 3.Tree Pit-36 square foot minimum,minimum width of
6'. Tree pits must be covered with either a tree grate or some form of permeable pavers, (brick or
stone).Only small species of trees are allowed in tree pits. Vehicle overhang is not allowed with this
option. One tree shall be planted for every 10 parking spaces with this option. (Figure 3)
6
6* by
op-nON 3
*Minimum width o.f all islands is measured from the actual planting area,(back of curb to
back of curb)
b. Calculation of area. Required perimeter landscaping may not be
substituted for interior landscaping. However, it is recognized that interior landscaping may join
perimeter landscaping. In such cases, landscaping which extends four feet or more into the parking
area may be included in the calculation of interior landscaped area.
C. Exceptions. All parking lots used solely for the purpose of providing
areas for the display and storage of motor vehicles for sale, lease, and rental shall be exempt from
the interior landscaping requirements.
4. Perimeter Landscaping Requirements. Parking lots containing five(5)or more
spaces shall be landscaped meeting the following requirements:
a. Side and Rear Property Lines. All parking lots shall have five feet of
landscaped area between the property line and parking lot. The two-foot vehicle overhang option
may be included to meet this requirement.Depending on the.use and location, additional area and
screening may be required under §166.10,Buffer Strips and Screening..
b. Property Lines Adjoining Street Right-of-Way.
(1). Residential Zones. Except for permitted entrance drives,every
parking lot shall be landscaped for an equal and uniform width of 15 feet parallel to the front
property line(s) street right-of-way.
(2). Non-residential Zones. Except for permitted entrance drives,
every parking lot shall be landscaped for an equal and uniform width of 10 feet parallel to the front
property line(s)street right-of-way.
c. Required Plant-Materials. Landscaping in these areas shall contain one
tree every 30 linear feet plus a continuous planting of shrubs along the street right-:Of-way, exclusive
of permitted entrance drives.Trees along the perimeter may be grouped to allow flexibility in design.
The requirement for a continuous planting of shrubs is intended to lessen the effect of extensive
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
page 1.11
bRD. 41Z7
paving. Groupings of shrubs are encouraged; however, a continuous planting will be required as
well. A minimurn 50% of shrubs selected shall be evergreen.
Cross Reference: Variances, Chapter 156.
G. Reserved
Board of Adjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Page 1.12
UR02-05.00 ALPH DELTA PI
Close Up View
... .......
.......... ...
m
--- --- ----
R.3
............
.. ........
..........
Subi
LAS q
7----------
R-3
----------
-----------
------- MIR
------------ -------
--- ------- <
P11
ect Property
op
---ALL
R-3 :
Overvie I w-_ Legend Boundary Master Street Plan
Subject Property -%-, Planning Area '57'�Fremay/Expressway
CP000%
Overlay District 4"%,*Pnnapel Arterial
Streets ......
I—— 4'44.#Minor Arterial
Existing L——1 City Jimits,
0 N, Collector
tanned Outside City
P 0*%, Historic Collector Board ofAdjustment
0 37.5 75 150 225 300 March 4, 2002
!!!!!!!!M Feet p R02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
Pgg 7 1
9 0
UR02-05.00 ALPH DELTA P1
One Mile View
HE
gr
C4 RA
VEJ
OkRQ
R'Z !D,77
R�2
IL R-3*_r!i
P4
ll_'��'T- 7,MT
R",Zi 9E�04TJX St.; W
-elm,
�2
RT Z2
E
J,
r
J, -J
r-
J
-Wo;
Ri
_89 T 1' .......,.3 .......
is
Operty
4- i�
-J ii,, 1� i �t-7
-------- in isi.-
nor R-1
R-1
P-1
7
H'
4.
_e.
E
_17t_
'- i P,
1� R. -_s-1 c R-P m.1
i
ALSELL go E I fE.
P-1
T71
V
J.-
�3
t
OT
JR-&M.Ii4A Apil
7,
p-
J
P11 4-0 1 0-
si-
it
R'l
!--\0, AAF!iix
ci
15 1
_'Q
-NA ------ , --1 _T_:
!%gisg� i 4-
J N
a,
.......... 0 Riot"! jL 1, AL, FTI-
it s
CA4-
mf�uow s A
rif
A-
g'
41-1 Jn4. ;I It
I-- - F,"..,J "'V=j- �_�,�!--1-�.'_ 7--,R,3" ft -------
P I Ono' 11. ��FLS%T_�R Sir
4,
1:.E
to
X'4 G'J ff�a
R ...
4 —_-Iicq Am s T
STQNE
P I
J.
2
lk
P�'ATE
3
P-1
7ri
L
Overview Legend
Subject Property Boundary Master Street Plan
Planning Area 4%0 Freeway/Expressway
_,ji F VAR02-05.00
o o Oveday District 4"1 Principal Arterial
Streets
Existing L City Limits 4"N.0 Minor Artenal
�%,Collector Board ofAdjustment
Planned Outside City
zz 00%, Historic Collector
r Miles March 4, 2002
r 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 R02-5 Alpha Delta Pi
I ;;Mmmmmmmmlql 7 Page 1.14
FAYETTEVILLE
ME CITY OF FAYFTFEVILLE,ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
Telephone:(479)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: February 26, 2002
VAR 02-6.00: Variance (Renegar,pp 447)was submitted by Henry Renegar for property
located at 925 Rockwood Trail. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and
contains approximately 0.85 acres. The requirement is for a 8' side setback on the east. The
request is for a 4.67' side setback(a 3.33' variance).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested 3.33' setback variance as shown on the
attached site plan with the following conditions:
1. This variance shall apply to the original structure and the addition proposed with
this application only. Future additions or,alterations to the structure shall conform
with zoning requirements or new variance requests shall be presented to the Board
of Adjustment.
2. Approval of an accompanying property line adjustment(administrative review and
approval)which will provide the space necessary to add onto the west side of the
existing building as proposed in the site plans included with this application.
Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request
Side Setback(R-1) 8� 4.67' (a 3.33'variance)
BACKGROUND:
This structure was built in 1967 and predates current zoning ordinances. The property
that the house is located on is a large tract,it contains approximately 18,700 s.E which is
more than the minimum requirement for two single family lots within this zoning district.
H.-IUSERSICOMMOArDAffN71REPORYSIBOA12002�_reportslrenegar varO2-61oc
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.1
The tract is long and narrow with a street frontage of only 85 feet. This condition and the
fact that the home was sited on the property prior to the adoption of an 8' setback
requirement, have caused a hardship for the property owners. They wish at this time to
renovate and add a garage and three rooms of living space onto the home to accommodate
their family. In order to expand an owner-occupied nonconforming structure by more
than 25% of the original footprint, a variance is necessary. The applicant has provided
an extensive explanation of this project which is included with this agenda item.
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 homes, R-I
South: Single family homes, R-1
East: Single family homes, R-1
West: Single family homes, 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: This structure pre-existed current zoning regulations and does not comply
with the required side setback of 8' on the east. The property is of more than
sufficient size to accommodate a single family home in the R-1 zoning
H.-WERSICOMMONDA WVYIREPORTSWOA12002-yeportsirenegatl_varO2-6toc
Board ofAdjusiment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.2
district,however the narrow frontage creates an obstacle for expansion of the
existing structure.
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: The literal interpretation of the provision of the zoning regulations would not
allow the proposed improvement of providing a two car garage and
additional living space for this single family home.
3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result
from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: The special conditions and circumstances existing on this site are not the
result of actions of this applicant.
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 requested will not confer on the applicant any special
privilege that is denied by current zoning regulations. The use of this
structure as a single family home is not proposed to change as a result of this
variance.
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 Monday,March 4,2002.
H.-I USERSICOMMOMDA WMREPOMWOA 12002_jreporislrenegar�__varO2-61oc
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.3
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 possible
the expansion of this existing structure.
(L) 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.
Finding: Granting the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of current zoning regulation and will not be injurious to the
neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. This
neighborhood consists of older homes of which, many were constructed prior
to current zoning regulations.
(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 and the
variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to make possible the
reasonable use of the 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.
Finding: Staff has recommended conditions which are appropriate to the project. Any
variance granted shall only apply to the existing structure and the addition
proposed with this application.
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 IUSERSICOMMOAPDAWVnPEPORTSWOA�2002—reports�-enega)�_varO2-61oc
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.4
161.04 DISTRICT R-1: LOW DENSITY D. Bulk and Area Regul tions.
RESIDENTIAL. Single-Family Two-Family
A. Purpose. The Low Density Residential Lot 70 ft. 80 ft.
District is designed to permit and encourage the Minimum
development of low density detached dwellings m Width
suitable environments,as well as to protect existing
development of these types. Lot Area 8,000 sq. ft. 12,000 sq.ft.
Minimum
B. Uses.
Land Area 8,000 sq.ft. 6,000 sq.ft.
1. Permitted Uses. Per Dwelling
Unit I City- de Uses by Right Unit
E I
Unit 26 1 Single-Family Dwelling E. Ya Requirements(feet).
FRONT SIDE YARD REAR YARD
2. UsesPermissible on Appeal to YARD
the Plannin Commission.
Unit 2 City-Wide Uses by Conditional Use 25 8 20
Permit
F. Building Area.On any lot the area
Unit 3 Public Protection and Utility Facilities occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40%of the
total area of such lot.
Unit 4 Cultural and Recreational Facilities
Unit 8 Single-Family and Two-Family (Code 1991,§160.03 1)
Dwellings
C. Density.
SINGLE-FAMILY TWO FAMILY
DWELLINGS DWELLINGS
4 or Less Families Per 7 or Less Families Per
Acre Acre
H.-IUSERSICOMMOND.4wv7wPOR7sWO,4i2OO2-yeportsirenegai�_varO2-6ioc
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.5
Henry L- Renegar
925 Rockwood Trail
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Phone(501) 575-0745
Fax (501) 575-9220
January 20, 2002
Chairperson
Fayetteville Board of Adjustment
City of Fayetteville
Dear Sir/Madam,
This letter is to request a variance from the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment to
allow remodeling and additional construction on my home residence located at
925 Rockwood Trail in Fayetteville.
My wife and I have owned this home since September of 1990. Prior to
purchasing the home, we leased the house for 2 years from the previous owner.
So, we have lived at this location continuously since August of 1988. We love the
beautiful mature trees and the peaceful surroundings of our property here on Mt.
Sequoyah. There is no other location in Fayetteville that we would rather live.
However, with two young sons, 8 and 6 years old respectively, our family has
outgrown our current house.
Our plan is to add a 2-car garage and three additional rooms of living space onto
the house. We would also remodel the entire existing home along with the new
construction. The existing 1465 sq. fL house would be expanded to approximately
2850 sq. ft. The reason that we need a variance to obtain a building permit is
because our home does not conform to the current building code which requires an
8-foot setback clearance zone to the overhang on each side of the house. Our
house was built in 1959 prior to the current building code, and the house was
constructed with the overhang just under 5 feet from the property line on the east
side of the property. The house does,however, conform to the 25-foot setback
from the street requirement as well as the 8-foot setback from the west property
line.
Our building plans would keep the east wall of the house exactly where it
currently is. This east wall would be extended south approximately 15-'/2 feet.
But the east wall would not be any closer to the property line than the current wall
is already located. We would add a 21-foot wide garage to the west side of the
house. Additional bedroom space would be located above the garage. This would
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.6
Page 2
still leave 8-feet of setback on the west side. The front of the house would also
still conform to the 25-foot setback from the street requirement-
In accordance with Item 7 on the Variance checklist obtained from the Fayetteville
City Planning Department, the following points are pertinent to this request.
Ciriteria A: 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.
Response to Criteria A: Our home, located at 925 Rockwood Trail, was
constructed in 1959 prior to the current building regulations. Our home and the
house at 927 Rockwood Trail, which was built in 1967 according to the owner,
were both built close to the property line. Figure I shows the house at 925
Rockwood Trail. Figure 2 shows a south-facing photograph of the area between
our home and the east property line.
This is a unique condition because the house was built over 42 years ago. The
condition already existed when my wife and I purchased the home over I I years
ago. Without demolishing part of our house, there would be no way to increase the
setback from the east property line. Most of the other homes in the vicinity of our
house are situated with significant spacing between the houses and with greater
setback from the property lines. For example, the distance between our house and
our neighbor to the west is more than 100 feet.
Also, many of the other homes in our neighborhood already have garages and
substantially more living space than our house. The changes that we are proposing
to make to our house would be in line with many of the newer construction and
remodel projects carried out in the Rockwood Trail district over the past few
years.
'A'
Figure 1. Home at 925 Rockwood Trail
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.7
Page 3
Figure 2. Southward view along east property line
Criteria B: That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same
district under the terms of this ordinance.
Response to Criteria B: Without a variance for the less than 8 foot set back on
the east side of our home at 925 Rockwood Trail, we will not be able to add more
living space or a garage to the home. This would force my family to sell our
house and move elsewhere. Many other homeowners in the Rockwood Trail/Mt.
Sequoyah district have been granted building permits to make additions to their
homes or to build new homes. Figures 3 through I I below show some examples
of such projects. These projects have all contributed to the beauty of the
neighborhood by adding new homes or improving the quality and property value
of existing homes. Our project is very similar to some of these projects. The only
difference is that we are working with a 42-year-old house that is closer to the east
property line than the current building code allows.
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.8
Page 4
Figure 3. House located at 1657 Applebury -new addition and remodel
Figure 4. House located at 668 Sequoyah Drive- extensive remodel and addition
Figure 5. New house located at 671 Sequoyah Drive Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.9
Page 5
Figure 6. House located at 1021 Trust Street- Extensive remodel
Figure 7. House located at 609 Crest Drive- Adding large garage
-4
Figure 8. House located at 1636 Rockwood Trail-Newer home
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6Renegar
Page 2.10
IF I
71:
..... .... ..
Page 7
Criteria C: That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the
actions of the applicant.
Response to Criteria C: Our house at 925 Rockwood Trail was positioned on the
lot when it was built in 1959. To the best of my knowledge, the house has the
same floor plan layout and the same roof overhang that it had when built. There
was no action on the part of either myself or any member of my family which
resulted in the house not meeting the 8-foot setback requirement on the east side.
Also, when my wife and I purchased the home back in 1990, we had no way to
anticipate what type of construction and renovation projects might be necessary in
2002. Until I met with Dawn Warrick at the Fayetteville City Planning
Department we were not aware that a variance of this nature would be required to
improve an existing home.
Criteria D: That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant
any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or
buildings in the same district
Response to Criteria D: Again our plan is to add a 2-car garage and three
additional rooms of living space onto the house. As previously stated we would
also remodel the entire existing home along with the new construction.
Granting the variance would allow my family to make needed changes to our
home. If the east side of our house were not less than the required 8 feet from the
property line, granting a building permit for our home would not be an issue. As
previously illustrated in Figures 3 through 10, building permits have been issued
for home additions all over the Rockwood Trail/Mt Sequoyah district. The
additions that are proposed for our house on the south, north, and west sides will
meet the requirements for setback on property zoned RI.
Thus we are not seeking any special privilege for construction on our house.
Rather we are planning to comply with all current building codes for the
remodeling and new construction on the house. We are simply requesting to be
allowed to improve our home similar to improvements made by other homeowners
in our neighborhood. Not granting this variance would be penalizing our family
for construction decisions made by a builder back in 1959 who was working
without the benefit of current building regulations.
I would appreciate your carefid consideration of this variance request.
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.12
Henry L. Renegar
925 Rockwood Trail
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Phone(501) 575-0745
Fax (501) 575-9220
January 20, 2002
Description of Request
'Me construction Plan is to add a 2-car garage and three additional rooms of living
space onto the house. We would also remodel the entire existing home along with
the new construction. The existing 1465 sq. & house would be expanded to
approximately 2850 sq. ft.
The reason that we need a variance to obtain a building permit is because our
home does not conform to the current building code which requires an 8-foot
setback clearance zone to the overhang on each side of the house. Our house was
built in 1959 prior to the current building code, and the house was constructed
with the overhangjust under 5 feet from the property line on the east side of the
property. The house does,however, conform to the 25-foot setback from the street
requirement as well as the 8-foot setback from die west property line.
Our building plans would keep the east wall of the house exactly where it
currently is. This east wall would be extended south approximately 15-'/2 feet.
But the east wall would not be any closer to the property line than the current wall
is already located. We would add a 21-foot wide garage to the west side of the
house. Additional bedroom space would be located above the garage. This would
still leave 8-feet of setback on the west side. Ile front of the house would also
still conform to the 25-foot setback from the street requirement.
The figures below show the current home and the proposed renovation and
addition.
Board ofAdjustment
March 4, 2002
VAR 02-6 Renegar
Page 2.13