HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-12-07 - Agendas Tayve e
ARKANSAS
The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
113 W.Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
Telephone: (479)575-8267
AGENDA FOR A MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MONDAY,DECEMBER 7, 2009 at 3:45 p.m.
Room 326, City Administration Building
The following items will be considered:
1. Approval of the minutes from the September 14, 2009 meeting.
New Business:
2. BOA 09-3477 (JORGENSEN/620 N. WHITHAM, 444): Submitted by BLAKE
JORGENSEN for property located at 620 N. WHITHAM AVENUE. The property is zoned
RMF-40, MULTI FAMILY - 40 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.13 acre. The
request is for a variance from the lot area requirements to allow a property line adjustment.
Planner: Data Sanders
3. BOA 09-3479 (MULLINS/120 MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD, 523):
Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES for property located at 120 MARTIN
LUTHER KING BLVD. The property is zoned NC, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION
and contains approximately 0.14 acres. The request is for a variance from the lot area
requirements to allow a lot split. Planner: Andrew Garner
All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. A copy of the proposed amendments and other
pertinent data are open and available for inspection in the office of City Planning(479-575-8267), 125 West Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested patties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD (Telecommunication
Device for the Deaf)are available for all public hearings; 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an
interpreter,please call 479-575-8330.
•
Taye evl e
ARKANSAS
ORDER OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
A. Introduction of agenda item—Chairman
B. Presentation of Staff Report
C. Presentation of request—Applicant
D. Public Comment
E. Response by Applicant/Questions & Answer with Board
F. Action of the Board of Adjustment (Discussion & Vote)
NOTE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE
If you wish to address the Board of Adjustment on an agenda item raise your hand when
the Chairman asks for public comment. He will do this after he has given Board
members the opportunity to speak and before a final vote is taken. Public comment will
only be permitted during this part of the hearing for each item.
Once the Chairman recognizes you, go to the podium at the front of the room and give
your name and address. Address your comments to the Chairman, who is the presiding
officer. He will direct them to the appropriate appointed official, staff member or others
for response. Please keep your comments brief, to the point, and relevant to the agenda
item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak.
Please, as a matter of courtesy, refrain from applauding or booing any speakers or actions
of the Board of Adjustment.
2009 Board of Adjustment Members
Robert Kohler (Chairman)
Sheree Alt
William Chesser
Robert Nickle
Mark Waller
Steven Bandy
Kristen Knight
Board of Adjustment
September 14, 2009
Page 1 of 4
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
A regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment was held on September 14, 2009 at 3:45
p.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
ITEMS DISCUSSED ACTION TAKEN
MINUTES: August 3, 2009 Approved
Page 2
BOA 09-3378 (Alan Reid, 445) Approved
Page 3
BOA 09-3422 (Colby Salazar, 408): Approved
Page 4
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Sheree Alt
Steven Bandy
William Chesser
Robert Kohler
Bob Nickle
Mark Waller
Kristen Knight
STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT
Jesse Fulcher
Andrew Gamer
Dara Sanders
David Whitaker
Jeremy Pate
Board of Adjustment Chair Bob Kohler called the meeting to order at 3:45 PM.
December 7,2009
Board of Adjustment
BOA Minuts 9/14/09
Agenda Item 1
Page 1 of 4
Board of Adjustment
September 14, 2009
Page 2 of 4
Approval of the August 3, 2009 Board of Adjustment meeting minutes.
Motion:
Board Member Waller made a motion to approve the minutes from the August 3, 2009
Board of Adjustment meeting. Board Member Nickle seconded the motion. Upon roll
call, the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0.
December 7,2009
Board of Adjustment
BOA Minuts 9/14/09
Agenda Item 1
Page 2 of 4
Board of Adjustment
September 14, 2009
Page 3 of 4
BOA 09-3378 (ALAN REID /911 HIGHLAND, 445): Submitted by GEORGE ALAN
REID JR. for property located at 911 HIGHLAND AVENUE. The property is zoned
RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.64 acres.
The request is for reduced street frontage for a lot resulting from a proposed lot split.
Planner: Dara Sanders
Dara Sanders, Current Planner, gave the staff report and described the applicant's
request.
Board Member Waller asked if Lot 1 was currently conforming.
Sanders stated yes.
Board Member Kohler asked where access would be provided.
Sanders stated that access would be reviewed at the time of development.
Waller asked if the property line was currently jogged.
Sanders stated yes.
Alan Reid (applicant) stated that they had reduced the width of the original variance
request by obtaining additional property from the neighbor. Access will likely be from
Cleburn.
Waller asked what the objection was to a jogged property line.
Reid stated that property maintenance can be an issue when the property lines are not
straight.
Board Member Kohler asked if the alley would count as adequate frontage.
Sanders stated that the 70' of frontage has to be on a public street, not an alley.
Motion:
Board Member Nickle made a motion to approve the request with conditions as listed in
the staff report. Board Member Alt seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion
passed with a vote of 5-1-0 with Board Member Waller voting no.
December 7,2009
Board of Adjustment
BOA Minuts 9/14/09
Agenda Item 1
Page 3 of 4
Board of Adjustment
September 14, 2009
Page 4 of 4
BOA 09-3422 (SALAZAR/ 1121 N. MISSION BLVD.): Submitted by COLBY
SALAZAR for property located at 1121 N. MISSION BLVD. The property is zoned
RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.54 acres.
The request is for setback variances to bring an existing non-conforming structure into
compliance.
Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner gave the staff report discussing the existing home on
the property built in 1921 and that the home was within the front building setback and
within the Master Street Plan right-of-way. Staff recommends approval of the requested
variance for the reasons discussed throughout the staff report.
Board Member Kohler asked about the vertical line on the survey.
Fulcher stated that is was a section line.
Board Member Nickle asked for clarification on condition #1.
Fulcher stated that the condition was for the benefit for the applicant, and that the City
Council would review the Master Street Plan amendment.
Board Member Kohler asked if there would be any issues in the future if the street was
widened.
Board Member Waller asked about one versus two nonconforming lots.
David Whitaker, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the matter would be up to AHTD,
since Mission and North were state highways.
Colby Salazar, applicant, stated that he was asking for approval to allow him to fix up
the house.
Public Comment:
No public comment.
Motion:
Board Member Alt made a motion to approve the request with conditions as listed in the
staff report. Board Member Bandy seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion
passed with a vote of 6-0-0.
All business being concluded, the meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
December 7,2009
Board of Adjustment
BOA Minuts 9/14/09
Agenda Item 1
Page 4 of 4
BOA Meeting of December 7, 2009
Ta7eVi
AHKAtJSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
125 W. Mountain St.
72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
Fayetteville,(479 57 -8267
Telephone:(479)575-8267
TO: Board of Adjustment
FROM: Dara Sanders, Current Planner
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Development Services
DATE: December 1, 2009
BOA 09-3477 (JORGENSEN/620 N. WHITHAM, 444): Submitted by BLAKE
JORGENSEN for property located at 620 N. WHITHAM AVENUE. The property is
zoned RMF-40, MULTI FAMILY - 40 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.13
acre. The request is for a variance from the lot area requirements.
Planner: Data Sanders
Property Description and History: The subject properties are located at the northeast comer
of Whitham Avenue and Taylor Street and are zoned RMF-40. The surrounding land use and
zoning is included in Table 1.
TABLE 1: SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
Land Use Zoning
North Multi-family residence RMF-40, Res. multiple family,40 units/acre
South Single family residence RMF-40, Res. multiple family, 40 units/acre
East Multi-family residence RMF-40,Res. multiple family, 40 units/acre
West Multi-family residence RMF-40, Res. multiple family, 40 units/acre
On February 28, 2008, the Subdivision Committee approved a request for a lot split on the
subject property to subdivide two lots for the creation of a third lot. Prior to thelotsplit
proposal, the subject property consisted of two lots,Lot 6 and Lot 7, which did not meet the
minimum bulk and area requirements of the underlying RMF-40 zoning district.
On March 3, 2008, the Board of Adjustment approved the applicant's variance requests
(BOA 08-2926) for lot width, lot area, and front setbacks, and rear setbacks for the three lots
in order to allow for lot split to occur and a third single-family dwelling to be constructed.
The staff report for BOA 08-2926 is included in this packet.
Proposal: The applicant has submitted an additional variance request to allow for an
adjustment of recently established property lines in order to follow an existing fence line that
dates back to the 1930s. This property line adjustment would further reduce the lot area of
Lot 6A below the minimum lot area and the lot area variance previously approved by the
Board of Adjustment. The RMF-40 zoning district requirement, 2008 Board of Adjustment
December 7,2009
K.IReports12 WBOA ReportsV2-07-0900,4 09-3477(620 Whilham).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 1 of 16
variance granted, and applicant's request are included in Table 2.
TABLE 2: VARIANCE REQUEST FOR LOT 6A
Lot 6A =FRMF-40 Zoning District 2008 BOA Variance A licant's Request
Lot Area 6,000 square feet 5,886 square feet 5,090 square feet
114 square feet variance - 9107s uaze feet variance
Public Comment Staff has not received public comment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow for the proposed
property line adjustment as indicated on the submitted survey, subject to the
following conditions of approval:
1. Should the variance request be approved, a property line adjustment shall be
required for Lots 6A and 6B.
2. All other conditions of approval associated with BOA 08-2926 and LSP 08-
2920 shall apply.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION. O4proved Denied
Date: December 7',2009 Motion: Second: Vote
CITY PLAN 2025 LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: City Neighborhood Area
FINDINGS:
City of Fayetteville Unified Development Code
Section 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: Staff finds that special conditions exist for this property. The Board of
Adjustment granted previously a series of variances for the subject
December 7,2009
K1Reports12009WOA ReportslJ2-07-091BOA 09-3477(620 Whitham).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 2 of 16
property and the adjacent properties in order to allow for the
development of an additional detached dwelling on an individual lot
of record, finding that the request was consistent with the underlying
multi-family zoning district and met several goals of City Plan 2025.
The existing fence on Lot 6b has served the existing house for decades.
Staff finds that the new property line between Lots 6A and 6B could
reasonably be established at the existing fence line, as this is typically
a feature that defines the edge or boundary of a 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: Staff finds that literal interpretation of the zoning regulations would
not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other
properties in the district to develop the property for a single family
residence. The applicant may still make use of the subject property
with or without the original fence in its current location. However,
staff finds that it is a reasonable request for a property line to be
adjusted to follow an established fence line and that it is a commonly
enjoyed right for property owners to have a logical property line.
3. Resulting Actions. That the`special conditions and circumstances do not
result from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: The existing fence was in place prior to the applicant purchasing the
property. However, the request to revise the previous variance
request to shift the property line to the existing fence line is a result
from the actions of the applicant's interest in keeping the existing
fence and creating a more logical property boundary. Staff finds that
the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship in that the existing
fence line was not considered during the first variance and lot split
proposal.
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 requested variances will not confer special privileges on
this applicant due to the special conditions associated with this
property. The applicant is not requesting a use that is prohibited or a
number of dwelling units that exceed the maximum number allowed
by the underlying zoning district. Staff finds that granting the
variance requests will allow for the applicant to utilize the existing
December 7,2009
K:1Reports1200900A Reportsll2-07-0900A 09-3477(620 Whitham).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 3 of 16
fence line as the property line, which would prevent the construction
of a second fence to the cast. Staff finds that a fence line often
identifies a side or rear property line. More importantly, staff finds
that the density and use of the subject properties will remain the
same, thus meeting the intent of the underlying zoning district.
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: Existing nonconformities were not considered as a basis of the
findings stated in this staff report.
Section 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, December 7,2009.
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 variance is the minimum needed to revise the property line to the
existing fence line.
b. 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 a variance for the subject property would be in keeping with
the overall character and harmony of the neighborhood. The variance
will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to
the public welfare, with conditions as recommended herein. Staff
finds that the issue leading to the variance request is interior to the
subject properties and will have no affect on the public or adjacent
December 7,2009
K.IReports120091BOA ReportsU2-07-091BOA 09-3477(620 Whitham).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
-Agenda Item 2
Page 4 of 16
properties.
C. 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 bas recommended conditions of approval on page 2 of this staff
report.
d. 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
December 7,2009
K-1Reports1200MOA ReportsU2-07-091ROA 09-3477(620 Whitham).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 5 of 16
JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS
124 WEST SUNBRIDGE,SUITE 5 . FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 72703 (479)442-9127 - FAX(479)582-4807
DAVID L.JORGENSEN,P.E.,P.L.S.
JUSTIN L.JORGENSEN,P.E.
BLAKE E.JORGENSEN,P.E.
City of Fayetteville
113 W. Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Attn: Planning Department/Chair of the Board of Adjustment
Re: Jorgensen Lot Line Adjustment
To Whom It May Concern:
Please find the attached Lot Line Adjustment and Variance Request for property located on the
corner of Whitham Avenue and Taylor Street. This property was adjusted and approved for various
variances in March of 2008, where the Board of Adjustments found in favor of several variances needed
to make this property available for a further split.However, after further planning has occurred, I would
like to adjust the property line that runs north and south that splits lots 6A & 6B to run along the existing
fence, this will prevent maintenance issues between the two properties and is something that I probably
should have requested previously. It is my understanding that the Board of Adjustment would have to
grant an additional variance for lot 6A, the following variance is being pursued:
Original Lot 6A Bulk Area:5,886 sq.ft.
New Lot 6A Bulk Area: 5,090 sq.ft.
Total Reduced Bulk Area: 796 sq.ft.
Required Bulk Area: 6000 sq.ft.
Requested Variance: 910 sq.ft.
As mentioned,this lot has been approved for several variances, and I feel that this additional
variance is not a hindrance to the existing lots nor does it detract from the surrounding properties.Please
contact me with any questions or comments.
Thanks for your time and consideration.
a Jorgensen, P.E.
STRUCTURAL DESIGN'LAND DEVELOPMENT'WATER SYSTEMS'WASTEWATER SYSTEMS'LAND SURVEYING
December 7,2009
Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 6 of 16
fa =
m
m
m "
�owim An mno n Zvvmimnm To n D A '
nTx�
mo A➢ t Tx i _ _ _.. -.
v2=vmm -,Z ➢DAo
mo � ynomo� $ O
n
anumo.onn a�.m,�
�=mx m m me
IIWHITHAM AVENUEA
—(50'R.O.W.) ✓ v
63.93'
�12
m G ISI
s
m I
n
�mo22muFniZr-c a, _ -
n
mvan'^4_ 'v uTn:mzo P"
>
m E y I cr
a g it /•m �mI �I z.•m a � � — '.
s
a mSzm m SOUTH
_ n s n .:III o 61.05 Y w A
ryF y nm e4aIo y > NORTH 5000' ani
p i
FS
v.
I II
/ T
0
N
ninnvcmm m II �' � � m
c
v a m
v v omnm�mm a I
N -
m /
a
a
ommxz
gzza� m
a ,
mmxz mma a -. _ m-z
mm-x mom o 5.y T b"` PO
minim � n „Y'
-
-
-
oaa m i
nm nmmo
N���a _ AOTx nonoonoA n Z
Tam Aonz mo a`m nN a`^Y mY'�A A (7
oii:oi z �;�mo umm".. niY
mhi YET yD�m` n
na y s .
.3aa aim 'an y y 3 s
or.ym,-in
nYooia"m I}I I ®®®id®OSmn. o m � n
m � '^j,�'�5lmanma cga� m �Emlm �yNm p -
JOROENSEN & ASSOCIATESV A"z A"�n tuber 2009
.ixeEas sunvcroa
cwu E> s LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FORE k4 n �m 8mm oard of Ad ustment
E ✓O--ENSEN
BLAK7 +`
....rt„._�,.,,....,m_,....�...,,......_,-......,�.. Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 7 of 16
110
=-
a 7'n OA Meeting of March 03, x()0088
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone:(479)575-8267
TO: Board of Adjustment
FROM: Dara Sanders, Current Planner
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
DATE: Py' S April 25, 2008
BOA 08-2926 (BLAKE JORGENSEN, 444): Submitted by BLAKE JORGENSEN for
property located at 620/626 N. WHITHAM AVENUE. The property is zoned RMF-40,
MULTI FAMILY - 40 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.37 acres. The request
is for several variances of lot frontage, lot area, and setbacks to bring existing structures
into compliance as well as the lot created by a lot split of the property.
Planner: Dara Sanders
BACKGROUND:
Property Description and History: The subject properties are located at the northeast comer of
Whitham Avenue and Taylor Street and are zoned RMF-40. The surrounding land use and zoning is,
included in Table 1.
TABLE 1: SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
Land Use Zoning
North Multi-family residence RMF-40,Res. multiple family, 40 units/acre
South Single family residence RMF-40,Res.multiple family, 40 units/acre
East Multi-family residence RMF-40,Res.multiple family,40 units/acre
West Multi-family residence RMF-40, Res.multiple family, 40 units/acre
On February 28, 2008, the Subdivision Committee approved a request for a lot split on the subject
property to subdivide two lots for the creation of a third lot. The lot split approval is contingent
upon approval of the variance requests of bulk, area, and setback requirements included herein.
Prior to the lot split proposal, the subject property consisted of two lots, Lot 6 and Lot 7,within the
RMF-40 zoning district, which the following bulk, area, and setback requirements for a single
family dwelling apply:
Minimum lot width 60 ft.
Minimum lot area 6,000 s .ft.
Front setback 25 ft.
Side setback 8 ft.
Rear setback 20 ft.
December 7,2009
K.IReports120081BOA Reports103-March 0300A(Jorgensen).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 8 of 16
Lot 6A, located at the comer of Whitham Avenue and Taylor Street, was approximately 64 feet
wide and contained approximately 9,147 square feet prior to the lot split request. It contains a
nonconforming single family dwelling with a west front setback of approximately 15 feet and a
south front setback of approximately 13 feet from the Master Street Plan right-of-way.
Lot 7, located one lot north of the Whitham/Taylor intersection, was a nonconforming lot prior to
the lot split request with 50 feet of frontage and a lot area of approximately 7,405 square feet. It
contains a nonconforming single family dwelling with a front setback of approximately 19 feet
from the Master Street Plan right-of-way.
Proposal: The applicant proposes to subdivide the two lots into Lots 6A, 613, and 7 of 0.13, 0.14
and 0.11 acres respectively, resulting in 3 nonconforming lots. The proposed lot split would reduce
the lot area for Lot 6A from 9,147 square feet to 5,886 square feet,the lot area for Lot 7 from 7,405
square feet to 4,727 square feet, and create Lot 613, with 6,078 square feet and 55 feet of frontage,
for construction of a two family residence.
Furthermore,the applicant proposes a reduced front setback of 15' (a 10' variance)for Lot 613. The
existing drive for Lot 7 is located at the east and north property lines of Lot 613, resulting in a
reduction of buildable space and usable yard area for the new lot.
The proposed bulk, area, and setbacks are indicative of the RSF-8 zoning district. While the
applicant could request to rezone the property to RSF-8 so that the lot split would meet most of the
bulk and area requirements of the revised zoning district, staff finds that a down zoning action is
inappropriate in an already dense area in close proximity to the University campus; therefore, staff
supports the applicant's request, finding that it is an appropriate infill project that meets the.density
intent of the RMF-40 zoning district, as well as goals and objectives of City Plan 2025.
Request:
1) Lot 6A - the applicant requests a lot area and setback variance to bring the nonconforming
lot and existing nonconforming structure into conformity.
2) Lot 613 - the applicant requests lot width and lot area variances for a new two family
dwelling and a front setback variance for the future construction of a residence.
3) Lot 7—the applicant requests a lot area, lot width, front setback, and rear setback variance
to bring the existing nonconforming lot and structure into conformity.
Ordinance Applicant's Request Pre existing
Requirement
Lot 6A
Lot Area 6,000 SF 5,886 SF (a 114 SF variance)
Front Setback(West) 25' 15' (a 10' variance)
Front Setback(North) 25' 10' (a 15' variance)
Lot 6B
Lot Area 6,500 SF 6,078 SF (a 425 SF variance)
Front Setback 25' 15' (a 10' variance)
Lot Width 60' 55' (a 5' variance
Lot 7
Lot Area 6,000 SF 4727 SF a 1275 SF variance)
Front Setback 25' 15' (a 10' variance)
Rear Setback 20 8' (a 12' variance)
Lot Width 60' 50' (a 10' variance)
December 7,2009
K.Reports12 OMOA Reports103-March 031BOA(Jorgensen).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 9 of 16
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances to bring the existing
nonconforming portions of the lots and structures into compliance, including the
following:
1) Request for a west front setback variance of 10' for a total west front setback of 15'
for Lot 6A.
2) Request for a south front setback variance of 15' for a total south front setback of
10' for Lot 6A.
3) Request for a front setback variance of 10' for a total front setback of 15' for Lot 7.
4) Request for a lot width variance of 10' for a total lot width of 50' for Lot 7.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances to allow for the proposed lot
split,including the following:
1) Request for a lot area variance of 114 square feet for a total lot area of 5,886 square
feet for Lot 6A.
2) Request for a lot area variance of 425 square feet for a total 6,078 square feet for
Lot 613.
3) Request for a front setback variance of 10' for a total front setback of 15' for Lot
613.
4) Request fora lot width variance of 5' to allow for a lot width of 55' for Lot 613.
5) Request for a lot area variance of 1,275 square feet for a total lot area of 4,727
square feet for Lot 7.
6) Request for a rear setback variance of 12' for a total rear setback of 8' for Lot 7.
The following conditions of approval shall apply:
1. The lot split shall be filed prior to building permit approval.
2. Any structure constructed on Lot 6B shall be constructed to appear as a single
family home from the street, limited to a maximum of two dwelling units.
3. No expansion of the existing structures, without Board of Adjustment
approval, shall occur within the building setbacks, with the exception of that
noted herein.
4. The variances shall only be applicable for the existing single-family structures
and the proposed single-family structure. Future development or re-
development of the site will require the property owner to meet all applicable
building setbacks.
5. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of any
construction on Lot 6B. All existing structures, easements and utilities shall be
December 7,2009
K.Teports120081BOA Reports103-March 0300A(Jorgensen).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 10 of 16
located on the site plan submitted for building permit consideration.
6. Should the lot width variance request for Lot 613 and/or the lot area variance
requests for Lots 6A and 7 be denied, the lot split approval shall be null and
void.
Additional Conditions/Comments:
BOARD OT ADJ[7STMENT:ACTIQN: x Approved Denied
Date Maxch 312008'= , Motion Nickle Second Zant' Vote 5 01
CITY PLAN 2025 LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: City Neighborhood Area
FINDINGS:
City of Fayetteville Unified Development Code
Section 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: The houses on Lots 6A and 7 are existing nonconforming structures,
dating from approximately 1926. The lots also predate current zoning
bulk and area requirements and exist as nonconforming. Staff finds the
request to bring the existing lot and structures into compliance
demonstrates sufficient special conditions to warrant granting a
variance for this request.
The applicant proposes to save a large tree located on Lot 613 and
proposes a reduced front setback in order to construct the proposed
home away from the tree to ensure its preservation. Furthermore, Lot 7
is accessed by a gravel drive, see site plan,that exists on a portion of Lot
613,which has been placed in a private access easement and reduces the
buildable area for the new lot.
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
December 7,2009
K.1Repor1s120081BOA Reports103-March 03180A(Jorgensen).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 11 of 16
regulations.
Finding: Literal interpretation of zoning regulations for Lots 6 and 7, as they
currently exist, allow for the continued existence of the structures and
lots as nonconforming. Bringing Lot 7 and the structures on Lots 6 and
7 into compliance would permit the applicant to make additions and/or
improvements to the homes.
Literal interpretation of zoning regulations for Lot 6B will not allow for
the creation of the lot and the proposed structure, as it does not meet
the minimum lot width and front setback requirements as currently
proposed. The proposed lots would have similar lot areas and setbacks
to those existing in the neighborhood.
Furthermore, staff finds that literal interpretation of the zoning
regulations for Lot 6B conflict with the goals and objectives of City Plan
2025 to encourage infill development, to encourage and promote
attainable housing options, to encourage and provide more
opportunities for people to live and work in the City, and to promote
compact development in strategic locations. The creation of Lot 6B, due
to its location in relation to the University of Arkansas and Downtown
Fayetteville, will promote several of the goals and objectives adopted by
the City of Fayetteville and promoted by the Planning Division; as a
result, staff supports the applicants proposal.
3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not
result from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: The existing nonconforming nature of Lots 6A and 7 and the existing
structures predate the applicant, and therefore does not result from the
actions of the applicant. However, the request to subdivide the two lots
into three, subsequently reducing the lot area for Lots 6A and 7 and
proposing setback and lot width dimensions for Lot 6B below the
minimum required, is an action of the applicant. The applicant could
request to rezone the property to RSF-8 and return to the Board of
Adjustment with a request for a variance from lot area requirements
for Lot 7; however, staff does not generally support spot zoning and
finds that down zoning the subject properties is inappropriate in an
already dense area with bulk, area, and setbacks comparable to the
applicant's proposal.
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 requested variances will not confer special privileges on
December 7,2009
K.IReports1200800A Reporlsl(13-March 031 BOA(Jorgensen).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2 -
Page 12 of 16
this applicant due to the unique and special conditions associated with
this property.
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: Existing nonconformities were not considered as a basis of the findings
stated in this staff report.
Section 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 3,2008.
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 variances for Lots 6A and 7 are the minimum variances
necessary bring the adjusted lots and existing structures into
compliance. The requested front setback variance for.Lot 6B is not the
minimum variance necessary to allow for the construction of a single
family structure. However, staff finds that the request is justified as the
request is congruent with the front setbacks of the surrounding
residential structures. Allowing the reduced setback will be compatible
with the neighborhood and create a uniform and pedestrian friendly
streetscape. Furthermore, Lot 7 is accessed by a gravel drive, see site
plan, that exists on a portion of Lot 6B, which has been placed in a
private access easement and reduces the buildable area for the new lot.
b. 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 a variance for the existing lots and structures, as well as the
December 7,2009
K.lReports12008WOA Reporls103-March 0300A(Jorgensen).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 13 of 16
proposed lot and structure, would be in keeping with the overall
character and harmony of the neighborhood. The variances will not be
injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public
welfare,with conditions as recommended herein.
C. 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 approval, with a primary condition that the
variances only be applicable for the existing single-family structures
and the proposed single-family structure. Future development or re-
development of the site will require the property owner to meet all
applicable zoning setbacks.
d. 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
December 7,2009
KAReporls120081ROA Reports103-March 0300A(Jorgensen).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 14 of 16
BOA09-3477 JORGENSEN/620 N. WHITHAM
Close Up View
r
SUBJECT PROPERTY x
a�
own
S I�
w
t
3
-000GLASST
Overview
0 37.5 75 150 225 300
Feet
December 7,2009
Board OT AdJUStPrent
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 15 of 16
20
:ItiE E l.s_e L /LE: 3 i._ W !.E M E
_ ..._.............
z_________._......__........_..._.._.._...._.___..._............__.....__._._._._. ...._....._...._...._..:__.......................... ......
..... ...
... ...
....._. .:. .s.....:-.:.::..
_....e..
.....
.
_ .._...__.
....................: ._ x :......:
: .........__.. ...y .. . ::::::::. ........ .
....—.....__=......—.......ss.....
..... ................_.........
.2i
.......—..
::............... .......... :Tiie ....... ....
.. _ _ _.z ....
......._....x.....
._.:...x....
.:.
.x_...
._
.—
ee
x... ..___......_.....__...... ........................................_ :.........._xAee4 .. _ ...:............mss: .......... ...::.-4' :::::: � __
................
.__...:_.. z£:axil:eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee2eeeieeieeiee£ecce: :: ......._........ x
......:::::::
__ _eee4_il'eeeeeeieeieeee?eeieT _
• ee£
te'e":eeeeeeeieeeeeeeee:eeeie— _
___£'.ee£:e::::..:£e£:::::::::'u£a???? �"__:_eeeeeeeieeeieeeiii- _ ___ _
eee :::. ............................. .. ..:::::::x:::_:::::. :i.
_x..:_..:.:........ !tit •__.._.....:.. __ _
.... ._.._..c_
. . .. E.x...
.._....
is
list
_..•._..•._...__._._a.s._.._...__..
_.
.................. ::::::::::::::: ...._....... ::z. ._.........._............... ......................._....._.._.__..............
........ ...� H.
::._xxx;_..
a....e:_....___:::::.
.......__._. .............. ._.
...._......_... ��'£eeeeeeee£eeeeeeeceeee:_ ......_..
.................. a............... .......... .
...... ........... .......... .. :........._.._._.... ...a.. . x .xz—
::eeTeieeeeeeRe, ::. ..........
Minims
.................. ........ ..... s ...a ..... ...___ _............. .................... ........................_..........._......_..._ ..::x: ...._
.......... .
: c .._.._..
._...............Ee::::::a_... 'TeE� .:::.. s-.reeeea;..._ _�_____. ........_.....::: .;___.._....:::cs:::c::-.=..::::::::::��-�_e::::x:::::::x:e::x ............._........_
-eeAiEeeeee£eeee�:e:: ee:SeA _
.......... ............ .........
HIM
......x_—g ._......._..... _ .�..:i is }£!!-_,ti�vwae•_ e _
...... z:eeeie:z::: ................. ....._ _ _
......._..._._ ..................._... _ .y;_m..... ..... ..:..amu z.s. _
1:ee: _ _ _se:eez:„�—_?- jeieeeeeeieeeeieee'::ee
..............Eeeeeee:eeeeeee:—� .: .... .. ._..... ...:::::
::E_=:.'�sFF..eseF.eeT ................ :.........:__ x:::::::::::::::::::::::::��:::.=::::::::s:::::::::Se�-'eF.. ¢— .............. ........
...........E......e:eeeeie:eee ...... ...... ....:z.. .x �_":::.................... _ ..............
:::::::::_.................. :::: ::::s...........__ x...z...£ .....eeeeeeeC-S:::eFee�sa:E_eeS. eeeeeijej s __
ill
MMMM:
._............................. ........._ ...._....__....__ _.............................._.... ......... ................... —::
. .... ................ _..........}e.., __.................................................teeeeeeeees:ee££es
.......... ...............c.. ............_. : x's?eeeeeeeeeee£eeeeeee2ee.........e:e:eeeeeeeeA?eeeeeeeee: ........... ............................ ,....:::_Yeeeeee
. ....................... ............ _..............— .....___..........._._,. :x_::x=x_:� ..................4z:leeeeeeee:e-�:::x::ccc£cccccl
is:
:ii—i=:iiiiii_ i ::::::::::::e:--:::x:ex--:x:x:x_- .-4.._...:._ _ _ .._e:££ '
...................................................._............ _Ac:Ece_Y...a...........x...........
_ . .yx..............._....... ,....¢'4i€ inE; iiiiiiiiiiiiii::rei_i _� ...._.... _._A..........
._........__ £¢.a......._... :_¢ x ..... x ._.......;,........................_.......__.....:_.. .. ...................................:..........:.%£i%ilii.
NN.Mun
man:
Mi:MMMUMU:
.__......_.................... :_..............._..._......_.._............._. ........... �.zxa¢:asM.s s:::::::::::::_
._..._.......................... .............__._......._........_......__. .......==fie_ --_______._.__ .............
........_ ....._. s e.=-;£g: eeeeFSFeeeeeeeee££ee£eF_.__e:-.::::eeeeeeee'�.
._......._........ ......_:_s.....s.......z..s_...................... .::.........................................._...........
._.......... .._.z_..........__._..._.______.._..__.._,._ :......_ ..._....__.....____._•__•_••__•s:::....
isst
._......... ._....__...................._._.__......_........_......._.. c:e.. ..._..__._............__....._._.
sis
.._..._ ...................._. �L:::a:::::::::::: F.....:
: ::::::. ..................._.._._......._..__..._...__.___. --ze ....;�_£__::::::::::::::::—:......
:x::::::::::�: ...... ...__....___..Yx_..;....., ,._E:_...: ::::::::::::::::::::.::::x:::::x¢'::eeeeee ................................_.........xx......... ...
._........_ ..............__.....__.. ...... ....._........_ __ I retie
._.......... ................._................_vv.._......................— :.
......_...... .................................................._............_�.......... ¢sa.._._ .. .........._.._._..x....
:::¢e:::___.__::::x:::x::c:a.... - .... .::c:e:::::::e—::zm::e sx._:::::::_............s.......................
.............. .....................................__......_..........._._._........_...._ x.:::::x:¢......:::a:_.:::x.::::e:e: —• ::::::::::...._,s.s..........._ .................__....................................£ieee
............. ......................................__...._._..._._.__............._.. _........_..__....._.__...._._._. .._ ... .__._. .......:x ...................�::x:::::: ...............
::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::x::::::::::x::::::::::::::::z::::::x:z:::::s :¢:::::::::::::::x:::e:x::::xx::::xx_
.......... @@ _.........._...._.._..._...............�,. ',i�,
sun
e ::::eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee£eieeeeeeeeeeee'eeeeeeee:eeeee4£=ee£e-£e£ee£.'
......................._.....x:::::::::::::........__......._..._..._. .._................ _.. --.—..._........_.. is
::e _xceeeeeeeeeeeeee£eeeeeeeeee:tie:eeee:eeeeee£'£:eee£::££' sit
a:e-e£ .__......................._......................_.x __..e _........ _... ,,,
..¢::......._.:x4 :x::..:::::::::::::.....:::::::¢:..::::::::::::::::
;._._........._...._._............................:............ ...._....._...... ...................................................._ -. 'A¢:::::::::::x:.......::::::::,z..
...._......... ¢exxxx :::::::: .....:c: ............. ......_......................._..................... _ .......e... ....a...;......
e £eeeeeeeeeee:e.::-.... ....... _
...;._sx:.._...._............... _...._Ace=.££P........ ....x:,e_a_
..._. .............................. :`sz�£ea-.
.............sit: .............._.........._............._._. ..:x:..............._i::::::::e::..............._ _s:£ ' ci£::..:
.::::::::::::s=:::::::::::::tie:::=:_:::. ...... ............... ............ee:x:::::3::.
.....................__......._..._.._ ..
_............. .......iE'"i_s=ix_:ee=:-- . 'eee i' e4_..._.._. ., In....--...-............_. tie§£eeeeeeeee_eeeeeeee__Se£k:eeie£££
......_........._..........__4 ., .a
st
__
::::......x.;c..........................
........e.. ...........
_......._._._....
__F:......_..e
e... _
... e .._..._..._.._ .£ ............:c. _
�e —
llin:
__.___.____ ... _ :......e ...y;. :�.
is
U is
is
.....
:—. ...
_.._......._....__.......__
....._........_........__....x. _ _
y, _ ....._...__..._•___..._..
N.
is s stirs.
M.
is
...._....... ....__.._._._.......ss .._._........_. ...... _
...__...__.._...._ __.......__........_ ..._....._.. ......
.—.d%Ecce=�_:_......................_.. ..._..... ........
—......_s..x:::::::.
is is
is
is is
is
is is
is
�:�.®x_kis
is
is
k -: k E � .E ; is
.........'.. is
. .:: is
7
is
' is
_ ais
iis
s
i is
is
2-::..::: --"lF:�.
;ea3": ie :. is
is
i l '4is
iE o
].6 ' Lf vet' [ A
isis
is
is is
Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3477 Jorgensen
Agenda Item 2
Page 16 of 16
TayeF BOA Meeting of December 7, 2009
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone:(479)575-8267
TO: Board of Adjustment
FROM: Andrew Garner, Senior Planner
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director
DATE: November 30, 2009
BOA 09-3479 (MULLINS/120 MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD, 523):
Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES for property located at 120 MARTIN
LUTHER KING BLVD. The property is zoned NC, NEIGHBORHOOD
CONSERVATION and contains approximately 0.14 acres. The request is for a variance
from the lot area requirements to allow a lot split. Planner: Andrew Gamer
BACKGROUND:
Property Description and Background: The subject property is located within the Walker
Park Neighborhood at the northeast comer of Martin Luther King Boulevard and Church
Avenue (120 Martin Luther King Boulevard) and is zoned NC, Neighborhood'
Conservation. The lot contains an existing approximately 960 square foot single family
home constructed in 1911 (98 years old). The home is located on the souther half of the
property and the northern half of the property is undeveloped. The house is accessed from a
side-loaded driveway on Martin Luther King Boulevard. Surrounding land use and zoning
is depicted in Table 1.
Table 1: Surrounding Land Use/Zoning
Direction from Site Land Use Zoning
North, East, West Single family residential NC, Neighborhood
Conservation
South Undeveloped; Multi-family residential; Church DG, Downtown General
Proposal: The applicant proposes to subdivide the lot into Tracts 1 and 2 of 3,004 square
feet each, resulting in two nonconforming lots as indicated in Table 2. The applicant's
stated intent is to build an additional detached single family residence on the new lot.
Table 2: Variance Request
Variance
Issue Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request
Tract 1
Lot Area 4,000 square feet 3,004 996 square foot variance
Tract 2
Lot Area 4,000 square feet 3,004 996 square foot variance
December 7,2009
K.IReports120091BOA Reports111-07-091BOA.09-3479(Mullins).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3479 Mullins
Agenda Item 3
Page 1 of 12
Public Comment: Staff has not received public comment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances to allow for the proposed lot
split as indicated on the submitted survey, subject to the following conditions of
approval:
1. The lot split shall be filed prior to building permit approval for Tract 1.
2. In order to retain the detached single family development pattern and density
of the immediate surrounding neighborhood, development on each of the new
tracts shall be limited to one detached single family residence.
3. In order to retain the traditional development pattern of the surrounding
neighborhood, homes on the new tracts shall be oriented with parking and
garages/carports located behind the front build-to zone. Garages/carports shall
not protrude forward from the principal fagade of the structure.
Additional Conditions/Comments:
trt��_?E...1 kl ; & t �...[ i[ s,r4€.l C €�
a#a�€.. .Cf c€:€€ rt€ ......:�CCr . ... .ars..._.€r_ .: �geatr_C_
CITY PLAN 2025 GOAL 1:
"We will make appropriate infill and revitalization our highest priorities."
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION:
City Neighborhood Area— Walker Park Neighborhood Master Plan
FAYETTEVILLE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE:
161.23 Neighborhood Conservation Zoning District
(A) Purpose. The Neighborhood Conservation zone has the least activity and a lower density than the other
(downtown) zones. Although Neighborhood Conservation is the most purely residential zone, it can
have some mix of uses, such as civic buildings. Neighborhood Conservation serves to promote and
protect neighborhood character. For the purposes of Chapter 96: Noise Control, the Neighborhood
Conservation district is a residential zone.
(B) Uses. -
(1) Permitted uses.
Unit 1 City-wide uses by right
Unit 8 Single-familydwellings
Unit 9 Two-family dwellings
Unit 41 Accessory dwellings
December 7,2009
K:1Reports120091BOA Reponsll2-07-091BOA 09-3479(Alulliw).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3479 Mullins
Agenda Item 3
Page 2 of 12
FINDINGS:
City of Fayetteville Unified Development Code
Section 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: Special conditions do not exist that are peculiar to the parcel directly
related to lot width. The property is a rectangle approximately 45 feet
wide and 133.50 feet deep, originally platted as part of Lot 1 in Block 22 of
Jennings Addition. This-is not an unusual lot size or shape, though it is
larger than the minimum requirements of the NC zoning district.
It is a special condition unique to property in this particular neighborhood
that qualifies it as appropriate for infill development consistent with the
City's adopted comprehensive plan (City Plan 2025). The City's
comprehensive plan provides the purpose. and intent for zoning
regulations. A comprehensive plan must be in place before zoning, is
adopted, according to state and federal law.
Many lots in this neighborhood or in the NC zoning district are not
appropriate for infill due to lack of street frontage, lot size, or the general
lot configuration. It is a special condition that the existing home is located
on the southern portion of the property directly facing Martin Luther King
Boulevard. As this is a corner lot, the remaining large backyard has the
potential to be developed with direct access onto Church Avenue. It is also
an unusual circumstance that the zoning criteria permits the property to
be developed for a two-family home (duplex), but the lot cannot be
subdivided and developed for two single family homes given the current lot
area regulations.
The requested variances, if subject to the recommended conditions of
approval, would allow infill and revitalization of this property consistent
with the City's comprehensive 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 zoning regulations would not deprive the
December 7,2009
K.IReports120091BOA Reports112-07-091BOA 09-3479(Mullins).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3479 Mullins
Agenda Item 3
Page 3 of 12
applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same
district. In its current configuration, the property may continue to be
utilized for one single family residence on a conforming lot, similar to the
other properties in this neighborhood, or it may be developed for a two-
family residence/duplex, in contrast to the surrounding single family
homes. The applicant proposes two lot area variances in order to create
two 3,004 square foot lots in the NC zoning district and develop the
additional lot for a single family residence. Staff finds that the variances
would not increase density over the current zoning if conditioned
appropriately; rather the variances would permit an additional detached
single family residence as opposed to a duplex. The variance would permit
infill on the property in a configuration similar to the surrounding
development pattern.
Staff finds that literal interpretation of the zoning regulations for lot
area in this situation conflict with the goals and objectives of City Plan
2025 to encourage appropriate infill development, to encourage and
promote attainable housing options, to encourage and provide more
opportunities for people to live and work in the City, and to promote
compact development in strategic locations. As City Plan 2025 is the
overriding adopted land use plan for the City and the background for
the zoning code, the policy to encourage appropriateinfill is a unique
and applicable consideration, and.approval of the variance will be, in
staffs opinion, "...in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning
ordinance."' in this particular case (Arkansas Code Annotated 14-56-
416(2)(B)(i)(2)). In addition, the variance will be in keeping with the
stated purpose of the Neighborhood Conservation, NC, zoning district
which, "Serves to promote and protect neighborhood character."
(Fayetteville UDC Section 161.23(A)).
3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not
result from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: The applicant's desire to split the property into two non-conforming lots
reduces the lot area below the minimum required. The existing
structure and layout of the lot predate the applicant, and therefore do
not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant could build a
duplex on the property in order to get the one additional residential
unit. However, such a proposal would not be in keeping with the
surrounding detached single family neighborhood, or the adopted
policies of City Plan 2025 to encourage appropriate infill
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 two requested lot area variances will not confer special
December 7,2009
K.-Reports120091BOA Reports112-07-091BOA 09-3479(Mullins).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3479 Mullins
- Agenda Item 3
Page 4 of 12
privileges on this applicant, in terms of density, land use or setbacks. Two
dwellings could be permitted on this property by developing it for a
duplex; however, it is the applicant's desire to construct one additional
detached single family residence. Staff finds that the applicant's proposal is
more consistent with goal No. 1 of City Plan 2025,and more appropriate in
a NC zoning district than developing the site for a duplex. Staff does not
find that meeting the goal for appropriate infill is a special privilege in this
case; rather it is the implementation of the adopted land use plan for the
City.
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: Existing nonconformities were not considered as a basis of the findings
stated in this staff report.
Section 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 maybe approved by the Board of Adjustment.
2. Public Hearing. A public hearing shall be held:
Finding: A public hearing is scheduled for'Monday,December 7, 2009.
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: Reasons are provided throughout this report that discuss the justification
for granting the variances. The variances are the minimum needed to
make possible the creation of two single family lots compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood. A variance is not needed to construct a duplex
on the property.
b. 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.
December 7,2009
K:Weports120091BOA Aeportsll2-07-091BOA 09-3479(Mullim).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3479 Mullins
Agenda Item 3
Page 5 of 12
Finding: Given the surrounding lot configuration and development pattern in
this older neighborhood with single family homes on narrow lots, staff
finds that the proposal to create two new lots as shown on the survey
would not be injurious to the neighborhood. Rather, the proposed lot
sizes and development pattern would be more compatible with the
surrounding land use, which consists of single family homes on small
lots, with conditions recommended herein. Also see discussion under
Findings No. A.1 and A.2. It is staffs finding that the granting of the
variance would be in keeping with the spirit of the zoning ordinance.
C. 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 approval, with conditions that development on
the new lots be limited to detached single family homes, and that
parking for the homes is side or rear-loaded in keeping with the
traditional neighborhood' character. Future development or re-
development of the site will require the property owner to meet all
applicable building setbacks and the build-to zone requirement.
d. 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: Single-family dwelling units are a use permitted by right in the NC zoning
district.
December 7,2009
K.lReports120091BOA Reportsll2-07-091BOA 09-3479(Mullins).doc Board of Adjustment
BOA 09-3479 Mullins
Agenda Item 3
Page 6 of 12