Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-05 - Agendas (2) 4 eLl114SAS 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,FEBRUARY 5,2007 at 3:45 p.m. Room 11 I.City Administration Building The following items will be considered: Oid Business: 1. BOA 06-2411 (OWENS,447): Submitted by SCOTT&CARLA OWENS for property located at 718 N. CREST DRIVE. The property is zoned RSF-4,SINGLE FAMILY-4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.47 acres. The request is for a T rear setback(an 8'variance)in order to construct a new 600 square foot detached studio/workshop. New Business: Planner: Andrew Gamer 2. BOA 00-2443(BOZARTH,527): Submitted by LEON M.&ELAINE A.BOZARTH for property located at 2761 TRAVIS LANE. The property is zoned RSF4,SINGLE FAMILY-4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The requirement is a 25'front setback and an 8'side setback. The request is for a 7'front setback(an 18'variance)and a 2' side setback(a 6'variance). Planner: Jesse Fulcher 3. BOA 07-2440(CENTRAL UNITED METHODIST,484): Submitted by Jorgensen&Associates for property located at 6 West Dickson Street. The property is zoned Main Street Center and contains approximately 6.02 acres. The request is a variance from the requirement for 75%minimum buildable street frontage for to allow a variance of 2%. Planner: Suzanne Morgan 4. BOA 07-2444(EICHMANN,444): Submitted by JUSTIN EICHMANN for property located at 902 W.CLEVELAND ST.&719-721 STORER. The property is zoned RMF-40,MULTI FAMILY-40 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.21 acres. The request is for variances of lot size and setbacks to bring a non-conforming structure into compliance and to allow for a lot split of the subject property. Planner[ Suzanne Morgan 5. BOA 07-2445(FIVE WEST MOUNTAIN,523): Submitted by JAMES FOSTER for property located at 5 WEST MOUNTAIN STREET. The property is zoned MSC,MAIN STREET CENTER and contains approximately 0.04 acres. The request is for a 0'rear setback(a 5'variance)to allow for the construction of a new multi-story building within the footprint of the existing nonconforming structure. Planner: Jesse Fulcher 6. BOA 07-2446(LOVING CHOICES,522): Submitted by KATIE ALLEN for property located at 275 S.DUNCAN AVENUE. The property is zoned RMF40,MULTI FAMILY-40 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.20 acres. The request is for a reduced front setback along W. Stone St.of 12'(a 13'variance.) Planner: Suzanne Morgan 7. BOA 07-2447(KAMINSKY,522):Submitted by LAURA KELLY for property located at 641 1/2 W.SIXTH STREET. The property is zoned I-1,HEAVY COMMERCIAL/LIGHT INDUST and contains approximately 0.32 acres. The request is for a 5'front setback(a 20'variance),a 3'side setback(a T variance),and a 4'rear setback(a 6'variance.) Planner: Suzanne Morgan S. BOA 07-2448(SHIREMAN,409): Submitted by MAUREEN SHIREMAN for property located at 1701 E.MISSION BLVD. The property is zoned RSF-4,SINGLE FAMILY-4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 2.00 acres. The request is for a reduced rear setback. Planner: Andrew Garner 9. BOA 07-2449(NOCK-BROYLES LAND DEV.,LLC,284): Submitted by NOCK BROYLES LAND DEVELOPMENT,LLC for property located at 3510 AND 3511 W.BELMONT CIRCLE. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY-4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.54 acres. The request is for a reduction in the bulk and area requirements in the RSF4 zoning district to allow for the creation of a new lot. Planner: Jesse Fulcher 10. BOA 07-2450(WM.LINDSEY,596): Submitted by WILLIAM LINDSEY for property located at 1614 S.HANSHEW ROAD. The property is zoned C-2,THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 0.69 acres. The request is for a 2'rear setback(an 18' variance). Planner: Jesse Fulcher 11. BOA 07-2451 (CABERNET/DE NOBLE,493): Submitted by DE NOBLE ARCHITECTS for property located at 615 WEST LAFAYETTE STREET. The property is zoned RMF-40, MULTI FAMILY - 40 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.27 acres. The requirement is 25'front setback and 20' side setback. The request is an 8' front setback(a 17' variance)and a 14'side setback(a 6' variance). Planner: Andrew Gamer 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 parties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD for bearing impaired are available for all public hearings;72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter,please call 479-575-8330. 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. 2007 Board of Adjustment Members Bob Nickle (Chairman) Sherrie Alt Robert Kohler Eric Johnson Karen McSpadden William Chesser James Zant 7elleV, fl BOA Meeting of February 5,2007 i 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,Director of Current Planning DATE: January 24, 2007 BOA 06-2411 (OWENS,447): Submitted by SCOTT & CARLA OWENS for property located at 718 N. CREST DRIVE. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.47 acres. The request is for a 7' rear setback (an 8'variance) in order to construct a new 600 square foot detached studio/workshop. Property Owner: Scott and Carla Owens Planner: Andrew Garner RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested rear setback variance based on the findings herein. Additional Conditions/Comments: BACKGROUND: January 2, 2007 BOA Meeting: This item was tabled at the January 2,2007 Board of Adjustment meeting because the applicant was not present. Property description: The subject property is located at 718 North Crest Drive. It is located within the RSF-4 zoning district and was platted and developed in compliance with the requirements of this zoning district. Crest Drive is located on Mount Sequoyah and is within the Hilltop/Hillside Overlay District. A 2,488 square foot house was constructed in 1996 compliant with all required building setbacks. Proposal: As shown in Table 1, the request is for a 7' rear building setback for a new 600 square foot detached workshop/studio. A total of approximately 240 square feet of this new structure will encroach 8' within the rear building setback. The requested variance would allow a 7' rear building setback where a 15' setback is required (an 8' variance). Table 1 Variance Request Variance Issue Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Request Rear Setback(HHOD) 15' 7' (an 8' variance) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Direction from Site I Land Use Zoning North, South,East, and West Single family detached RSF-4, Residential Single-Family — dwellings 4 units/acre GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential 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 for this property related to the rear building setback. As a whole,the lot is of sufficient width and area to allow the construction of a single family dwelling,which has occurred. That the owner wants to construct a new detached 600 square foot workshop/studio is not a special condition of the property. Should other new development be proposed in the same district or on the same street,they would be required to conform to the 15' rear setback requirement as does the subject property. To grant a variance for K.Weports120071BOA Reports102-05-071BOA 06-2411(Owens).do encroachment of a new nonconforming workshop/studio on this lot would not be consistent with the intent of the City's zoning regulations to prevent and discourage nonconforming uses and structures (Fayetteville UDC 164.12), and to prevent accessory structures and uses from being constructed within required setbacks (UDC 164.02(A)(3)). 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 related to rear building setback would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same district. This property has been utilized for single-family use for 10 years and can continue to be enjoyed in its current condition. Staff would recommend that the current owner modify the location and/or size of the new accessory structure to comply with the requirements of the RSF-4 zoning district. 3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Finding: The requested variance is 'a result of the applicant's desire to construct a new accessory structure that would encroach within the. building setback. Staff does not find that the shape and/or size of the lot, or topography, or any other issues presented in the applicant's request area special circumstance particular to this lot which would necessitate the need for a variance. 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 rear building setback variance would confer special privileges on the applicant. There is not a special condition or circumstance that exists in this case that would be required for a variance of the rear building setback compared to other lots in the district in a similar condition. 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. K.-Weports12007WA Reportsl02-05-07WOA 06-2411(Owema).doc Finding: No existing nonconformities or other nonconformities were 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,February 5,2007. 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 rear setback variance is not justified by the reasons set forth in the application. The applicant can still make reasonable use of the lot while complying with the required setbacks. There is adequate space for the applicant to construct an accessory structure or addition to the exiting home and still meet all required setbacks, or continue utilizing- the existing dwelling that meets ordinance _ requirements. 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 the rear setback variance would not be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of zoning regulations that discourages creating nonconforming structures. Also see Findings No. 1,2, 3, and 3.a. 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 denial of the requested variance. Should the Board of Adjustment choose to grant the request, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: K.IReports12007WOA Reports102-05-071BOA 06-2411(Owens).doc 1. Any new development shall comply with all Zoning development regulations including building setbacks, except those varied by the Board of Adjustment and/or shown on the attached site plan. 2. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of any construction. All existing structures, easements and utilities shall be located on the site plan submitted for building permit consideration. 3. A solid evergreen vegetative screen shall be planted between the new structure and the rear (east) property line, the species and location of which to be approved by the Urban Forester prior to building permit The vegetative planting shall be planted at a density to become view- obscuring within two years from the date of planting. 4. Development on the property shall comply with all requirements specified in the Hillside/Hilltop Overlay District. 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: The proposed use is for an accessory structure to a single family residence, a use permitted by right in the RSF-4 zoning district. K.Teporls120071BOA Reports102-05-07WOA 06-2411(Owens).doc City of Fayetteville Unified Development Code 161.07 District RSF-4,Residential Single-Family—Four Units Per Acre (A) Purpose. The RSF4 Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of low density detached dwellings in suitable environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted uses. 11 Unit 1 Ci -wide uses by right Unit Single-famil dwelling (2) Conditional uses. Unit 2 Ci -wide uses by conditional use permit Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities (C Density. Single-family Two-family dwellings dwellin s 11 Units per acre 1,4 o less 7 or less Bulk and area regulations. Single-family Two-family -- dwellings dwellings eoT>.a Lot minimum width 70 ft. SO ft. Lot area minimum 8,000 sq.ft. 12,000 sq.-ft- Land area per 8,000 sq.ft. 6,000 sq.ft. dwelling unit Hillside Overlay 60 R 70 ft. - District Lot minimum width Hillside Overlay 8,000 sq.ft 12,000 sq.-ft District Lot area minimum Land area per 8,000 sq.ft. 6,000 sq.ft. dwellin unit - (E) Setback re uirements. FRONT SIDE REAR 26 ft. 8 ft. 20 ft. 1 kl (F) Height. Structures in this District are limited to a building height of 45 feet. The height of a proposed structure may only be increased above 45 feet by obtaining a variance after hearing by the Planning Commission. Existing structures that exceed 45 feet in height shall be grandfathered in, and not considered nonconforming uses. (G) Building area. On any lot the area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40%of the total area of such lot. (Code 1991,§160.031;Ord.No.4100,§2(Ex.A),6-16-98;Ord.No.4178,8-31-99;Ord.4858,4-18-06) K IReports120071BOA Reports102-05-07WOA 06-2411(Owens).doc hj. vY 0-i ��•' a . � a zO . fie W Wa0Z '1 coQ.W 0 z t Ldz Un as oo w LJ W c=now� zLiro3 ; t ® p F—.. - J Of L 7�<� O U) mo0� Ocl II-- > — < 1$� �� 30l O <f O i� L au 6,q I ~ U 0 N UJ �I Lil S00'05'56"W 125.67' >- oI " 25.00' 100.6T 3s' to Q7 ¢! s r- - ® 1 15' B.S_B. AS PER HHOD p O' B.S.B. AS S/D PLAT x 00� N d ' cl oa dtlx � &a �n > < zoz 0..: OK z ° _ yea' a 9R� � . 12.b' Wx dll 4 4 KK U) RU 3`L i F v 'xW co yia Q� I 23d'0 )II z 3Qj w w 24� b I Oq g t O II "� "-U " I z4. wjga z v z zl D:I O 75.o' t&Y y 77.3' ( Op wx W Y ml } Im N 11� I <0Ld c WO >w G CC) ln� m v- _ --�.,! m I'7 NOS O Q �O t co q 25' _S.B_ FER S/ PLAT Imp _ _o _ 15 S_B. AS PER H Zzlp � 3 Fv� z 25.00' 99.53' R/w-"#—© N00'55 6 W 124.54' — —R/w N EP a . N CREST PRIVE (ASPHALT, 45' R/W)T spy x a Sx {L t _ c X53 i 70-" a _ ^AW u y ry c ; f 3 i imyEi°R� �+ 3 7®9 r 7 4 R 77pW J. i Sx 6091-, A f S _ » C ... ) � '� obi s ➢d i., `�'i Y rt BOA06-2411 QW E N S Close Up View _ 1;. RSF 4 RSF 4 y- O j� SUBJECT PROPERTY ti �W I � -RDIXWDOD TRI f 3 I z 2 6 i RSF-4 RS114 OVBNIeW Legend oo0ocp 00004 OvenaY DislriG—FLOODWAY 500 YEAR — 100 YEAR --- LIMIT OFSTUDY - - -Basetlee Profile O Fayetteville Oe Ide Cdy WA00-2411 vW.,.GM..Foogmnt-2004 _ FdI15ide fiMep Overlay District 0 75 150 300 450 600 Feet BOA06-2411 OWENS One Mile View �� —r��p..• f ASFJr � R6iN t :'r/ L!� _�V t 'RSFd '^IL �'.� r--1-a -• � �• 9Fd r G2�, h '.r ASJt3L=+�f RA A71 f 'F SUBJECTPROPERTY I -�' Lg ASPdtI RSF _ .II �- •� I 1 _•-^`-"� i ,___F]ANaR OR wG RSFi t r7 IFktaFJ � TiSF ��F 7 t •- I - k N A � , n ca ,y 1 RSF-d j .. i 1 - 24z Aim IST R _ I SPINEL Lf�K 9G I A-.��p G - _, cx J z s— Overview Legend Boundary - - Subject Property r�,•Planning Area MM BOA06-2411 cP000� o°oc000°Overlay Divhict Outside City Legend ------ --- ® Hillside-Hilltop O eday District 0 0.25 0.5 1 M les BOA Meeting of February 5, 2005 anxa nuns 125 W. Mountain St, Fayetteville,AR 72701 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS Telephone:(479)575-8267 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Board of Adjustment FROM: Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner THRU: Jeremy Pate, Current Planning Director DATE: January 29, 2007 BOA 07-2443(BOZARTH,527): Submitted by LEON M.&ELAINE A.BOZARTH for property located at 2761 TRAVIS LANE. The property is zoned RSF-4,RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The requirement is for a 25' front setback and an 8' side setback. The request is for a 5' front setback(a 20' variance) and a 2' side setback (a 6' variance). Property Owner: Leon Bozarth Planner: Jesse Fulcher RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested front and side building setback variances based on the findings herein, and recommends that the existing structure be removed or relocated outside of the required building setbacks. The`" Ql ])ITIONS.OF APPROVAL%'fisted is hd- repdrtareaeeepteil to torakucthoutexcepirouby,tl e` eiirity;reg1'10*g approval of this varianee. BACKGROUND: On October 5, 2005 a neighbor filed a complaint with the Building Safety Division regarding a carport (boat cover) that was erected on the subject property without a building permit (photos depicting this structure are provided in this report). Mr. Bozarth contacted the Building Safety Division the same day as the complaint and stated that he would come in for a building permit. As of October 17th, no one had applied for a building permit; accordingly Building Safety mailed a K:IReports1200AROA Reports102-05-071BOA 07-2443(Bozarth).doc violation letter to the owners. The owners applied for a building permit on November 8, 2005 however; the location of the carport did not meet required setbacks. Consequently, the applicant applied for a front and side setback variance on December 5,2005,which was denied by the Board of Adjustment. After the request was denied in 2005 the applicant proceeded to the Circuit Court of Washington County,but later dropped the appeal. The owner has now brought forth a modified variance request for Board of Adjustment review. The variance request was modified by the applicant after removing approximately 3' from the front portion of the carport structure. Property description: The subject property is located at 2761 Travis Lane,west of Stonebridge Rd and north of Huntsville Rd. Proposal: The owner has erected a 14' x 19' carport in the driveway,for the purpose of covering a; boat. The owners have applied for the variances so that the carport can remain in its current location. Table 1 Variance Request Variance Issue Ordinance Requirement Applicant's Re uest Front Setback 25' 5' (a 20' variance Side Setback 8' 2' (a 6' variance) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Direction from Site Land Use Zoning North Single Family Residence RSF-4,Residential Single-Family South Single Family Residence RSF-4, Residential Single-Family East Single Family Residence RSF-4,Residential Single-Family West Single Family Residence RSF-4, Residential Single-Family GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential Neighborhood Area FINDINGS: City of Fayetteville Unified Development Code Section 156.02 ZONING REGULATIONS K:IReports1200700A Repora102-05-07180A 07-2443(Bozarth).doc 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: There are no special conditions or circumstances which are peculiar to the property or structure involved with this request. This lot was platted in 1990 in accordance with current zoning regulations and has ample space on the property to erect a carport which does not encroach within the building setbacks that are applied to all surrounding properties. The fact that the applicant was not aware of the setback regulations does not make this circumstance unique or peculiar. 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 fact that the boat and associated carport cannot be located outside of the building setbacks is not a result of the zoning regulations. Rather,the location is limited by the placement of the home,privacy fence and inground pool. The location of these structures have limited the functionality of the property and therefore the literal interpretation of zoning regulations related to setback requirements do not deprive the applicant of any rights enjoyed by surrounding properties. 3. Resulting Actions. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Finding: The request for a building setback variance is a result of the actions of the applicant. Had the applicant applied for a building permit prior to erection of the structure,staff could have worked with the applicant to locate the structure appropriately on the lot. As the applicant has already constructed the carport and is now requesting the variance, staff finds that there are no conditions unique to this variance request that are not a result of the actions of the 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. KlReports120071BOA Reports102-05-0700A 07-2443(Bozarth).doc -- n Finding: Granting the requested setback variances would grant special privileges on this applicant which are denied to surrounding properties within the same zoning district. 5. Nonconforming Uses. No nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no permittedornonconforming use of lands, structures,or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. Finding: The applicant has supplied photographs of various structures that appear to be nonconforming structures. However, staff did not consider nonconforming structures 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,February 5,2007. 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 front and side setback variances are the minimum variances necessary to accommodate the proposal. 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: Staff does not rmd that the granting of the requested variances would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of Zoning Chapter 160-165. However, the location of the structure does not impede visibility or pose any known threat to the health, safety or welfare of the public. C. Conditions and Safeguards. In granting any variance, the Board of KAReporu00071BOA Reports102-05-071BOA 07-2443(Bozarth).doc Adjustment may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the zoning regulations. Finding: Staff has recommended denial of this variance request. 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: An accessory structure to the principle single family use,which consists of less than 49% of the total area of the principle structure, is permitted within the RSF-4 zoning district. K:IReporW20071BOA ReporisW-05-071BOA 07-2443(Bozarlh).doc 161.07 District Rsf-4,Residential Single-Family—Four Units Per Acre (A) Purpose. The RSF-4 Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of low density detached dwellings in suitable environments,as well as to protect existing development of these types. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted uses. Unit 1 City-wide uses by right Unit 8 1 Single-family dwelling (2) Conditional uses. Unit 2 City-wide uses b conditional use permit Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities (C) Density. Single-family Two-family dwellin s dwellings Units per acre 14 or less 7 or less - (D) Bulk and area regulations. Single-family Asq. dwellin s dwellings Lot minimum width 70 ft. Lot area minimum 8,000 sq.ft.Land area per 8,000 sq.ft dwellin unit (E) Setback requirements. Front Side Rear 25 ft. 8 ft. 1 20 ft. (F) Height.None. (G) Building area. On any lot the area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40%of the total area of such lot. (Code 1991,§160.031;Ord.No.4100,§2(Ex.A),6-16-98;Ord.No.4178,8-31-99) K.Reports12007ROA Reports 102-05-07WOA 07-2443(Bozarth).doc I City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Fayetteville,AR 72701 Service Request Detail (479)521-7700 Fax(479)575-8316 - Report Date 11/30/2005 04:31 PM Submitted By Page 1 - - - -- ii Service# 28936 Problem BDO02 BUILDING WITHOUT PERMIT j Address 2761 E TRAVIS ST j O FAYETTEVILLE AR 72701- j i Call Date 10/05/2005 11:12 Priority 03 LOW PRIORITY Duration of Call 00:00 j Taken By 816 CATTANEO,STEVEN M. Responsibility BD BUILDING SAFETY #of Calls 1 j Source CALLIN Project III Customer Contact Requested Budget# r Seorice Relylest P ------------- Schedule (inspected) - �I Inspect Inspected from 10/06/2005 08:29 AM to 10/06/2005 08:29 AM by 2636 DENNIS SANDERS.I Resolve Overdue for resolution as of 10/14/2005 11_12 AM Location Area Sub-Area District Map# Parcel Template Type A/P If Asset Name ISAACS MOM FIrst,MI ELSA, Title Address city I State/Province ZIP/PC Country ❑ Foreign .Reference# j E-Mail REDBIRD7@ALLTEL.NET j Day Phone (479)582-5885 x Evening Phone Call Date 10/05/2005 11:12 Taken By 816 Comments The owners to 2761 put up a large carport,rapidly,in one afternoon. No permit is visible,no variance either. When I asked Mrs.Bazarth about the missing permit,she said,"We have that covered."and walked away. I told her I'd call the city(4:50pm!). Their phone numbers are 582-0168 582-0053 What can I be done?-....Elsa Isaacs ' There are no additional callers for this servicenumber I Comments 10/5/05 No record of permit at this address. Called number given by citizen and left message on recorder to contact me...SMC: I OOR:Leon 8 Elaine Bozarih,2761 Travis,Fay.72701 I 10/5/5 Mr-Bozarth called and he will be in asap to make application for a permit. , SMC 1016/05 portable metal -carport.owner needs to check with planning to make sure the building is within setbacks.need a permit.DLS. j 10/17/05 No one has made application for permit.Sending Violation Notice Certified mail...SMC 11/1/05 Owner called.They are going to the Board to ask for a variance to allow the carport. They will apply for permit. SMC I j i I I I i December 10, 2006 2761 Travis Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Board of Adjustments Attention: Chair A. We have the only property in our neighborhood that has two concrete drives, and this is the only place on this property to install the boat cover. B. See Attached Pictures: Other properties within the same area as our property, which possess similar structures, with less than minimum setbacks C. Special conditions would not result, but instead would be applicable to other area properties. D. Granting the variance requested will not show any special privilege that is not already enjoyed by other area property owners, but will merely provide a well constructed weather protection for the family boat. F"L AT-OF-SURIVE., �ICE TRAVIS — STREET - - 4' CONC. 5 W_ J R 90:0 / 5` - ` R W /Yy ^!� CO MC.- ,M '_ IctAd�,E ;BOAT' [s✓ Q CO DRIVE Ab W. ' t :r 20.6• ." .. .26.9• SINGLE:STORY '.c « . -BRK-6 FRN oe - . 2761 - - - _. .. It C o 66,0'. p pq.p n. �A/yam p - 2 CONC PATIOJEJ n r' PPL CX%stay « 6 LOT A,edity Rei✓ — I I _ ` 10' /-fNGC' w FRAME � �( G� L _ STOR. g19/rt" /:nr S %u�EWhy[ ft L !� wTIL. EENT. LOT CDR. _ ,. .. (90.5•L.a ��I fEl� 90.0:4 CA LE IN FEET J"" g ,o IS o 30 RECEIVED .�i..�' �- 6cCE€ 12 2006 N/w`�" � rc ITY OF FAYETTEVILLE SURVEY DESCRIPTION cERrlFicaTlox Lot Numbered Eleven 00-of Stonebridge Subdivision,. a I hereby certify, this day, that subdivision to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas as per plat of I have completed a survey of the said subdivision on file in the office of-the Circuit Clerk and above described lands and found Ex-Officio Recorder of Washington County, Arkansas. (llo,dilions to be as shown hereon. ...Owners: Leon & Elaine Bozarth NEIGHBORHOOD PETITION December 10, 2006 We the undersigned, being of sound mind and of our own free choice, living connected to or on the same street as 2761 Travis Street, Fayetteville, AR, find no fault or disagreement with the placement of the boat cover on said property: NAME: ADDRESS: 2� 3� S ST �; 11e ��/Utn� C��rv�C o269S F i✓c�,'S t-� ��v, ! l `�rp✓i 1 Y ,7.7z 0iaAl a RECEIVED E G 12 2006 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING DIVISION Board of Adjustment December 5, 2005 Page 2 BOA 05-1843 (BOZARTH, 527): Submitted by LEON M_ & ELAINE A. BOZARTH for property located at 2761 TRAVIS LANE. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The request is for a 2' front setback (a 23' variance) and a 2' side setback (a 6' variance). Nickle: We will proceed with hearing staffs comments, we will ask staff some questions, and then we will ask the applicant for comment and may have some questions for them. After that, we will open it up for public comment and at the end of public comment we will close that and bring it back to the board for a decision and a vote if necessary. The first item submitted is BOA 05-1843, Jesse would like to fill us in on that. Fulcher: This property is located at 2761 Travis Lane, just north of Huntsville Road, west of Stonebridge road. A little background on how this came about. It's a carport, pictures included in the report, but it's being used to cover a boat. It was erected without a building permit. Neighbor had called to complain to building safety, regarding this. Contact was made with the property owners at that time, which case they did come in and apply for a building permit_ When staff began to review the building permit, the carport did not meet required front and side setbacks, so they requested variance for those setbacks to allow the carport to remain. Staff did review this, we did not find any special conditions or circumstances peculiar to this property or to the structure involved. This is a platted subdivision that was done in 1990 with current zoning regulations. There is space on the lot where a carport or another structure can be located with out encroaching on the required building set backs. The granting of this variance would grant a special privilege on the applicant and the surrounding properties in the same zoning district. Therefore, staff would recommend denial of the requested setback variances from the front and side and would recommend the structure to be moved and located where it would meet the required building set backs. Nickle: Thank you Jesse, is the owner or applicant here? Bozarth: Yes,sir. Nickle: If you can identify yourself please. Bozarth: My name is Leon Bozarth, my boat storage is on the second driveway that there. It's been there, ever since the house has been constructed. That is all it's going to be used for, boat storage. It sits there with a cover on it. That's my personal residence; I'm not trying to do anything that would deflate the property value of anything. As a mater of fact, I own two properties less than a block from that area. The one right down the street, Board of Adjustment December 5, 2005 Page 3 the other one directly behind the adjoining property of my home. So, I'm certainly not trying to obstruct anything. I'm not aware of anything on my property where I can put that building and be able to get my boat to it, without going thm the front_ I have uh; I know it's pretty close to the property line on the east side, which belongs to Mr. Linn Robins, who is with me today. I'd like to have it. I actually went to Missouri to check out one that would be color matched with my trim and stuff of the house. As you can see, it matches. It's not a round one, it's actually gabled. It has little overhangs. I've tried to do every thing that would be nice and appropriate with the house. Robins: I'm Linn Robins and I own the adjoining property and I have no objections, it's a nice looking building. No problem with me, I think its fine. Nickle: Any other comments or questions? Yes ma'am would you identify yourself. Issac: My name is Elsa Isaac and I'm the women who called that one afternoon and my basic statement is that if code is observed more of the breach than in the observance of code is ignored it sets precedents for any other property owner to ignore code either in large or small elements— large or small things. And I think out of respect to the law the permit should have been asked for initially, and the adjustments could have been made before the fact, rather than ex post facto, after the fact. The code is not ordimental, its suppose to be useful. And it has underlinying purposes, safety, aesthetics, access. Mr. Bozarth does make a good point, I don't see anyway place he can bring his boat back to his backyard, given the position of his house. This being the second drive, it does seem like the only other place to put his boat, yet it is too close to the street. What is the set back in the front?20 feet....and 8 on the sides, is that correct? Nickle: 25 foot setbacks in the front. Issac: Oh, 25 foot setbacks in the front, I see. Alright, basically those are my objections. I think it should be modified to coincide with code_ And so, I've said everything I need to say. Nickle: Okay, thank you_ Anyone else like to speak to this? Bozarth: I'd like to add one more thing. Before I went to the trouble of purchasing this building, I actually called and thought I was talking with someone in planning when I checked on this at the beginning_ But,I explained what I was going to do and the gentleman I talked to said that this is all I needed, talked with some couple of other people with in the building, and was told Board of Adjustment December 5, 2005 Page 4 I wouldn't need a permit either. So I proceeded, obviously I proceeded wrong. I did try to receive the right direction. McSpadden: Do you have any reference on that? Bozarth: I can only speak for myself. McSpadden: Do you remember who you spoke with? Bozarth: It must have been 3 or 4 months ago. Nickle: Okay, if there is no further comment, we will bring it back to the board for discussion. Kohler: I guess we have had situations like this before, and from our stand point, or should I say from my stand point. The only way to distinguish someone following the law and someone not following the law would be to deny the request of the one not following the law. The only way we can figure out how to deal with situations like this. Someone who follows the law can't be rewarded over and above just because they followed the law. This code applies to this piece of property and from what I can tell, you're not supposed to be able to park your boat in front of your house. According to this code. It precludes the structure of this size, in front of your house. Bozarth: You're saying, I can not, excuse me, I'm not suppose to speak now. Kohler: According to these allowable setbacks, and according to your access. Unless you put it in your existing concrete driveway, but then you got a front setback issue. Bozarth: I have two driveways. Kohler: The other driveway, you're not violating a side setback issue, you're only violating the front setback issue. From what I can tell, this code does not allow this type of structure in front of your house. Pure and simple. McSpadden: Regardless of setbacks. Kohler: No, because of the setbacks. McSpadden: Not because of the type of the structure. Kohler: Right, because of the setbacks. The people who don't put these in front of their house, even though they want to put one in front of their house, they don't because of the setbacks_ It's unfortunate, you didn't check that out Board ofAdjustment December 5, 2005 Page 5 before hand. We have no way of knowing if this was intentional or not_ And often time, we get these kind cases. Sometimes its intentional, sometimes its not_ We do not know that. I don't know how to deal with it, other than to deny it. Isaac: Am I allowed to speak or am I out of order here? Nickle: We really closed the public comment, unless one of the board members has a specific question for you. Isaac: I think I have a solution. Nickle: If there is a solution, feel free. Isaac: I have quite a bit of land on either side of my fence; I'm inviting the Bozarths, to park their boat there. As how he's going to keep it covered, that will be up to him. But those are largely unused segments of my property and rent free, in perpetuity. Considering I'm 70,perpetuity is not that long. But I'm going to invite them, if they wish too. McSpadden: Where is your property? Isaac: I'm at the end of the cul-de-sac. Nickle: Anymore comments from the board,motion? MOTION: Kohler: I move that we deny the request. Nickle: Motion, second? McSpadden: Second. Nickle: A motion and a second, any further discussion? Roll Call: McSpadden, Johnson, Nickle, Kohler, upon the completion of roll call the motion to deny the Variance was approved by a vote of 3-1-0, with Johnson voting no. Garner: The motion carries_ � i � � � ' � 1 �� 4 SF 4�'{ � �I 'ih � h,-Y k � )� �� b. � 9. ,. �' ��� "`i 1 / 1,��� Ri �i �.,1v� J ��, j { r :r 4" �:-, - .,� „ ' 5 � �ii !° re, - � t_ �z x" �.; i •:tel - �\ _ �.. �9 ... ._:� ,...:.yam � ` n _ �� � g��r Y y: of �tfi .rt a 1� ,,,r"_. . _ � � I y i i ��i ♦ s i 1 � •� � ♦/ • � � ` ,;1:�:�+ ,� c:. � ,y �"' t3. t� 1?N.�3ry 'b SRV i� 4 '�� � ��� ��. Z �L f� �L�'��4�� �Q�ti,�g+z ' f��F� t i � k . �'� a � ) v 1 _ _ 1 f hy�Gl �� h� � �3 � e4 � .._� � I �K _ �zx t z =- �. � A f cra � ��� - _ � � _ �� � a z;�, �� � - ��,�z u .��- �' �, =,_�� ,g,Fv-�� r � �� A • � � � � dY � a �. � �`� *:� 1 � e h. 3: F 6 D� _ Y Y� J Y �-f }4 .Cl t \ � y.�� ` ... `��% �� . �o. — — _ , . . . � �� ^_ ��� t rSR y Yy. ^. 4 _ ?a S � {nom �� � � '�+v f -.'_A}� j. 3 � }S � � � I