Proposed variance finds controversy in Ash Grove; variance tabled

On Monday, Aug. 3, Ash Grove Alderman Pat Hurley presented a request for a variance of the Ash Grove Municipal Code during a hearing held prior to that evening’s ash Grove Board of Aldermen meeting. Hurley’s request was to be allowed to divide a property he owns, located at 517 E. Prairie Lane, into three separate tracts; two of which would be 69.92 feet in length; just short of the city’s minimum 70-foot-width requirement.
According to the minutes of the meeting, Mayor Pro-Tem Troy Watts started the hearing by stating “that this public hearing was for the variance of the 70-foot lot width, and had nothing to do with Washington Street or any sewer issues, which were a few of the reasons for appearance on the agenda request forms that were submitted.”
Neighbors speak out
Since then, some people have objected to not being able to speak about those issues at the meeting. One of them was Danny Davis, whose property is located downhill from Hurley’s. He said he felt he and others who spoke against the variance were not given “a fair shake” at the meeting.
“They started off the meeting with Washington Street being opened up or any sewer issues could not be brought up at that meeting,” he said. “It had nothing to do with the variance. My personal opinion was, it had everything to do with the variance.”
Cathy Owen, another neighbor of Hurley’s who also spoke against the variance at the hearing, said she felt it “made no sense” to not allow anyone to speak about extending Washington Street.
“All of the surrounding neighbors were at that hearing,” she said, “and all of them opposed to it, because they knew what was going to come next was that they were going to talk about putting in that road, but they didn’t want us to talk about the road. They just wanted us to talk about the variance. Well, to me that didn’t make any sense, because if you’re putting in a third house, then you would have to extend that road, so to me, it was an altogether thing that they didn’t want to talk about that road because that’s going to upset a lot of people.”
Davis and Owen also objected to the variance itself. Davis said he believes that if Hurley is granted the variance and he builds on the tracts, it will increase flooding on his property during a heavy rainfall.
Owen said she objects to the variance because, in addition to the flooding issues it would create, Washington Street would be extended through her property.
“In order to access that third (tract) that they’re wanting to do, it would mean extending Washington Street to that back lot, and if that happens, then that’s going right through my yard and through my garden,” she said.
Another perceived issue
Local business owner Marc Schwenn, who also spoke at the meeting, had a different objection. Schwenn stated he objected to what he perceived as “outright falsehoods” being told by Watts and Alderman Bill Wagner. He said they claimed to have no prior knowledge of Hurley’s plans for the property, but Hurley, with his daughter and son-in-law, had presented his plans at a meeting earlier in the year.
“They talked about extending Washington Street,” he said. “They talked about if they built this, they would probably have to put in a pump station, and the Hurleys and his son-in-law agreed that we would be responsible for putting in a sewage lift station to lift it up to the main line. They talked about how they wouldn’t require them to pave the streets or driveways within that area where they built these houses because they wanted to get water-permeable materials; that way it wouldn’t cause flooding because there is a big issue about flooding in Greene County due to paved driveways.”
Ronessa Williams, a friend of Schwenn’s, confirmed that Hurley presented his request at a Planning and Zoning Committee meeting that both she and Schwenn attended earlier in the year, though she could not confirm that either Watts or Wagner were present at the meeting.
“In the meeting that I was in attendance, there were plans that were presented for a few houses, I believe,” she said. “They were like blueprint plans … That’s what happened at the meeting I was at.”
In a response to a media inquiry, Watts defended not permitting discussion of flooding at the hearing.
“As I and other council members stated, this variance has nothing to do with any flooding concerns,” he said. “The only thing it does have to do with is Mr. Hurley’s request to divide the parcel into three parcels.”
Watts also said the purpose of the meeting was to give residents a chance to voice their opinion on Hurley’s variance request.
“The meeting … was the public hearing to allow concerned, vested residents the opportunity to voice their concerns to, or not to, allow the variance to be approved,” he said. “The next step is a board of adjustment meeting to allow, or not to allow, the variance. The board of adjustment makes decisions in matters of planning and zoning. The City of Ash Grove, at this time, does not have an active board of adjustment, so, by law, the city council acts as the board of adjustment. A separate meeting, like that of the public hearing, will be held for the council to act as the board of adjustment and vote on the variance.”
Watts maintains P and Z, not city council, had seen plans
Watts also reiterated that the Ash Grove Board of Aldermen had no advance knowledge of Hurley’s plans for the property.
“At the time of the Public Hearing, council knew nothing of any such plans,” he said. “Council was accused of lying about not knowing ahead of time of the public hearing and what Mr. Hurley was ultimately wanting to do with the parcel if granted the variance. Come to find out, Mr. Hurley had approached the Planning and Zoning (P and Z) Board about the possibilities of building on the back parcel, not city council. As in the case of most Planning and Zoning meetings with residents, council knew nothing of the meeting.”
Watts stated he understood Hurley approached the P and Z Board briefly but did not present any plans to the board.
“According to Jerry Kane, the council member who is on the Planning and Zoning Board … Mr. Hurley met briefly, maybe last year, with Planning and Zoning, inquiring if the back part of the parcel could be developed,” Watts said. “There were no plans, on paper, presented to the P and Z Board to review. The P and Z Board told Mr. Hurley what was required for building lots in the city. The only instance that council was aware of Mr. Hurley wanting to develop any property was when, last year, Mr. Hurley and his son approached council about a subdivision east of town, on property owned by his son, that would need to be brought into the city limits.”
Board tables variance request
At the Ash Grove Board of Aldermen meeting, Monday, Aug. 17, Hurley’s variance request, as well as a request to vacate Washington Street, was tabled unanimously and indefinitely by the board.