Driveway variance request in Burnet leads to dispute
J-Bar Enterprises LLC owner David Jamar requested a variance from the Burnet Zoning Board of Adjustment to allow for the material of his driveway at 5388 U.S. 281 South to remain gravel as he further develops the site. Staff photo by Nathan Bush
The Burnet Zoning Board of Adjustment ordered three city leaders to testify in an upcoming meeting about a variance request for a gravel driveway at 5388 U.S. 281 South. A hearing on the request from David Jamar of J-Bar Enterprises was held on March 28.
Jamar said city officials consistently misled him on city zoning regulations for the driveway.
“It has been very difficult,” Jamar told DailyTrib.com after the meeting. “They say one thing and then deliver something totally different.”
Board members asked to hear future testimony from City Manager David Vaughn, Fire Marshal Johnny Caraway, and City Engineer Eric Belaj.
“The best way for you to know what the intended message was of these people is to get them in front of you,” Assistant City Manager Habib Erkan told the board.
The disagreement originated from a Burnet zoning ordinance passed in 2012 that requires commercial properties to have paved driveways as opposed to gravel or other aggregate driveways.
“In that site development regulation, paved driveways, parking areas, and sidewalks are required,” Burnet Planning Manager Leslie Kimbler told the board. “That is why we’re here for the variance request today.”
Jamar first encountered problems with city staff during a meeting in August 2022 following his decision to develop the site.
“Eric Belaj, your city engineer, questioned the paving of the driveway and parking areas, and I explained that my intent was to keep the driveway as-is with compacted gravel, to which he agreed, excluding the handicapped parking,” Jamar said. “He stated that while compacted gravel is acceptable for the driveway, we must use either asphalt or concrete for the handicap parking.”
City fire officials also found the site’s gravel driveway to be fine, Jamar said, so long as the property owner installed signs for the fire lane in place of striping. A fire marshal review a few weeks later changed that.
“Mr. Caraway agreed that the compacted gravel drive that we currently had met the requirements of the code but that he was directed by the fire chief to enforce an asphalt or concrete drive,” Jamar said. “He went as far to say that it was an unenforceable requirement because of all the other businesses in the area that were not paved, namely Collier Materials across the street.”
Jamar referred to an additional 11 other properties in the Burnet city limits with gravel or other aggregate driveways as proof the city has allowed other variances in the past.
“All of those properties that I’ve given an example of have either had a permit pulled or a change in use or occupancy in the last two years,” he said.
Zoning board members were also told of a purported phone call between Jamar and the city manager that indicated the city was changing its standards.
“On that call with the city manager, (Vaughn) stated that city staff wanted to set a precedent of having paved driveways,” Jamar said. “I don’t disagree with the city setting a precedent. I do, however, have a problem with them setting it after the fact. This is an undue burden on myself and anyone else who did their due diligence, planning, and budgeting.”
Erkan reminded the board that Jamar’s retelling of the call was hearsay until they could speak with others involved in the dispute.
“A statement has three different spins,” Erkan said. “It’s what the person thought they said, what the person thought they heard, and what actually was said. That’s why I characterize the statements as hearsay. It’s being presented that these people said something, but it may have been misconstrued or intended another way.”
Board member Tommy Gaut was unimpressed by Jamar’s presentation.
“With the statements you’ve made, to me, it doesn’t sound like you were prepared in talking to the city or even coming before this board,” he said.
Jamar was offended by Gaut’s comments.
“I’m disappointed in your statement about not being prepared,” he said. “I have brought more material, more evidence than the city has provided today.”
Gaut then closed the meeting. As of Friday, March 29, no date had been set for the next meeting.