HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-01-22 MinutesMIMTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
.00 �� Rove a, �2 -/,;?.
The Fayetteville Board of Adjustment met at 3:45 P.M., Monday, Janua'7 22,
1973, in the Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
Members Present: Connie C ' lack, James H. White, Albert Witte, Suzanne
Lighton, Carl Yates.
Members Absent: None,
Others Present: Ray White, David McWethy, Wilbur Watson, Mike Montgomery,
Rodney Nickell, Leta Fay Brown, Mrs. Ambrose, Joe
Sutterfield, Don Offenbacker,
Chairman Carl Yates called the meeting to order.
The first matter considered was a request for reconsideration on APPEAL 72-45
Appeal 72-45, Wilbur Watson, 565 Fallin Avenue, on an application WILBUR WATSON
to'var7 minimum lot width and minimum lot area. The request had 565 Fallin Ave.
been denied December 21, 1972, but the denial included a provision
for reopening the appeal if the Planning Commission approved the
conditional use request. The Planning Commission had approved the
conditional use request January 2, 1973. Mr. Watson was present,
He said that although it is considered a duplex, there is only one
room that can be used as an efficiency apartment with room for one
person. He had bought the property and made an application to add
an extra room. The application showed it would be used as a bedroom
and he said that is what he intended when he made the application.
During the course of construction, he located an efficiency apartment
On combination refrigerator, 2 -burner stove top, and sink which could be
set in there, He said he did not know he was in conflict with the
zoning ordinance until he had already completed the work, He thought
there would be fewer persons occupying the building with a single
family house and an efficiency apartment than if he were renting a
3 -bedroom house. He said he had talked to the neighbors and also
written them letters and no one had objected. He requested a variance
in lot width and in lot area,
Mrs. Ambrose asked if granting this would open up the rest of the area
so others could come in and put up duplexes. There were no other questions
or comments. The public hearing was closed.
Chairman Yates opened the public hearing on Appeal 73-1, C & W Manhattan APPEAL 73-1
Associates, Representative . Mike Montgomery, 3180 North College Avenue, C & W MANHATTAN
on an application to vaz7 size and height of sign. Mr. Montgomersy, 3180 N. College
Construction Supervisor Rodney Nickell, and Les (1) property owner
were present,
Chairman Yates said he understood these applications for variances
on signs were filed prior to the time the new sign ordinance took effect
and that the Board of Adjustment was obliged to hear them and act on them.
Mr. Montgomery said this is a very large building with a large retail
merchandiser. The building is set back about 400 ft. from the street.
They feel the sign close to the street would aid them.
Chairman Yates asked the precise location of the proposed sign and
whether they proposed to have wall signs on the building. Mr. Montgomer7
said the sign would be centered in front of the building and he thought it
would be back 35 ft. from the ROW. Wall signs are proposed,
10
is
Board of Adjustment
1-22-73
-2.
Suzanne Lighton asked what kind of lighting the sign would have,
whether it would flash or move, and how high the building is.
Mr.,.Montgomery said the sign would be a plastic faced sign with
florescent lighting, the 11K11 on top would revolve, and the building
is 26 ft. high.
Chairman Yates read the powers and duties of the Board of Adjustment
from Zoning Ordinance 1747 and said he was not yet convinced that a
variance was justified.
Rodney Nickell, Construction Supervisor for K -Mart, said they would
like to amend their request at this time to bring it more in line with
the regulations. He said the sign is part of their image and the only
time it would burn is when the store is open, coming on shortly before
the store opens and going off shortly after it closes. He requested a
sign 35 ft. high and containing 128J square feet. He said the location
of the sign would have to be verified, but that it would be back about
52 feet or so because they cannot install it within 15 fte of the power
lines. He said this is a standard sign made up in either Ohio or Florida
and installed by a local contractor. He said they have 528 stores across
the countryand that with the exception of a half dozen, such as in Miami,
they can use one of their standard signs.
Chairman Yates asked if they could do without the revolving part of the
"K"o
Mr. Nickell said they would like to have the sign go high enough to be
seen above the International House of Pancakes
There was no opposition present. The public hearing was closed.
Chairman Yates opened the public hearing on Appeal 73-2. Leta Fay APPEAL 73-2
Brown, 622 Mission Boulevard, on an application to vary setbacks. LETA FAY BROWN
Mrs. Brown was present, Mrs. Brown said she has always had a good 622 Mission
garage and this property does not have either a garage or a carport,
She felt one would protect the car and help the property. She said
she also wants to cover an existing patio because it always has li
to 2 inches of water standing on it.
Chairman Yates asked if she is presently parking in the area where
she proposes to build the carport. Mrs. Brown said she is not; she
is presently parking in the front yard and she wants to put the
carport next to the patio. She wants the carport farther to the East
than where she is now parking. Mrs. Brown said she bought the house
November 27. She has not decided what she wants in the way of storage
but supposed it would join the carport. She had talked to Mrs. Ambrose,
Mr. Watson, and Mrs. Spencer, all adjoining property owners, Mr. Watson
and Mrs. Spencer had not opposed her plans,
Mrs. Ambrose was present and said she has lived there since 1936 and that
there is a water problem. The water from Fallin Avenue and Sequoyah seeps
out of the ground. Mrs, Ambrose said a roof over the patio would not get
rid of the water. She felt she shoUd be opposed to the proposal until
Mrs. Brown makes definite plans to have guttering and drainage taken care
of. She felt water from the roof would make a drainage ditch through
there,
The Board discussed Mrs. Brown's plans with her, but felt it could make
a better decision if more detailed plans on construction and drainage
were furnished. Mrs. Ambrose said she was not particularly opposed to
Mrs. Brown building a carport, but was concerned about the drainage.
Suzanne Lighton told Mrs. Brown that a carport without a provision
for disposing of water coming off it will pose a hardship on the Ambroses,
James White asked about putting the carport in the back yard,
The public hearing was closed,
I0
I *
10
Board of Adjustment
1-22-73
.3 -
Chairman Yates opened the public hearing on Appeal 73-3. Taco Hut, APPEAL 73.3
1925 North College Avenue, on an application to vary height and size TACO HUT
of sign. Joe Sutterfield and Don Offenbacker were present to represent 1925 N. College
the appeal. Mr. Sutterfield said they woUd like to use the old
structure for the present sign on the site and just put a new face
on it. It is in line with other signs up and down the street,
Suzanne Lighton asked if the proposed sign had any moving lights,
Mr. Sutterfield said the sign'�,does have moving lights, but they
would leave them off,
Don Offenbacker said there is no way to put a wall sign on the building
and they cannot put a roof sign on the building either. Albert Witte
asked why the sign is 124 square feet. Mr. Offenbacker said this is the
size they are working with in Oklahoma. Chairman Yates asked if the
figure of the man could be taken off. Mr. Sutterfield said the man is
their trademark.
Chairman Yates asked how far back from the right-of-way the present
sign is. Mr. Sutterfield did not know, but said it is 20 ft. from the
curb. Chairman Yates asked if they could conform to the 40 ft. setback
of the new sign ordinance. Mr. Sutterfield said they could go back the
40 ft* if they had moving lights to attract attention, He offered to
put a planter at the base if the variance were approved.
Mr. Offenbacker said there are two main reasons for requesting the
variance, (1) They are trying to use something which is standard elsewhere;
and (2) They cannot have a roof or wall sign.
Chairman Yates asked if the sign would be made at some central location.
He was told this one would be made by D�Sign in Springdale. Chairman
Yates asked if the sign could be scaled down. Mr. Sutterfield said he
would rather have a smaller sign at the location of the old sign, than to
have to move the sign back. After further discussion, Mr. Offenbacker
said they could accept a sign that would be 7 ft. by 10 ft. on the lower
panel and 4 ft. by 6 ft. on the top panel. There was no opposition.
The public hearing was closed,
The Board discussed the application of the Taco Hut, Appeal 73-3. APPEAL 73-3
Connie Clack said she felt they have a problem because he doesn't have
a place for a wall sign. Albert Witte felt the Board should recognize
the situation in the developed area this is in,
Albert Witte moved to grant a variance for the sign not to exceed 94
square feet, with the height of 30 ft., and with no moving lights and
the sign to be no closer to the highway than the existing sign.
James White seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously.,
Regarding the appeal of Leta Fay Brown, Appeal 73-2, Albert Witte
asked what the other Board Members thought about the feasibility APPEAL 73-2
of Mrs. Brown getting some sort of drawings or sketches that would
assure them and the neighbors this would not aggravate the drainage
problems. Chairman Yates said the Board needed to have some assurance
that these details will be worked out before they grant a variance.
James White suggested the carport be put in the back of the house with a
turn around because backing out onto Mission is so very dangerous.
After further discussion, Suzanne Lighton moved to defer action on this
request until Mrs. Brown presents the Board with definite details of
construction including the proposed water drainage with the possibility
suggested by the Board that the carport be put to the East of the patio
in back of the house. Albert Witte seconded the motion which was approved
unanimously,
I
Board of Adjustment
1-22�73 -4-
The Board discussed again the application of C & W Manhattan
Associates, Appeal 73-1. Suzanne Lighton said she did not like the
revolving "KII. Since it is going to be on both sides, it doesn't
A
have to revolve to be seen from both directions.
Connie Clack said that the building is very conspicuous and with the
exception of the Pancake House there is nothing to obstruct the vision.
She could not see why they could not get by with just a wall sign,
Carl Yates asked the representatives of the application if there would
be a problem if the Board limited the sign to 30 ft. in height.
Mr. Nickell said he would still be concerned about trucks entering the
property there and needing clearance; however he stated they could "live
with" a 30 ft. high sign, but still requested the sign size.
Chairman Yates asked if they could cut the size of the sign down still
more. A man who identified himself as the owner of the property said
that the cost of changing the mold would override the cost of 10 signs.
He said the mold has been compiled from sign regulations over the United
States. Suzanne Lighton asked if they did not sometime have to make a
smaller sign. He said they have either gone without a sign or gone with
one of the two signs, sometimes with a variance. Mir. Nickell said they
would go without a ground sign rather than pay the extra cost -of reducing
the size. Chairman Yates said that he felt the size of the sign should
be tied to the amount of frontage the business has, but that the new
ordinance did not get written that way. Both Mr. Nickell and the property
owner said they could do without the revolving action of the IIKII and that
a 40 ft. setback would be no problem.
Albert Witte moved that the Board of Adjustment grant the amended request,
specifically to approve the small standard sign, 1281 sq* ft, in size, and
that the approved height be 30 ft. as provided in the ordinance, and to
condition the variance on the requirement that the IIKII not revolve and
that they comply with the 40 ft. setback requirement of the new ordinance,
Suzanne Lighton seconded the motion.
lc Before the vote was taken, Albert Witte said he did not want to get the
idea out that if it is a standard size, it carries a lot of weight. He
was more influenced by the argument that the size of the area and building
cannot be ignored. Suzanne Lighton also told the applicants that the fact
J that it would cost more money to have to make a smaller sign could not
ti be used as grounds for granting a variance.
!.. The vote was taken; White, Yates, Witte, and Lighton voted "Aye"; Clack
Ocr)
voted "Nay." The amended variance was granted,
The Board discussed again the appeal of Wilbur Watson, Appeal 72-45.
'0- James White asked the other members if they could not, if the variance
were to be granted, attach a condition that would freeze what is there
now to the point that they could not alter the outside of the house or
the inside of the house to change it any more, He said he would like
to freeze it so it couldn't be remodeled into a bonafide duplex.
Connie Clack said she was not really very much in favor of approving it.
Chairman Yates asked if it could not be approved with a time limit of
perhaps three years. He said he was inclined to want to go along with
the request with any conditions The Board might want to attach because
he was convinced the man had made an honest mistake. He also suggested
the alternative of allowing the duplex to exist until it became necessar7
to replace the kitchenette unit. He said the Planning Commission has
said this use is compatible with the area.
James White moved that this request be granted for a variance in lot
width and lot area for a duplex subject to freezing the use, the outside
APPEAL 73-1.
APPEAL 72-45
14
Board of Adjustment
1-22-73 .5 -
structure of the house, the inside of the house insofar as it would
allow double occupancy of two full family units, so that this would
remain basically a dwelling with a single-room,efficiency apartment
as it is now. Suzanne Lighton seconded the motion, which was approved
unanimously,
The minutes of the December 21, 1972 Board of Adjustment Meeting were MINUTES
approved as mailed.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 P*M'
0
5
PAGE SUBJECT DATE
ls4
1�4
21 3� 106
3
6s9
619� 20
719
7;9
8J10
11
13� IS
13; 14
14
16
19221
20
21
22
24�26
21,27
29332
31�54jS6
�34
32
3413Ss39
35,39
36,38
ie37238
40,42
41
42
43�50
46s49
48
52,56
53,56
57s64
64
66s67s95
66,67
68971
73
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82sS6
84
86
0 89j94p99
89394
92,9319S
92393
Wilbur Watson (Appeal 72-4S - 565 Fallin Ave.)
C & W Manhattan (Appeal 73-1 - 3180 N. College)
Leta Fay Brown (Appeal 73-2 - 622 Mission)
Taco Hut (Appeal 73-3 - 1925 N. College)
Mr. Burger (Appeal 73-4 - 1194 N. Garland - Hugh Smith)
F.J. Hughes, Inc. (Appeal 73-5 - 101 E. 13th)
Maupin Cummings (Appeal 73-6 - 1604 W. Sixth)
H.D. Mixon (Appeal 73-7 - 1041 N. College)
E. Billingsley (Appeal 73-8 - 184") N. College)
C. Vanlandingham (Appeal 73-9 - 2648 N. College)
Clarence F. Gorman (Appeal 73-10 - 1111 East Elm St.)
AMC, Inc. (Appeal 73-11 - 2210 S. School)
Stout Petroleum (Appeal 73-12 - 1701 IV. Sixth)
Doctors' Building (Appeal 73-13 - 241 W. Spring St.)
B.H. Unger (Appeal 73-14 - 2431 Mt. Comfort)
Bob's Studio (Appeal 71-5 - 109 North Block)
James A. Pennington (Appeal 73-15 - 14 West Township)
Frank McDonald (Appeal 73-16 - 1825 Susan)
Susie Marley (Appeal 73-17 - 212 Oklahoma Way)
General Management Corp. (Appeal 73-18 - 380 W. 24th St.)
N.W. Arkansas Bank (Appeal 73-19 - Millsap & College)
E.R. and Ruby Jean (Appeal 73-20 - Eagle St.)
Thomas H. Rodgers (Appeal 73-21 - 3000 North College)
Esther Keller (Appeal 73-22 - 16 N. Duncan)
Parkhill Clinic - Drs. Lushbaugh & Cole (Appeal 73-23 - 740
Lollar
G. Hugh Smith (Appeal 73-24 - N. College Ave.)
University Baptist Church (Appeal 73-25 - 315 West Maple)
James E. Holder (Appeal 73-26 - Otasco - N. College Ave.)
,Mrs. Gladys B. Eason (Appeal 73-27 - 508 Forest St.)
J. Dale Smith (Appeal 73-29 - 724 W. Skelton)
Arthur H. Skelton (Appeal 73-28)
Fayetteville Medical Center (.Appeal 73-30 - Baxter L. & North
St.)
Orthopedic Clinic Ltd. (Appeal 73-31 - 1673 N. College Ave.)
Northwest National Bank - Mr. Loris Stanton (Appeal 73-32 -
3500 N.
Mr. Herbert Hatfield (Appeal 73-33 - 22 E. Meadow St.)
Mr. Harold Duggar (Appeal 73-34 - 1754 Janice St.)
Mr. Robert Kelly - Mrs. Margaret Wooten - Mrs. J.A.Robinson
(Appeal
Goff -McNair Parking Lot (Appeal 73-3S)
D.J. Land (Appeal 73-36 - 275 E. Huntsville Rd.)
01-22-73
01-22-7-,
01-22�7Z
01-22-73
02-12-73
02-12-73
02-12�73
02-12-73
02-12-73
02-26-77
03-26-73
03-26-13
03-26-73
04-23-73
05-14-73
05-14-73
05-14-73
05-25-73
06-25-73
06-25-73
07-23-73
07-23-73
07-23-73
07-23-73
Lane) 08-13-73
08-27-73
08-27-73
08-27-73
09-24-73
09-24-73%
09-24-73
10-08-73
10-08-73
College)10-08-73
10-29-73
10-29-73
73-35) 11-12-73
11-26-7S
12-17-73
Kelley Bros. Lumber Co. (Appeal 73-37 - N of 71 Bypass 4� W of Johnson Rd.) 12-17-73
Dandy Oil Company (Appeal 74-1 1421 S. School Ave.)
Ozark Floors, Inc. (Appeal 74-2 928 N. College)
Capitol Tobacco Company (Appeal 74-3 - 523 W. Poplar)
Dandy Oil Company (Interpretation Request - 15th & School)
Resolution No. 1-74
Albright Trust (Appeal 74-4 - 1925 Green Acres - Vary Setbacks)
Pat Tobin (Appeal 74-S - 46 Township Rd, - Vary setbacks)
Jerry D. Sweetser (Appeal 74-6 - 126 S. University)
Ozark Windows (Appeal 74-7 - 4032 N. College)
Arnold McCraw (Appeal 74-8 - 351 N. Highland)
Memorandum - Zoning Variances
Mr. & Mrs. Ralph Guthary, Jr. (Appeal 74-9 - 159 & 161 S. Hill Ave.)
David Lierly (Appeal 74-10 - 1363 Hendrix)
Dandy Oil Company (Appeal 74-11 - 1421 S. School)
Aften Brannon (Appeal 74-12 - 27 East Sixth)
Stanton & Hughes (Appeal 74-13 - 18S7 Wedington)
01-14-74
ol-28-74
02-11-74
02-11-74
02-11-74
02-25-74
02-15-74
03-25-74
03-25-74
04-08-74
04-22-74
04-22-74
05-06-74
05-06-74
05-06-74
05-06-74
I
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Attendance Chart
James
Albert
Carl
Suzanne
/I /Mo , ,
Aobert
David
DATE
White
--Witte
—Yates—
—Lighton-
—Clack—
Newhern
'Taytvx. ry
60�
rc,)\ g:P
c.;2 3 A� 73
-7
coc;ro h e
-er-
1-00A
(ge ess�cl
19 a
e,� d
toe
Gooe
Lo�
IZ
jF0 if 13 C07 14 *7 4F
-IYO Ye
%00�