Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-08-26 MinutesMINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING C d( q -a3-29 A meeting of the,.,Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held Monday, August 26, 1974, at 3:30 P.M. in the Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Carl Yates, David Newbern, Connie Clack MEMBERS ABSENT: Suzanne Lighton, James White OTHERS PRESENT: Gene Burson, Charles Atkinson, Wally Brt, David McWethy, Loris Stanton, Agent for the Bank of St. Louis, Bobbie Jones, Janet Bowen Chairman Yates called the:meeting to order. Chairman Yates opened the public hearing on Appeal 74-26, Loris L. Stanton, Agent for the Bank of St. Louis, 2715 Stagecoach Drive, on an application to vary setbacks. Mr. Stanton was present. He told the Board that this house had already had 2 owners and the problem wasn't known until the last prospective buyer tried to obtain a VA loan and the survey showed a 19 foot setback from the right-of-way tAPPEAL NQ. 74-26 instead of a required 25 feet. The house was built 2 years ago Mr. Loris L. Stanton and the actual roadway was set over within the right-of-way to 2715 Stagecoach Dr. line up with the street coming from Butterfield Addition. Mr. Stanton felt that the only thing to do was to request a variance of setback. Mr. Newbern wanted to know if there was any controversy over this, and in answer Mr. Stanton said that he had only one telephone call concerning this matter. Mrs. Jones, Planning Administrator, stated that she also had had some calls but they had not seemed concerned after they learned this was not a rezoning petition. Mrs. Clack stated that if the builder had been concerned in this, he should have to make the changes involved, but that since it had gone through several hands already she felt the only thing to do would be to grant the requested variance. Mr. Newbern was troubled by the thought that someone might get the idea that they could sneak a house by this way and feel that no one would make them tear it down. Mr. Yates stated that he felt the same way, and that like Mrs. Clack had already stated, if the builder were involved, he would certainly be instructed to make the necessary changes; however, since it had been through several hands already, he felt the only thing to do was to grant the variance. There was no one present to oppose the request. The public hearing was concluded. Mrs. Clack moved that the variance be granted as requested. Mr. Newbern seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. APPEAL NO. 74-24 Further discussion on Appeal No. 74-24 was opened by Chairman Further Discussion Yates. McRoy, Inc. Mr. Burson, the prospective tenant, and Mr. Atkinson were 16 Mountain St. present to represent. It was felt that the problem was not actually the parking or even the Lo -Dal container that was on the property, but how Mr. Burson was to handle the trash from the restaurant. Mr. Burson said he would have a daily pickup using two garbage cans; one can to be located inside the restaurant and one outside. In answer to a question asked by Mr. Yates, Mr Burson said that the garbage can outside would be set on a rack outside the service door. Mrs. Clack asked if the elimination of the parking on the South side had been discussed with Mr. McRoy and also the matter of Mr. McRoy having the proposed building moved forward enough to provide for service and to provide drainage. She then asked if this • • • Board of Adjustment August 26, 1974 -2- would require a variance. Mr. Yates said that the elimination of the parking would require a variance. Mr. Atkinson said that Mr. McRoy is aware that he will have to set the proposed building back approximately 2 feet from the Niblock Building to have access to the side of the building. Mrs. Jones said that she had been advised that Urban Renewal plans to widen the alley' 51 feet to the West and that they plan to rebuild buildings between East Avenue and the West side of the alley. A discussion was then entered into concerning the Lo -Dal container that is on the property. Mr. Wally Brt, Sanitation Superintendent said they could get the tender trucks into the container if the power poles could be moved 5 feet, but could not get them in now as it existed. Mrs. Clack talked about the possibility of moving the proposed building 20 feet South, and Mr. Brt. said that then they could set the Lodal container in a more accessible location. Mr. Yates said that the alley seemed level enough for the trucks to get in and Mr'.'Brt said that even though this would not be as high as the area on the North, but that he did think the Pak -More trucks which serve cans could squeeze by these two power poles on the property until such time as Urban Renewal widens the alley. Mr. Atkinson then asked if it would be possible to set the container in the area behind the Cravens Building since this alley has been closed by way of previous construction • anyway. Mr. Brt said that the container needed to be left close to the same area as it was used by McRoy-McNair Printing Company. It had -been discussed in the Board of Adjustment Meeting of August 19, 1974, that a grassy area be planted in front of the building to make a neater appearance; there- fore, Chairman Yates expressed concern because they would be loosing this in order to make room for the garbage trucks to get into the container. Chairman Yates then referred to a memo mailed out by Bobbie Jones, Planning Administrator, saying that Mr. McRoy had been in the Planning Office and stated that he would not be responsible for the upkeep of the grassy area, either with Mr. Burson or future tenants. Mr. Newbern pointed out that since the Urban Renewal Program was moving rather slowly that there should be some way worked out so that the trash cans would not be located outside in front of the building. Mr. Brt told the Board that the trash could be picked up with a commercial packer (Pak -More) until the Lo -Dal container could be properly located. Mr. Newbern moved that the variance be granted as requested (to allow a zero setback from the alley and to waive the 5 parking spaces required) with the following stipulations: 1.) That no parking will be maintained on the South side of the building to be constructed. 2.) That arrangements for trash collection and storage will be on the North side of the building only. 3.) That the South side of the building be appropriately and attractively landscaped. Mrs. Clack seconded the motion. There was no further discussion. The motion was unanimously approved. The approval of the minutes of August 19, 1974 Meeting was deferred until the next meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 4:10 P.M. 93