Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-10-28 Minutesr Duo -et. //- //. 9 y MINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING A meeting of the Board of Adjustment was held at 3:30 P. M., Tuesday, October 28, 1974, in the Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Carl Yates, David Newbern, James White, Connie Clack, Suzanne Lighton MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OTHERS PRESENT: Bobbie Jones, Jim McCord, Charles Barrett, Clifton Gabbard, John "Boone" Carlon, Bill Drake, Phillip Warford. Chairman Carl Yates called the meeting to order. APPEAL NO. 72-40 Chairman Carl Yates opened the discussion on Osage Oil, Osage Oil 1600 North College Avenue, for consideration of Appeal 1600 N. College No. 72-40 as directed by the Circuit Court of Washington County on an application to vary size and height of a sign. Jim McCord, City Attorney, was present and advised the Board of Adjustment that he did not feel there was any need for them to consider this item for the following reasons: 1. The Court has already in effect granted the variance. 2. The old ordinance has been repealed and there is no variance procedure under the new ordinance. 3. The matter is under appeal to the Supreme Court. He also stated three reasons why he felt the matter should have been appealed to the Supreme Court even though the ordinance had been repealed. 1. The existing sign ordinance is under attack. 2. If there is a ruling on this one before a ruling is given on the new one it might have some bearing. The issues are somewhat related. 3. The Board of Directors would like to see the sign at Osage Oil come down. Mr. McCord brought out that if the case was lost in the Supreme Court the Building Inspection Department would issue a permit for this sign. Miss Suzanne Lighton asked how the new sign ordinance differed from the old sign ordinance. Mr. McCord explained that the provisions are different but that the sign does not conform to the existing sign ordinance either. The discussion closed without any action being taken by the Board of Adjustment. APPEAL NO. 74-32 Southwestern Bell Telephone Chairman Yates opened the public hearing on 138 N. East Ave. Appeal No. 74-32, Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, 138 North East Avenue, on an application to vary setbacks and parking requirements. Chairman Yates informed the Board of Adjustment members that Mr. Holland of the 122 • • Board of Adjustment -2- Qctober 28, 1974 Southwestern Bell Telephone Company had phoned him before the meeting stating he could not attend and to give them his apologies for not being here. John "Boone" Carlon was present instead of Mr. Holland to represent and explained that the telephone company planned to add a third story to the existing building and that the variance which they were requesting was actually to make legal what they already have there now because they are presently too close to the right-of-way. Bobbie Jones, Planning Administrator, explained that the parking variance had been part of the request before the Planning Commission met on October 22 but Mr. Green from Little Rock (who is with Southwestern Bell Telephone) had since then told Mr. Lieberenz of the Inspection Department that there was approximately 9,000 sq. feet that would be used for office space.The Planning Commission, in approving the addition to the conditional use and the use of off-site parking, had stipulated that the parking requirements should be figured on the amount of building actually used for office space. Based on the ratio of 1 parking space for every 300 feet of office space, 30 parking spaces would be required. They have 34 parking spaces already so there is no need for the parking variance. Mr. Bill Drake, also with the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, was present to represent the 127 people who had signed the following petition in opposition to any parking variance. The petition is hereby inserted into and made part of the minutes: "We the undersigned are against any deviation of parking requirements for Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. at 138 North East Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas. We feel South- western Bell Telephone Co. is able to meet her responsibilities in this matter." Signed by 127 people. Mr. Drake asked to have it clarified how the number of parking spaces was figured and just what was meant by office space. He also wondered how the amount of office space came to only 9,000 square feet. Mr. Carlon stated that he felt they had "stretched" every amount of office area that they had in order to come up with this amount. Mr. Drake said the employees who had signed the petition felt there were not enough parking spaces at the present time. Chairman Yates told Mr. Drake that he had a memorandum from Mr. Lieberenz to Mrs. Jones in which they show office space as follows: Basement --1,930 sq. ft; 1st floor --3,000 sq. ft; 2nd floor --3,400 sq. ft.; and the proposed 3rd floor 484 sq. ft. Chairman Yates explained that the:parking variancerwas not part of,the Board of Adjustment's :consideration. since the Inspection Office showed they met'the number of parking spaces required as stipulated by the Planning Commission -- (that is 1 parking space for every 300 sq. feet of office space.) David Newbern told Mr. Drake he felt there was a serious problem with the ordinance. He said it was a bad situation when you have a building that is full of people but they do not work in offices, but as Chairman Yates had already pointed out there was nothing the Board of Adjustment could do about it. However, he felt that whatever decision they came to that a note should be made in the record that there is a serious problem with the ordinance in this regard. Miss Lighton felt the Planning Commission should look into this matter and perhaps define the term office space. Chairman Yates agreed that there was a problem with the ordinance and he believed the Planning Commission was aware of this; however, as far as the Board of 123 Board of Adjustment -3- .October 28? 1974. Adjustment was concerned it was not a part of this variance request now. There was no further discussion and the public hearing was closed. APPEAL NO. 74-33 The public hearing was opened on Appeal No. 74-33, Charles Barrett Charles Barrett, 118 South College Avenue, on an applica- 118 South College Avenue tion to vary parking requirements. On both Tract 1 and Tract 2 the ordinance required a 25 ft. setback of parking area from the street right-of-way and a 20 ft. setback of parking area from adjoining R -zoned property with a 5 to 8 ft. view obscuring fence or hedge. Mr. Barrett requests a 0 ft. setback from Rock Street and College Avenue rights-of-way and 0 ft. setback from adjoining residentially zoned (R -zoned) property,(without screening? ) on Tract 1 and 0 ft. setback from Rock Street right-of-way and 0 ft. setback from adjoining R -zoned property (without screening?) on Tract 2. The applicant owns additional property which is zoned C-3 and which lies between Tract 2 and College Avenue. The applicant had petitioned the Planning Commission for rezoning because the setback requirements from street right-of-way for parking are not applicable in the C-3 zone except where such property is within 50 feet of R -zoned property. The Planning Commission declined to rezone the property from R-2, Medium Density Residential District and R -O, Residential -Office to C-3, Central Commercial District, but did rezone the R-2 portion to R-0 and suggested to the applicant that he appeal to the Board of Adjustment for a variance. Mr. Charles Barrett was present to represent and said he had been before both the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors and both Boards recommended to go this way on the matter for the reason that if the Board of Adjustment granted the variance he could always use this for parking. He said his present real estate building and the two houses directly East down Rock Street will be removed. Mr. Barrett agreed to screening if it was required, and said it was due to an over- sight that the screening was not mentioned in the request. Chairman Yates asked Mr. Barrett if he wanted the Board of Adjustment to consider a variance on the parking because he could not get the required number of parking spaces if he had to stay with the setbacks. Mr. Barrett said that the lot on the corner of Rock Street and College Avenue was 65'x95' and under the present zoning about 6 cars could be parked there. Miss Lighton asked what this parking area was to serve. Mr. Barrett said they would be building a new two story office building on the North side of Rock Street and that Tract 2 would adjoin the building. There will be one row of parking in front of the building between the building itself and College Avenue. They will have 18,000 sq. ft. of office space which means they will have to have 60 parking spaces. In answer to a question, Mr. Barrett said there were 63 parking spaces shown on the drawing. Mr. Yates asked about the possibility of eliminating some of the parking spaces on the corners in order to meet the setbacks, and also provide for better visibility. Mr. Barrett explained that there would not be any parking out against the street anyway. Mr. Barrett said they would not be opposed to setting back 5' instead of the 0' setback for parking in the C-3 Zone. Chairman Yates said that before he was ready to make a decision on a variance for the setback of parking he would like to see how many parking spaces he would be short to meet the setback requirements or to meet something less than a 0' setback, such as perhaps a 10 ft. setback Chairman Yates said he would like to see a drawing of what Mr. Barrett would have to have to meet all the setbacks and compromise between the two or to see how many parking spaces he would be short if he met the required setbacks. He indicated he might even be willing to consider a variance in the number of spaces. 19.44 A Board of Adjustment -4- October 28, 1474 Mrs.. Clack asked Mr. Barrett if he had inquired about purchasing additional property for parking. Mr. Barrett told her that they had acquired additional property for this but found out that they had several feet out in the middle of College Avenue. Mr. Newbern asked how many offices were planned to be in this building. Mr. Barrett answered there would be 20 office bays in the building. Mr. Barrett agreed to prepare additional drawings that would require less variance of setbacks but perhaps also require a variance in the number of parking spaces needed which will be considered at the next meeting of the Board of Adjustment. There was no one present to oppose the request. The public hearing was concluded. APPEAL NO. 74-34 Chairman Yates opened public hearing on Appeal No. 74-34 Clifton Gabbard Clifton Gabbard, South of the end of Ray Avenue, on an application to vary requirements for fences and setback of uses. Mr. Clifton Gabbard was present and explained that he would like to use this as a temporary storage for abandoned automobiles. He said he would haul the cars in one at a time from the Fayetteville -Springdale area. Mr. Gabbard said he planned on making enough selling the scrap metal to justify his operation, and would therefore, haul these cars in free of charge. He said the cars would be stripped of the tires, floor mats, and gas tanks, parts which can be resold; the upholstery material would be stripped off and hauled to the land fill as it accumulated. The cars would then be compacted and hauled out by a semi -trailer to a shredder (large hammermill type machine) the closest one being in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Mr. Gabbard stated this would not be a conventional, salvage -type operation where the cars set around for a long period of time and oil was spilled on the ground. This will only be a short-term storage for the abandoned automobiles until they are processed. He said there would be no burning involved and that he had contacted Mr. Rush of the Arkansas Pollution Control Commission and he did not feel there would be any problems with this operation but would come to look it over and if it was needed could write a letter stating this. Mr. Gabbard said he would be able to dispose of appliances also. Mr. Gabbard had the signatures of all the surrounding property owners except Mr. Goff --who is out of town and Mr. Timbrook, who is in the hospital at the time and that no one, including these two, had any objections to this type of operation. He also had pictures of how the cars were processed and of the area. Mr. White asked if the compacting equipment was portable. Mr. Gabbard told him that at the time he was using a crane to drop a weight but intended to either build or buy a hydraulic machine and there would be more of a crushing motion so there would not be that much noise. Mr. Phillip Warford was present and stated that the compacting would only be done about one or two days per month, and after stripping, would take only 5 minutes per car; also that on the appliances, Fort Smith was the closest place right now to dispose of them. Mr. Gabbard went on to explain that he would have access to this property by way of Ray Avenue, but would use this entrance only when hauling the compacted vehicles out; it would be difficult to get through the other way with the semi -trailer because of the terrain. In answer to a question asked by Chairman Yates, Mr. Gabbard said he intended utilizing the fencing that is already there plus the natural embankment and build a metal fence only on the North side (except build enough wooden fence for screening as the Building Inspector would require. David Newbern asked about the Board of Adjustment sign on the property. He said when he drove by the location he did not see one. He said he wanted the poeple that lived on Helen Street to be aware of this. He said even though this operation is 125 Board of Adjustment gctobex 28, 1974. -5- more than 200 feet from Helen Street, the people that live along here would probably be aware of some noise. Mr. Gabbard said the sign was located at the North entrance but was partially obscurred by some debris that was there. In answer to a question asked by Mr. White, Mr. Gabbard stated that the operation would stay within the central portion of the land. Mr. Yates read aloud the statement signed by all the surrounding property owners contents of which follow and is hereby made a part of these minutes: Verna Lea Farms Raymond Kellar Bob Harvey Don Timbrook Otis Watson Highway 16 E. Fayetteville, Ark. Highway 16 E. By-pass, Fayetteville, Ark. Johnson, Arkansas S. College Ave., Fayetteville, Ark. Highway 16 E. Fayetteville, Ark. There was no one present to oppose the request. There was no further discussion and the public hearing on Appeal No. 74-34 was concluded. APPEAL NO. 74-34 David Newbern moved to grant the variance as requested by Clifton Gabbard on Appeal 74-34. Mrs. Clack and Miss Lighton seconded the motion. There was no further discussion, The motion was carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0. APPEAL NO. 74-33 The Board of Adjustment by unanimous consent delayed consideration of Appeal No. 74-33 Charles Barrett, until the next meeting at which time Mr. Barrett would return with another drawing. APPEAL NO. 74-32 On Southwestern Bell Telephone, Appeal No. 74-32, David Newbern said this was the kind of variance that would normally be granted without too much trouble in as much as it would be just approving the building which is presently located there, if it were not for the problem over the parking coming up. He said that he sympathized with Mr. Drake and with the position of the employees, but felt that this was not a consideration of the Board of Adjustment. He did, however, feel that there was a serious problem with the ordinance and if the request should be granted some action should be taken by the Board of Adjustment to call this to the attention of the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors --that the Board of Adjustment feels the ordinance is insufficient in that it bases the required number of parking spaces on what is called "office space", but should be controlled by the amount of space generally where the employees work and the number of employees. Connie Clack didn't think the request should be denied just because the Board didn't approve of the parking arrangement. Miss Lighton agreed with Mr. Newbern in that this should be brought to the Planning Commission's and Board of Directors' attention. Miss Lighton moved that the variance on Appeal No. 74-32 be granted as requested. David Newbern seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved. Miss Lighton moved that in view of the parking problem called to their attention by the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company's variance request, that the Board of Adjustment officially contact the Planning Commission and/or Board of Directors for a study of parking requirements and bear in mind the over use of public parking areas as approved off -premise parking. Mr. Newbern seconded the motion. There was no further discussion; the motion carried unanimously. IQ • • Board of Adjustment ..October 28; 1274 APPEAL NO. 74-31 Mr. Ira Swope, Appeal No. 74-32, 321 Archibald -Yell Ira Swope Blvd., was not present at the meeting. Therefore, 321 Archibald -Yell Blvd. it was decided by the Board of Adjustment that Bobbie Jones, Planning Administrator, should write a letter to Mr. Swope stating that since there was no one present to represent the request that no action was taken on it; and that if he does not show up for the meeting his chances of getting the variance approved would not be as good. MINUTES The minutes of the September 23, 1974 meeting were approved as mailed except for misspelled words to be corrected. Meeting was adjourned at 5:05 P. M.