Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-06 MinutesMINUTES OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING A meeting of the Board of Adjustment was called to order at 3:55, P.M., Monday, April 6, 1981, in the Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Chester House, Larry Thompkins, Don Mills, Wayne Ball. MEMBERS ABSENT: Larry Smith, Robert Waldren, Dr. David Crittenden. OTHERS PRESENT: Bobbie Jones, Cynthia Stewart, Marvin Bradley. The first item of business was APPEAL NO. 81-4 the Public Hearing on Appeal No. 81-4, Herbert HERBERT ,HATFIELD Hatfield, 21 East Spring Street, application 21 EAST SPRING STREET to vary setbacks. Marvin Bradley was present to represent. Mr. Bradley stated he is Mr. Hatfield's builder, that Mr. Hatfield could not attend due to poor health. He asked the Board to consider the application, and stated he was available to answer any questions they may have. The Chairman asked Mr. Bradley to explain what Mr. Hatfield proposes and why he feels a variance should be granted for this particular building. Bradley stated that Mr. Hatfield plans to build a building approximately 28 ft. x 60 ft. to adjoin the existing service station building. The problem is the side yard requirement on .Spring Street. Hatfield would like to line up the proposed building with the telephone building and the body shop. Both the telephone building and the body shop have been through the variance process. The usage of the building will be storage. Bobbie Jones stated that a variance was never granted for the body shop. The telephone company did obtain a variance for their structure. The variance was granted for' a maximum of 3 ft. from the street right-of-way, and a minimum of 2 ft. 4 in. from the street right-of-way. Bradley stated that the street would be improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to this building. Thompkins asked if the entrance to the body shop would be from the East. Bradley stated the entrance would be from Spring Street. The doors will be located on the East side of the building. Thompkins asked where the lot lines would be. Bobbie Jones stated she did not have a break down of the lots, but her understanding is that one building will butt up against another. Jones further stated that in the commercial zones, there are no front yards, the setback is called from the street right-of-way. Thompkins asked if this structure would be a separate unit. Bradley stated that is correct, but it will have a common wall with the body shop. He said that fire walls will be installed per City Code. Thompkins asked if there is a side yard requirement. Bobbie Jones said that requirement will be as per Building Code. It is based on the size of the structure and the materials used in construction. This building is in the Fire Zone, and that will be a determining factor also. House asked if sufficient parking is being provided. Bobbie Jones said to the best of her knowledge, sufficient parking is being provided. 13 Board of Adjustment Meeting April 6, 1981 Page 2 House stated he is familiar with this site, and so far, a variance has been granted on the gas pumps, the canopy, and the main building. Now another variance is being requested. He wondered if the tax payers would end up paying for street rights -of -way -.in the future. Bobbie Jones stated she was not familiar will all the variances that Mr. House was referring to. House stated that the pump island he mentioned was poured before a permit was ever obtained. Also, the canopy was put up before a variance was requested. The work on the inspection bay footing was performed prior to obtaining a variance, and the new warehouse was started before a building permit was obtained. Bradley stated that due to the existing buildings on Spring Street, he did not feel that the widening of Spring Street would be feasible. Mills stated she was not in favor of granting a variance of this type when there is no hardship shown. Bradley stated that before work commenced, the setback was measured from an existing sidewalk. He said the sidewalk must have been in the street right-of-way. When first measured, it appeared there would be plenty of room for construction of the proposed building, now it appears there is not enough room. Wayne Ball stated, that as members of the Board are. aware, the ordinance has certain requirements that the Board is to make findings on prior to issuance of a variance. With that in mind, the application has been designed to elicit- information. In this case, the application has been left completely blank in one case, and in two places "correct" has been written in in place of facts. It is impossible to find the facts on which this Board could grant a variance. Ball said he felt the application was not sufficient. He said he could not address the issue of whether the variance should be granted based on the application. He wondered if the questionswere not understood, whether it was not important enough to the applicant to answer the questions, or whether the applicant did not have enough respect for the Board to provide full details of what the applicant proposes. Ball said that, looking at the application as it is being requested, it looked as if cars would be pulling out on to Spring. Street. He stated he travels this street and that it is congested. Ball felt that all things conidered, he did not feel there was sufficient reason to grant a variance. Thompkins asked if the applicant was requesting a side yard or rear yard setback variance. Bobbie Jones said actually, it will be a variance of the setback requirement from street right-of-way. Thompkins said he has the same problem with this request as he had with the variance requested for the same property in connection with the construction of the warehouse He felt that granting this variance would be perpetuating a situation that is contrary to the ordinance. He felt that granting this variance would be detrimental in that it may create an unsafe traffic situation. Mills moved to deny the variance. Thompkins seconded The motion to deny passed (4-0). The minutes of the March 16, 1981 meeting of the Board of Adjustment were approved as mailed. MINUTES There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:30, P.M.