Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-07-03 Minutes'111111 lI .I: :/ I111111'11113 I I:1 ICi: 1 A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held on Monday July 3, 1989 at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas, MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Mills, Dennis Becker, Larry Tompkins, Gerald Boyd and Robert Davis r.• I::1 :, I OTHERS PRESENT: John Merrell, Becky Schmidt, Karl Thiel and John Lewis The minutes of the regular meeting on April 17, 1989 were approved as distributed. i Chairman Mills announced that the appeal #BA89-5 by Clyde Iglinsky on this agenda was withdrawn. REQUEST FOR VARIANCE ON Building SETBACK - APPEAL OBA89-4 KARL THIEL & JOHN LEVIS - NW CORNER OF WEST AVE & DICKSON ST The only request was a variance on the building setback submitted by Karl Thiel • of Heckathorn Construction on behalf of John Lewis of the Bank of Fayetteville for property located on the northwest corner of West -Avenue and Dickson Street and zoned C-3, Central Business Commercial. Request was to reduce the setback from the right-of-way of West Avenue from 50' to 38" Karl Thiel of Heckathorn Construction stated that the Bank of Fayetteville is proposing a branch bank at this location. The plan is to renovate an old caboose and passenger car to make them into offices and a drive-thru facility. The caboose will be closer to Dickson Street and the passenger car will be farther back. He noted that he would like to review the four criteria that they look at when deciding whether to grant a variance. The first one is whether a special conditions exist and he feels that there are two conditions related to this: 1) If the railroad track is moved or any development or improvements made that would block this track, the property would revert back to the original owner. Therefore, they are limited by that railroad track on the west side so the property is effectively narrowed down to about 80' of useable property that they have to work with. The railroad cars in themselves have helped because they are a narrow structure. 2) Because they are proposing parking along West Avenue, in lieu of a 5' setback which is acceptable in C-3 zone, they are required a 50' setback because of the parking there. They are approximately 30' from the right-of-way instead of 50'. The 50' setback in his opinion allows people to build there parking lot between their structure and the street without having direct access to the street. By using the angled parking here, they will be able to narrow this down and still • have a parking lot that is usable but does not have open access to the street. They did explore the possibility of reversing the parking and the drive-thru which would allow them to comply with the setback requirements. The problem with 1q!� • Board of Adjustment July 3, 1989 Page 2 that is the location of the drive-thru entrance and exit would be right at the intersection of Dickson Street. The second criteria on the application states that a literal interpretation of the ordinance wouldn't deny them rights that are enjoyed by other properties in this area. With the 80' useable width minus the 50' setback leaves approximately 30' to build with which greatly restricts the possibilities of any type of structure that you can have on this property. The City staff's report says that basically about the only other option for development of this property is for a parking lot. Mr. Boyd asked how much parking is required for this project. Mr. Merrell advised that one space per 300' of floor area is required. The third criteria is that the special conditions are not resulting from actions of the applicant. The special condition here is the railroad and it is particular to this property. The provisory clause is something that has gone along with the property and been in effect for many years. The fourth criteria is that this variance won't confer any special privileges. They feel that there is no other property on Dickson Street that has quite this • set of circumstances to deal with. Therefore, they feel that this would not be a special privilege to the Bank of Fayetteville. Granting this variance would allow the Bank of Fayetteville to once again put a new business in an old business district and would be a valuable asset to the Dickson Street area. This project also meets the goals of the Dickson Street Improvement District which are to improve the looks of District Street and to encourage new business in that area. John Lewis stated that after a lot of study that they will be able to make the cars work as a bank. One of the problems is on a commercial drive -up window, how do they get to the teller so they designed a little foyer for an entrance into the cars on either side. Then they will have tellers on an upper level and a lower level. Mr. Boyd stated that he likes the fact that is this is not a case where they are trying to over use the property. If anything, the property is being under utilized. Mr. Tompkins stated that Dickson Street is very very busy. He stated that he wondering what the traffic counts are on Dickson as opposed to West Avenue. This ingress does create a problem as shown. Mr. Thiel stated that they looked into that, but changing it would create a problem because they would be entering at the building at the wrong side of the car. The driver's side would be on the wrong side. The traffic flow should be better as it is proposed. Mr. Tompkins asked for clarification on the statement that "no improvements can • be made on the tracks". the one set of tracks Mr. that Thiel stated that they can't build over or next to limit any egress on the other particular set of tracks. They can't move the track or obstruct use of the track. Mr. Tompkins • Board of Adjustment July 3, 1989 Page 3 asked why they decided to flip the layout of this from their original plan that was in the newspaper. Mr. Lewis stated that it was flipped because they wanted the backup of the traffic to come in so that there wouldn't be cars backed up on the street. Mr. Lewis stated that they have studied the layout and they have obviously tried to make it work the best for a bank, but they have also considered the convenience of the customers. Chairman Mills asked if they had considered backing the cars up and flip-flopped the plan so that the people could come in off of West Avenue to the drive-thru and exit on West Avenue. Mr. Lewis stated that they have looked at every configuration and this seemed to be the best considering the backup and needing the right side of the car at the teller's window. Mr. Becker asked if there is a ball park figure for the number of drive-in cars on a park and serve yourself as opposed to the drive-thru. Mr. Lewis stated that he didn't know. He added that there is 140 businesses up and down Dickson Street and a lot of it depends on how many of those businesses will do business here. If this is purely student & faculty service accounts, then there will be 80% service here but if it is business, it would be less than that. . Mr. Becker stated that one of the benefits that he sees in this project as far as traffic is that they can come out with a choice to go either direction. Chairman Mills asked if a developer comes in with a plan for the section where the depot is now, is there going to be adequate parking space for whateverlmight be developed there. Mr. Lewis stated that it is a big piece of ground, but he can't answer that. ^ Mr. Becker stated that if they look at the development of Dickson Street, then there probably will be a "no left" there to regulate the traffic flow. Mr. Merrell stated that the staff reviewed this and was concerned that there may be traffic backing up into the intersection. There is really not a perfect optimal way to lay it out, but the staff feels that what is being proposed if about the best they can do. Mr. Tompkins asked what would happen if the car was moved over to the 5' minimum setback and the parking would be moved over. Mr. Lewis stated that they hadn't checked into that. Mr. Thiel stated that they would no longer have the separation between the parking and the drive-thru. Mr. Boyd moved to approve this setback variance, seconded by Davis and followed by discussion. isMr. Tompkins stated that he had looked at the setback of all the other properties along West Avenue and they are right to a 0' setback which is setting a 1�7 • Board of Adjustment July 3, 1989 Page 4 precedent. With this they are establishing a reasonable setback that this area has never had before. He is not concerned that they are asking for a 25% variance; he is only concerned with the idea that this runs with this particular use. He added that he doesn't think this should be granted with the idea,that this is for any use that comes in. Mr. Becker stated that he thinks they are doing there best with this property and Fayetteville is lucky to have this use here. Chairman Mills stated that they don't own this land. She asked what the difference is in granting a variance on a leased piece of property as opposed to the owner requesting the variance. Mr. Merrell stated that he isn't sure there is a difference, but he believes the Board does have the authority to grant the variance. Chairman Mills advised that the Board of Adjustment rules state that the owner of the land must request the variance. Mr. Becker noted they are leasing this for forty years so they are the effective owners for forty so the variance goes with the lease. Chairman Mills stated that brings up the question: Does the variance go with the land or with the lease? Actually the variance usually goes with thelland. Mr. Merrell advised that the zoning ordinance is silent on who would need to • constitute the applicant as to whether it necessarily needs to be the owner. Mr. Merrell stated that they could amend the motion to.specify that the variance is for this particular lease and this layout. Mr. Boyd amended his motion to grant the variance for the duration of the lease or any extension therefore for the project submitted ( this specific site plan) to the Board, seconded by Davis. The motion passed 4-0-0. Item O1: Regarding the IBM Building on North College, John Merrell stated that according to the traffic people for the City, the statement which says "The issuance of this driveway permit does not supercede any requirement of the City which has jurisdiction over the development of the property." was not on the original permit. However, the Highway Department in response to a request for a copy of the permit, furnished one with this statement on it. He advised that the driveway has now been marked "ingress only". The traffic superintendent, Perry Franklin, has stated that hopefully by the end of the summer, they will start work on some of the changes to the stop light at Joyce Street and North College, Mr. Becker stated that he appreciated the follow-up on this. 14U • Board of Adjustment July 3, 1989 Page 5 Item 02• Chairman Mills stated that she would like to discuss the handling of the Wade Bishop variance request by the Board of Directors. She stated that she will give the details as she knows them. The request was submitted to someone (possibly the City Clerk). Her understanding is that the request for this to appear before the Board was submitted by Jim McCord. She added that there wasn't any evidence that the Board of Adjustment's decision on this variance was ever commented on. The suit was filed against the City of Fayetteville, not the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, when the attorney for Wade Bishop requested a settlement for Mr. Bishop in giving the City $500.00, the City has every right to accept or deny the settlement. As she understands it, Mr. Bishop is going to give $500.00 to the City for Parks and Recreation. Now he can leave his house as is and has settled with the City for $500.00. Mr. Tompkins stated that the house is still in violation. Mr. Davis stated that there was no one there to speak up and inform them that this has been in front of the Board of Adjustment twice and denied. Chairman Mills advised that the City, according to Jim McCord, has every right • to reverse the Board of Adjustment decisions. Mr. Tompkins stated that isn't true. Chairman Mills stated that she is concerned because the Board of Adjustment didn't have an opportunity to explain why this appeal was denied. She stated that she was asked by one of the Board of Directors to come to a Board meeting and explain all of this. However, at that time, she didn't feel comfortable picking up the banner and running with it before the Board of Adjustment had discussed it. Mr. Tompkins advised that they meet with the Mayor and explain their concern. Chairman Mills advised that the suit was filed, but it never got to Court. They came to the Board of Directors first for settlement. She noted that the only time they can meet with the Board is at an agenda meeting on Wednesday morning or at the open meeting at night and that wouldn't give them much time. She would like to schedule a meeting with the Mayor and any Board members that could be persuaded to attend at the next regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment to come and talk with them about their concerns on enforcement and procedure. Mr. Merrell stated that they are planning to set up the first workshop on the Unified Development Ordinance which includes zoning around the first of August. Item 03- Mr. Merrell stated that the sign that Dr. Boyd Harris on Green Acres Road had • asked for a variance and was denied has been moved and he is in compliance now. There being no more business, the meeting was adjourned. 1q