HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-10-07 Minutes•
•
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held on Monday, October 7,
1991, at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West
Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Gerald Boyd, Don Mills, Robert Davis, Larry Tompkins, Lonnie
Meadows, and Marion Orton
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dennis Becker
OTHERS PRESENT: Freeman Wood and Sharon Langley
AGENDA
Mr. Larry Tompkins called the meeting to order. He reviewed the agenda and
stated under New Business he believed they needed to clarify their ideas on the
decisions by the Board of Directors to settle numerous Board of Adjustment cases.
Mr. Boyd stated he had comments regarding the amendment of the sign ordinance.
He explained he did not agree with the way it had been amended.
The Board unanimously approved the proposed agenda.
MINUTES
Ms. Orton stated that on page 3 of the minutes of the Board of Adjustment meeting
of September 16, 1991 the first paragraph should read "had characteristics of
controlled access" rather than "this street was a controlled access".
Ms. Mills moved to approve the minutes as corrected.
Ms. Orton seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
There were no committee reports.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Davis stated that sometime ago the Board had contacted builders and
developers in the area regarding terms of compliance with building setbacks. He
stated he believed Planning staff should be the entity to contact the builders,
not the Board.
Ms. Mills explained the meeting had not been called by the Board of Adjustment.
She further explained the planning staff had called the meeting and she had been
present to explain the problems the Board had been having to the builders and
developers.
Mr. Wood explained that, in order to solve problems with building setbacks, the
Board had discussed requiring surveys to be filed with the building permit.
Public meetings were held regarding amending the ordinance. The builders were
opposed to the amendment and, as a compromise, the city and builders had agreed
to the present building permit format with a plot plan on the back of the form
and the owner of the property certifying that the building would be located as
reflected on the plot plat and would comply with all setback requirements. He
gave the Board members a copy of a building permit.
• Mr. Davis expressed his belief that there should be some form of disciplinary
action for violations. He gave as an example the Ryan case where there was an
Board of Adjustments
aiPtentamarawatir 10-1-g/
Page 2
addition on the building that was never on the plot plan. He suggested the
builder should at least receive notice that any future applications will have to
be verified by a surveyor.
Mr. Wood stated while he agreed with Mr. Davis, he did not think legally they
could single out a particular builder.
Ms. Mills asked if they could legally do something after a person has received
two or three violations.
Mr. Wood stated they would need to ask the city attorney. He stated they could
not refuse to issue a building permit to someone because they had a violation at
another site.
Mr. Tompkins reviewed the three phases in the planning process: plan
development, plan for implementation and the evaluation process. He explained
implementation of the comprehensive plan was the job of the Board of Adjustment.
He stated they must establish policy and the approach they would use. He
described various implementation plans performed by other cities across the
country. He expressed his belief their role was to protect the community. He
stated he was interested in what the Board of Directors saw as their role -
representation of the individual or the community.
Ms. Mills stated she believed the Board of Adjustment needed to be concerned with
individual rights and the Planning Commission took care of community rights. She
expressed her belief the problem related to enforcement of the ordinances.
The Board and Mr. Wood then discussed various methods of enforcement. Mr. Wood
stated that on new construction the utilities were not turned on until code was
met but the only avenue open to them on existing construction was a stop work
order.
The Board also discussed the numerous settlements the Board of Directors have
recently been making with regarding to denied Board of Adjustment cases.
The meeting was adjourned.