HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-09-08 Minutes•
•
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, September
8, 1992, at 3:45 p m in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West
Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkanssss.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
Gerald Boyd, Marion Orton, Don Mills, Robert Davis,
Larry Perkins, Lonnie Meadows and Thad Hanna
Alett Little, Sharon Langley, Joe Bader
Ms. Mills called the meeting to order and explained the protocol of the meeting.
APPEAL NO. BA92-17 - REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF AREA AND BULK
REQUIREMENTS
JOE BADER - 2050 W. 6TH
The first item to be heard was a request for a setback variance (setback not to be
used for parking) on property located at 2050 W. 6th presented by Joe Bader. The
property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial.
Mr. Bader stated he was present to answer any questions they might have.
Ms. Little explained the Section 160.118(D) (6) allowed for reduction in the building
setbacks required for a C-2 zone from 50 feet to 25 feet provided vegetation having
a minimum height of 1.5 feet at the time of planting and occupying 10% of the open
area was installed and no off-street parking was provided in the remaining front
yard.
She further noted this lot was triangular in shape consisting of approximately 1/3
acre, and had frontage on three streets. She explained to the north was Farmington
Road, to the west was Sang Avenue and to the southeast there was frontage on U.
S. Highway 62 (West 6th) . She advised that, due to the unusual configuration, with
frontage on three sides, a setback from each street right-of-way of 50 feet was
required. She explained the applicant was proposing to demolish the current
building which occupied the lot and to replace it with, in Phase 1, a 1300 square foot
restaurant and in Phase 2, an additional 1200 square foot building. She further
explained that, at completion, the buildings would occupy approximately 20% of the
lot which was in the acceptable category for building area (60% being the maximum) .
She stated that, under Use Unit 13, Eating Places, one parking space per 200 square
feet of area was required, thus a total of 13 parking spaces would be required. She
noted the developer planned on providing 16 parking spaces; however, due to the
unusual shape of the lot, the 16 spaces would not fit without encroachment into the
setback area. She advised the use of the setback area was prohibited under the
referenced section.
Ms. Little explained the applicant was requesting a variance to allow use of the
setback area for parking in order to accommodate the proposed development of a
Little Ceasars Pizza. She also expressed concern that parking spaces 6 through 9
would be backing directly into the street onto Farmington Road.
• Ms. Little recommended approval of the requested variance conditioned upon a vision
triangle of ten feet being maintained at each corner where streets intersected. She
•
Board of Adjustments
September 8, 1992
Page 2
explained this requirement was stated at Section 160.110, Visibility at Intersections
in Residential, Nonresidential Districts.
Mr. Boyd pointed out Farmington Road was one-way at the subject tract.
Mr. Bader explained there was an inset from the center lane of the road and it
appeared there was room to back out onto the road.
Mr. Boyd stated the car would be going the wrong way on a one-way street.
Mr. Bader stated he could change the parking of those few cars.
Mr. Wayne Eckert stated he had worked at that location for nine years and had seen
approximately 200 to 300 people per month go through the station lot in order to
avoid the intersection.
Mr. Richard Noyce, a customer and part-time employee of Mr. Eckert, agreed the
intersection was quite busy.
Mr. Boyd advised the applicant only needed 7 parking spaces in phase 1 and he
would be able to get 7 spaces without the request for a variance.
• Mr. Bader stated he believed he would need the parking.
Mr. Boyd suggested Mr. Bader redesign his plan so there would be no exits on 6th
Street, only entrances.
Mr. Bader explained most of the traffic would be at the pick-up window and he had
planned it would be one-way coming from Old Farmington. He explained having the
entrance on Highway 62 could cause problems whenever the traffic was backed up
at the pick-up window.
Mr. Eckert expressed concern for the children crossing the street at that location.
He requested some type of safety measure such as a crosswalk.
Mr. Bader explained 80$ of his business was done between 5:00 and 8:00 p.m. which
would be after school hours. In response to a question from Ms. Little, he explained
the Phase 2 was to be used as a rental property.
Mr. Boyd asked why he needed so many parking spaces if the customers picked up
the pizzas.
Mr. Bader explained only 40% of the customers used the pick up window, the
remaining 60% came in, ordered and waited 10 to 15 minutes for their order. He
further explained corporation headquarters requested each restaurant have 12
parking spaces for a 1300 square foot building.
• In response to a question from Mr. Hanna, Mr. Bader explained he would be using
the existing pad but would have to remove the tanks.
%8
•
Board of Adjustments
September 8, 1992
Page 3
Mr. Davis asked if there had been any consultation with the Traffic Department for
yield signs to bepainted on the street or crossing warnings.
Ms. Little stated she had not talked with Perry Franklin regarding that matter.
There was discussion regarding traffic flow and realignment of the parking spaces.
Mr. Boyd stated he did not see how Phase 2 could be completed. He recommended
the Board table this matter to give the applicant time to redraw Phase 1 without the
addition of Phase 2.
Mr. Davis agreed the matter could be tabled in order to use the expertise of the
Traffic Department.
MOTION
Mr. Davis moved to table the request to better determine a traffic plan.
Ms. Orton seconded the motion.
The motion carried with Ms. Mills, Mr. Davis, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Orton voting "yes" and
Mr. Hanna, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Meadows voting "no".
APPEAL NOS. BA92-18, BA92-19 & BA92-20 - REQUESTS FOR A VARIANCE OF
AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS
GERALD BOYD - 1685 MAINE, 1626 MAINE, & 239 S. EASTERN
The next three requests were for variances of area and bulk requirements presented
by Gerald Boyd for property located at 1685 Maine, 1626 Maine and 239 S. Eastern.
All three tracts of property are zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential.
Ms. Little stated the first of the properties, located at 1685 Maine, stated the request
was for a variance on the front setback from 25 feet to 11 feet, and the side setback
from 8 feet to 3.7 feet.
Mr. Boyd pointed out this was a corner lot and he would need a variance from 25 feet
to 3.7 feet.
Ms. Little stated there were two dwelling structures on this tract plus a garage. She
stated the first request was for the structure closest to Maine Street which currently
existed only 11 feet from the property line, requiring a variance of 14 feet. She
explained the garage was located to the rear of the property and sat 3.7 feet from
the property line, requiring a variance of 21.3 feet. She recommended approval of
the request because there were existing structures.
Ms. Little stated almost the same situation existed on the property located at 1626
Maine Street. She explained it was an existing structure and the porch had been
removed from the property. She advised she had estimated the porch had been 6 to
8 feet wide which had reduced the amount of variance required. She noted the
requirement was for a 25 foot setback and the building currently sat 17.5 feet from
71
•
•
Board of Adjustments
September 8, 1992
Page 4
the property line, leaving a variance request of 7.5 feet. She recommended this
request for approval since it was an existing structure.
Ms. Little stated the third request was for property located at 239 S. Eastern Street
which also had an existing structure. She explained the setback requirement was
25 feet, the building currently sat 18.6 feet from the property line, requiring a
variance of 6.4 feet. She further advised this structure had also had the porch
removed which had reduced the variance requested.
Ms. Little presented pictures to the Board of the three tracts for their review.
In response to a question from Mr. Davis, Mr. Boyd explained he had completed
remodeling of two of the structures and planned on remodeling the house on Eastern
Street.
Mr. Davis asked why, since the structures did exist and would not be enlarged, Mr.
Boyd was requesting a variance.
Mr. Boyd explained if the structure should burn he would be able to rebuild it with
the variances. He further stated it would be necessary, in order to get title
insurance, should he plan on selling the property. He advised all three of the tracts
were in an older part of town and the property had been purchased prior to
properties being surveyed.
Ms. Mills recommended they consider Appeal BA92-18 located at 1685 Maine.
Mr. Boyd explained the structures currently existing were in existence when he
purchased the property together with a house immediately to the east of the existing
house. He stated he had torn down one of the houses. He stated the house had
originally had a front porch which had been enclosed and made a part of the
livingroom. He advised he had removed that portion of the structure thereby
reducing the encroachment. He also noted he had made two of the structures into
a duplex.
Mr. Perkins pointed out the setbacks were consistent with the surrounding
neighborhood properties.
MOTION
Mr. Perkins moved to approve the requests for variance.
Ms. Orton seconded the motion.
The motion carried 6-0-1 with Mr. Boyd abstaining.
Ms. Mills stated they would consider the property at 1626 Maine.
Mr. Boyd explained this was the first property he had purchased on the block and
now owned all the property on both sides. He stated this property had also had a
front porch which he had removed in order to lessen the encroachment.
t0
•
Board of Adjustments
September 8, 1992
Page 5
MOTION
Ms. Orton moved to grant the variance.
Mr. Hanna seconded the motion.
The motion carried 6-0-1 with Mr. Boyd abstaining.
Ms. Mills stated they would consider the appeal at 239 S. Eastern.
Mr. Boyd explained he had purchased this tract because the structure encroached
onto his property. He further stated he would be remodeling this property also but
did not want to move the structure because it had a basement. He also pointed out
the garage was also in violation of setbacks but he did not want a variance on the
garage.
MOTION
Mr. Hanna moved to grant the variance as requested.
Mr. Davis seconded the motion.
• The motion carried 6-0-1 with Mr. Boyd abstaining.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the Board of Sign Appeals of the August 17, 1992 meeting were
approve as distributed.
The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
•