HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-03-03 Minutesiz
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND SIGN APPEALS
A meeting of the Board of Adjustments and Board of Sign Appeals was held Monday, March 3,
1997 at 3:45p.m., Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain Street
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Perkins, Marion Orton, Thad Hanna, and Paul
Wilhelms.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Gerald Boyd, Bob Nickle, and Michael Andrews
STAFF PRESENT: Rich Lane and Heather Woodruff
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF
Minutes were approved as distributed.
NEW BUSINESS
BA97-3.00: VARIANCE FROM REQUIRED SETBACKS
VALERIE ALMON- 9 SOUTH SCHOOL STREET
The request was submitted by Valerie Almon for property located at the northwest corner of
Mountain Street and South School Street at 9 South School. The property is zoned C-2
(Thoroughfare Commercial) and contains approximately 0.44 acres. The request is for a variance
of approximately 32 feet from the required 50' setback adjacent to Mountain Street.
Mr. Lane stated the vanance request was for a non- conforming structure built during the 1950's
prior to the zoning code. Approximately half of the structure was in the front setback. The
applicants were not required to apply for a variance, but as a condition of approval for the
conditional use for a dance club, they were asked to do so by staff.
Ms. Almon stated she did not own the building, but she had signed a long term lease.
Mr. Wilhelms asked if the variance was for the existing structure or for the site. He was
concerned that, if the building was removed, the variance would not apply to a new structure.
Mr. Lane stated the variance was for 32' along the entire south side of the property. The variance
would be for the site.
Ms. Orton asked if the building could be built back according to the current ordinance if the
structure was destroyed.
• Board of Adjustments and Sign Appeals
March 3, 1997
Page 2
•
Mr. Lane stated the applicant would be able to receive title insurance if the variance was granted.
Mr. Wilhelms believed the variance would be beneficial for the neighborhood.
MOTION
Ms. Orton moved to grant the variance for the existing building.
Ms. Almon stated she would like to buy the building in the future. If the structure was destroyed,
she would like to rebuild as it was.
Mr. Hanna explained Ms. Orton motion was to grant the variance only for this building. If the
building was destroyed, then it could not be built back as it was. Ms. Almon would have to
conform to the ordinances.
Mr. Wilhelms suggested the variance could be for the footprint as shown now. If the building
was destroyed, they could rebuild as -is. They could not increase the building size in the setback.
He further suggested they could grant a 32' variance along the entire south side.
Ms. Almon stated they would like to rebuilda "as -is".
Mr. Lane stated the staff was recommending the variance so the owner could rebuild in the
setback.
Ms. Orton asked if it was reasonable to have 50' setbacks on both sides of corner lot in a
downtown area.
Mr. Lane did not believe they could add much to the building because of their parking
requirements.
Ms. Orton commented if they were going to enlarge the building they could always come back
for another variance.
Mr. Hanna wanted to make sure if something was to happen to the structure they could rebuild
the structure.
Ms. Orton withdrew her motion.
• Mr. Hanna moved to grant the variance as requested.
13
• Board of Adjustments and Sign Appeals
March 3, 1997
Page 3
•
•
Mr. Wilhelms suggested increasing the variance by two feet that, if they decided to replace the
flat roof with a pitched roof there would be adequate room.
MOTION
Ms. Almon thought she would like to replace the flat roof in the future.
Mr. Hanna reworded his motion to grant the variance for the existing footprint of the building
plus an additional two feet for a new roof.
Mr. Wilhelms seconded the motion.
The motion carried by a vote of 4-0-0.
The meeting adjourned at 4:10.