Loading...
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.