No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-04-29 - Minutes• • • 1645 S. Industrial Dr. MINUTES MICROFILMED CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS (CB,(A) APRIL 29, 1998 They held a meeting of the Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals at 11:00 a.m. on April 29, 1998, in room 111 of the City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Stephen Jeffus, Stan Johnson, Butch Green, Dennis Becker, Jim Key, Matt Bodishbaugh, and Mike Tramill OTHERS PRESENT: Ken Dunk, Burt Hanna, Steve Cattaneo, Don K. Fitzgerald, Bert Rakes, Jan West Jim Key, chair, declared the meeting open and asked for a role call. Bert Rakes, secretary, called the role. Mr. 0. E. Luttrell was absent, with all other members present. Butch Green was present but abstaining. Bert Rakes stated that with Mr. Green abstaining, and Stan Johnson being present as an alternate, could be a voting member. Mr. Key said this would give them a quorum. Mr. Rakes said it would take four votes to pass any decision made by the board today. Mr. Key moved that they approve the minutes of the April 13th meeting. Mr. Tramill seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF DECISION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THE • TECHNICAL PROVISION OF THE 1991 STANDARD BUILDING CODE FOR 1645 S. INDUSTRIAL DRIVE MR. BURT HANNA MR. KEN DUNK Mr. Hanna explained that approximately three years earlier he had permitted and built this warehouse, at the time he had neither the funds nor the thought of changing the building. When, this year, he decided to add space to the building, he did not think there would be any problem, since approximately 84,000 sq. ft. had been originally approved. Mr. Hanna stated that somehow this building had passed large scale development without a firewall. When Mr. Hanna wanted to permit the addition, he discovered that with only 15 or 20 -foot to the southeast property line, he would have to add a fire wall to the building. Mr. Hanna discovered that the cost was going to be prohibitive to build a fire wall, at this time he called Mr. Ken Dunk, to see if he had any better ideas, that would meet code, and not be as costly. Mr. Dunk suggested that they could use a water curtain against twenty-six gauge sheet metals. Mr. Dunk & Mr. Hanna both felt that this would give better fire protection. Mr. Dunk stated that the only time the code addresses water curtains is in an atrium going vertically through a building, where there are spaces between the floors, a water curtain prevents • the spread of a fire. Mr. Dunk said that since this is what they design a fire wall to do, although the code does not directly address a water curtain being used in this type of application, common sense says that a water curtain will survive better than a fire wall. Mr. Dunk presented an article from a magazine called "Sprinkler Agent," that shows they sprinkled a building, they did not sprinkle an addition, but had the four-hour fire wall that is called for in the code. Mr. Dunk pointed out that the building did not have a water curtain, only a sprinkler system and that the fire collapsed the fire wall, but the sprinkled portion was still standing and usable. Mr. Dunk feels that it is common sense that a fire curtain just works better and with the fine job that the Fayetteville Fire Department does enforcing the inspection and maintaining of sprinkler systems within the city, that the sprinkler system just works better. Mr. Tramill asked if they were going to sprinkle one side or both sides. Mr. Dunk stated that they could do either side or both, since you would not know which side a fire might start on they would do both sides. Mr. Bodishbaugh asked how the heads worked, were they in a grid pattern on the face of the wall or against the roof running parallel to the wall. Mr. Dunk said it was parallel to the wall, just like a waterfall. Mr. Tramill wanted to know how the water supplied to the system, and Mr. Dunk said they sprinkled the whole building. Mr. Dunk stated that if a fire started in the building they automatically activated the sprinklers. Mr. Tramill's concem was the integrity of the water supply to the system or malfunction of the system. • Mr. Key asked where is the riser for the existing building, will there be a separate riser for the addition or extending the existing line. Mr. Green pointed out on the site plan where the riser • • was located in the building and Mr. Hanna pointed out that the riser was located in a sprinkled room. Mr. Bodishbaugh asked the exact location of the building. Mr. Hanna explained that it was in the Industrial Park, approximately 600 feet away from Hwy 16, behind "Industrial Fastenings," in a small cul de sac. Mr. Green said there was one water supply coming into the north side of the building under the building. He also stated that there would not be an additional riser because there is a fire department connection here that services the whole building, so that there will not be two points of entry. Mr. Green stated that even if the whole system failed, with the fire hydrant right by the building they could still supply the fire department with water to combat the fire. Mr. Tramill stated that, having been a fire fighter, he knew that there was the possibility of total involvement by the time the fire department arrived and probably cannot approach the fire hydrant. This was the reason that Mr. Tramill was looking at having a separate riser for the addition. Mr. Key stated that the fire department would prefer not to have a separate exterior supply. Mr. Green said that he remembered the meeting concerning this problem, that Mickey Jackson and Dennis Ledbetter attended, and to the best of his recollection, they would not object to what they were proposing. Mr. Bodishbaugh said that if he remembered correctly that when he had built a four-hour fire wall they had to carry this fire wall three feet above the roof line, and was protection above the roof line an issue now. Mr. Rakes said this was not an issue with a non combustible roof. Mr. Bodishbaugh wondered if there was a UL rating on this or did they recognize this water curtain system. Mr. Dunk stated that they only addressed it in atriums, the same as the code, there had not been a specific test done on this application, this was the reason he had brought the article, and named other specific fires where the fire spread until it had reached the sprinkled areas. This was the reason he thought that the water curtain was more than adequate. Mr. Tramill stated that his main worry was the integrity of the water supply to the sprinklers. Mr. Dunk said this was a concern of all firefighters, and that he, Mr. Hanna, and the fire department did testing of the lines on a regular basis. In fact while doing test in another part of the city they found one of the twelve inch valves was left shut and still had enough pressure for supply to the citizens of the city. Mr. Hanna said that in answer to the supply question, Mickey Jackson had requested that he put another loop on the water supply, because at the time it was only a single line to supply the trailer park across the road and the industrial section. Mr. Hanna had looped over to the industrial place to another sprinkler system and it is an open loop to the city, so if one side is shut off the other side is still supplied. Stan Johnson asked whether this was a wet or dry system, discovering that it is a wet system. Mr. Bodishbaugh had some questions about Mr. Hanna's insurance carrier and if they had come to check out this system. Mr. Hanna said that his insurer was very happy with the system and the pressure that he has for the system. Mr. Hanna and Mr. Dunk also stated that the insurance companies are only interested in the system and the water pressure, they do not rate the building based on a certain type of system. Mr. Bodishbaugh and Mr. Key both had questions about having fire doors, over head doors etc. through the new wall. Mr. Key said with a four-hour wall they would have to have the fire rated doors, so if the board were to approve this water curtain, it would also do away with the need for the fire doors or fire shutters and the four-hour firewall. • • Mr. Hanna stated there would be a 12 -ft x 14 ft door on the north side of the building. Sixteen feet from the northwest end of the building there is a 12-x 14 -ft overhead fire rated door, and two 20 x 20 foot window openings. To the glass is insulated with metal frames. Mr. Hanna suggested that they could remove the glass openings and have metal sheathing all of the way down that side of the building and sprinkle that wall. Mr. Bodishbaugh asked what this building is being used for at this time. Mr. Hanna said that it was just storage right now and was planning to use it for his distribution center. Mr. Tramill asked what they were storing in there. Mr. Hanna said he stored candles, potpourri and boxes. Mr. Dunk stated that when Mr. Hanna originally built the warehouse, he wanted the best fire protection possible, therefore they used the largest system possible. It is the maximum sprinkler system possible. It is designed to be able to stack corrugated board up to twenty feet high. Mr. Hanna does not store the higher hazard materials in the warehouse but the sprinkler system is designed for those types of materials. Mr. Hanna stated that there will lie no racks in the building because they will have heavier material And will not use racks, he wants the open spaces to be able to store more. Mr. Bodishbaugh asked if the only question the board was considering if a water curtain suffices instead of a fire wall. Mr. Key said that the only reason that it is even an issue is because there is not a 60 -foot clearance all the way around the building. There is an 80 -foot section of the building that does not have the 60 -foot clearance. Mr. Key stated that in reality they should not have allowed that • the building built the size it was without having a firewall. Mr. Hanna stated that when we built it was a factory industrial. • Mr. Key stated that, according to the plans, Mr. Hanna has vehicular access all around the building and a utility easement between his property and Northwest Oil. Mr. Key continued that they could not be assured that they would not move or expand it or that Northwest would not expand closer to the property line. To the main issue for the board to consider is that the building is less than 50 ft from the property line to the building. Mr. Key suggested that they have the Inspection staff's recommendations and called on Mr. Rakes Mr. Rakes asked if all of the members had their ideas. Mr. Becker asked if they sprinkled the existing building and if they would sprinkle the addition. Mr. Dunk assured him that they sprinkled the original building and they would sprinkle the addition. Mr. Becker asked Mr. Hanna what the specs were on his quotation for the firewall. Mr. Hanna stated that they had told him that 12 inches unfilled lightweight would give him four hours, also that 8 inches filled with foam would give four hours, formiculite would work, or you have to fill with concrete. Everyone has their own opinion on what would work. Mr. Becker felt that drywall would give you the required rating, but that with the type of equipment that Mr. Hanna would be using there was the possibility of tearing up the drywall and defeating its purpose. Mr. Bodishbaugh stated he was hoping that there would be some sort of testing they could look at on water curtains. That some agencies had tested it, possibly have a UL rating, someone would have looked at this and come out with some sort of statement. He stated that maybe the SBC had not endorsed this but surely another rating bureau that has come out and endorsed this • water curtain instead of a 4 -hour firewall. To the fact that the code has recognized an atnum, he wondered if this were a subtle approval to use this instead of a firewall. Mr. Becker asked if a fire would set off both sides of the sprinkler system at the same time. Mr. Dunk replied negatively, but they could have a deluge system installed. A deluge system is set off when one sprinkler head has read the heat and then sets off the rest of the sprinklers up the line. Mr. Becker said that for this water curtain to be effective in replacing a four-hour wall wouldn't it have to go off all at the same time and give you a complete deluge on both sides. Mr. Hanna asked if they could make the sprinkler heads, on each side of the curtain, sensitive to a lower heat temperature, so they would go off sooner in case of a fire Mr. Dunk said that this was possible. Mr. Green and Mr. Tramill both felt that if there were a fire on only one side the sprinklers on that side would be the only ones that would need to go off. Their job was to stop the fire before it went through the wall. Mr. Jeffus asked for a clarification of the sprinkler system, does it spray in a pattern, a straight line or staggered? Mr. Dunk stated that it does spray in a staggered or overlapping coverage, and you have your standard sprinkler system, and most of all of the sprinkler heads are on the ceiling. Mr. Rakes stated that the building was first constructed in 1995 and then had unlimited area, there were 60 foot spaces. Mr. Rakes repeated that a 4 -hour fire wall is a tested assembly that keeps fire from spreading from one area to another. Essentially creating two independent • buildings. Part of the definition is that fire can destroy part of the building and the other parts are left standing. To the code, fire a protection code handbook, life safety handbooks, not one of them actually recognizes the sprinkling of a wall. Nevertheless, the building code does allow for the sprinkling of an atrium, but that is a one hour wall. Mr. Rakes continued that one point against the building is that it does contain highly combustible material. There has not been any testing, nor does this meet any code of which he knows. His main concern is the risk and that should be the main concern of the board. Mr. Rakes said maybe there were alternatives to the sprinkling system. Maybe consider improving the access for the fire trucks, or the wall close to the property line could be fire rated walls that would reduce the risk. To the sprinkling has its merit and he knows that it is a really tough decision. • Mr. Bodishbaugh said he really hated to decide this situation until they had a chance to hear from Mickey Jackson, and get the fire departments feelings on this idea. Would the fire department be willing to think about some alternatives? Mr. Rakes said that they could table the question and address it later. Mr. Hanna stated that he could wait for three or four weeks. He stated that he could possibly buy some property from Northwest Oil and this would give him more space. Mr. Bodishbaugh made the motion that they table any decision today, pending investigation by the owner to investigate options in respect to his property line. To also hear from the fire chief and if they can obtain a restricted easement we will administratively approve the permit. There will be a decision within three weeks. To the motion was seconded by Steven Jeffus To the vote was unanimous. t New business was recognizing the new members Steven Jeffus and Stan Johnson, also Matt Bodishbaugh on being elected as the vice chair. Mr. Rakes said that there was some confusion on the position of the alternate members. If we have a meeting and the alternates show up and someone else does not, then we decide, somehow how, which of the alternate members can vote. Either way they could both participate in the discussion. Mr. Tramill asked if we could mention that when a standing member has to abstain from voting then an alternate could vote then. Mr. Key adjourned the meeting at 12:30 p.m. FAYETTEW LEE • APRIL 23, 1998 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS TO: CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APP(E6AL,L- FR: BERT RAKES, INSPECTION DIVISION DIRECTOR RE. BURT HANNA, 1645 S. INDUSTRIAL PLACE A meeting is called for Wednesday, April 29, 1998, 11.00 am, room 111, City Administration, 113 W. Mountain St. for the appeal of a decision of the Building Official and the Technical provisions of the 1991 Standard Building Code. The appeal is to have concentrated sprinkler heads washing a non-combustible wall rather than a code required 4 -hour fire rated wall separating the building into two buildings conforming to areas allowed by code. The building code recognizes wall washing in lieu of I -hour rated walls for a glass wall in an atrium (see attached code section 509.5). The applicant has provided the attached article to help support the appeal. Plan review of the required drawings indicated that the area of the existing building, 69,375 sq. ft., plus the proposed addition, 14,800 sq. ft., exceeded the maximum area allowed by code for the use and type of construction. Type IV construction, storage occupancy, unprotected, and sprinklered allows a 48,000 sq. ft. plus 16,000 sq. ft. with area modification with 30 ft. of open space around permiter of building ( see Table 400 and Section 402.3 attached). Attached code section 402.4.1 provides for unlimited area for storage occupancy with 60 ft. open area around permiter and with building sprinklered. Review of records of the permiting in 1995 of the existing building indicated a building with 60 ft. open area around permiter allowing unlimited building area but in fact the building was constructed with approximately 60 ft. open area around permiter except the south 80 ft. on east side was within 30 ft. on the south (see attached site plan) limiting the area to 64,000 sq. ft.for a storage occupancy. Apparently the building was designed for a manufacturing occupancy in 1995 within area requirements of the code. This will be explained during the meeting. Attached you will find: 1. Appeal application w/ article. 2. Code sections 509.5, 402.3, 402.4.1, & Table 400. 3. Site plan. 4. 1995 & 1998 permit applications. Also, attached you will find minutes of the April 13, 1998 CBAA meeting to be reveiwed, corrected if necessary, and approved. CBAAHANN 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 501-521-7700 FAX 501-575-8257 4r;119:-1998 • 8 : 37PM FROM P. 2 City of Fayetteville Inspection Division NOTICE OF APPEAL CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS NAME Bu2r t -Liv INA- DATE y/aa15s ADDRESS: /1a/ (3 , / S' CITY: __>, JTr'Y, cis" STATE: '- ZIP: %a 70/ HOME PHONE. 7 56, - .WORK PHONE: 9'4'3 -Sf ADDRESS OF PROPERTY WHERE APPEAL REQUESTED: /6,/i5 5. u n pasremz. 7L � APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING OFFICLAL AND/OR APPEAL THE TECHNICAL PROVISION OF CODE 1/ . (Y/N) • BUILDING OFFICIAL DECISION: / '1 1+i, 04'o,1e0 5,7- pr P2oScex.) Liw r 15eAr 1-055 40 off S.2i L&kJ& T'"'5 au:,.,,; .JV O'aei-ta.y w.,3 PMSG w/o Tre Lew ' . TECHNICAL PROVISION OF CODE. I( 142. f,'oiee, REASONS FOR REQUESTING APPEAL. 74r bus- of 9to:k F,'.p3 geoA'6''-i.e nria ,ay Sit/vka/'Ivt- 1 ✓4a„ w a ono aver nit 02 aeab j;SnNL- It rnz P•eoT13zr7'or- NOTE A fee of $50.00 shall accompany each Notice of Appeal Notice of Appeal shall be filed within Miry (30) days after the decision is rendered by the Building Official. i• APR -21-1998 14:21 DUNK AUTOMATIC SPKLR 501 751 8479 P.03'04 Same Time, Same Place... Totally Different Results Warehouse Fire Provides Perfect Comparison of Sprinklered vs. Unsprinklered Facilities Roarely do conditions outside of a laboratory burn dem- nstration provide such a graphic testimonial'' to the effectiveness of fire sprinklers as that witnessed by mp]oyees of AllSouth Sprinkler Company, Lilburn, Ga.. The AllSouth personnel responded to a call from an owner asking that a system in his Atlanta, Ga. warehouse be replaced into service after it activated during a fire. What they found when they arrived at the structure was one section of the build- ing nearly intact, while the other lay in rubble, demolished by the fire. According to Bob McCullough, president of AllSouth Sprin- kler Co. and Immediate Past Chairman of AFSA, the original portion of the structure was constructed of brick and fully pro- tected by a fire sprinkler system installed in 1960. Some time later, previous owners of the building had added a second sec- tion, constructed of brick and concrete block. For unknown rea- 10 SPRINKLER AGE/Apr111998 sons — perhaps they considered brick and concrete block con- struction to be fireproof— they chose not to protect it with fire sprinklers. On February 3, 1998, a fire started in the unsprinklered por- tion of the warehouse, apparently by a forklift battery charger. Stored inside the building were rolls of plastic material used to stripe streets and parking Tots. The fire totally devastated the building, warping structural steel and collapsing brick and con- crete walls, until it reached the sprinklered portion. When the concrete block fire wall between the two sections collapsed, the nearly 40 -year-old sprinkler system went into action. Fifteen fire sprinklers fused and created a water curtain, protecting the rest of the structure until fire fighters could gain control of the blaze. Figure 1 shows a diagram of the building's two sections. In the photographs above, the left pictures the gutted remains of • • .RPR -21-4998 14 21 DUNK AUTOMATIC SPKLR 501 751 8479 P.04K04 rri SPRINKLERED PART/ OF BUILDING a• SPRINKLERS ACTIVATED'�� 45,000 SQ FT BURNED TO THE GROUND N.S. 300' 1 ' 450' FIREWALL COLLAPSED FROM HEAT Figure 1. Diagram of the warehouse In Atlanta where fire sprinklers saved a portion of the structure, while the unsprtnklered side burned 10 the ground. the unsprinklered portion, while the right shows the location where the two sections were joined. Note the fused sprinkler and slightly scorched ceiling, only a few feet from the total de- struction on the other side of the collapsed fire wall. (See cover of this issue for exterior photograph.) McCullough noted that the section of the building lost to fire was valued at S1.2 million. He also reported that, although the fire was covered extensively by the local media, not once did he hear any mention of the fact that fire sprinklers saved a portion of the building. Atlanta fire officials could not be reached for comment. i ED(nOH'i NOM Our thanks to Bob McCullough for notifying us of this interesting story, and for providing Information end photographs that avowed us to bring it to the aaenllon of our readers. We encourage our readers to notify us of any Interesting events that happen in their area. MoreThan Just Canopies PPI Fire Protection Products, Inc. .,^ r ... .2 -� - raltri EL 1P; _: Y,'. '• of wr t W -SI Ca111BOO 344-1822 TOORY for the distributor near qou. m1998 Fire Protect on Products. Inc. • • _•,.•. _._...=':..:..•... . .4:.';., to ,, • •• +4 ._. 4 D' • .-® t•.t • Hose valves • Globe valves • Angle valves ^ft 4>• �� 77-444611 l 1 • Ball valves • Check valves • Ball drips www_fppl.com • email: fppiceoefppl.com SPRINKLER A(:F /Anril 1998 11 TOTAL P.04 509.5 ENCLOSURE OF ATRIUMS IIIium spaces shall be separated from adjacent spaces by a 1 -hour fire aration wall. A glass wall forming a smoke partition may be used in lieu of the required fire separation wall where automatic sprinklers are spaced 6 ft (1829 mm) or less along both sides of the separation wall, or on the room side only if there is not a walkway on the atrium side, and not more than 1 ft (305 mm) away from the glass and so designed that the entire surface of the glass is wet upon activation of the sprinkler system. The glass shall be installed either: 402.3 GENERAL AREA MODIFICATIONS 402.3.1 The exceptions and requirements of 402.3 and 402.4 shall modify unsprinklered areas permitted by Table 400 and the specific use provisions of this chapter. 402.3.2 Where streets or public spaces, or horizontal separation from property lines of total width of not less than 30 ft (9144 mm), or 30 ft (9144 mm) between buildings on commonly owned property, extend along the building perimeter, except for hazardous occupancies, the areas permitted by Table 400 may be increased as follows: [FORMULA 402.3.2 - GENERAL AREA MODIFICATIONS] I = 4/3 (100 (F/P - 0.25)) •here I= Percent increase of unsprinklered areas in Table 400 F= Building perimeter which fronts on streets, public spaces or horizontal separation not less than 30 ft (9144 mm) wide P= Total perimeter of building 402.3.3 For both an unsprinklered building and a sprinklered building, the percent increase is multiplied by the unsprinklered area permitted in Table 400 for the type of construction of the building, and the resulting area increase is added to either the sprinklered or unsprinklered areas in Table 400. When there are no unsprinklered areas permitted for the building in Table 400 an unsprinklered area can be computed for use in this section. The corresponding unsprinklered areas are computed as one-third of the sprinklered area for one story only and as one-half of the sprinklered area for multi -stories. 402.4.1 The area of a one-story building of Group B, Group F, Group M, or Group S occupancy shall not be limited provided the building is equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system throughout, in accordance with 901, or other automatic extinguishing systems as approved by the Building Official, and is surrounded on all sides by a permanent open space of not less than 60 ft (18 m). High piled combustible storage shall be protected in accordance with Chapter xF36 of the Standard Fire Prevention Code. • TABLE 400 ALLOWABLE HEIGHTS AND BUILDING AREAS ewer case letters in table refer to Notes following table. Height for types of construction is limited to the number of stories and height in feet shown. NL = No Limit. Allowable building area is shown in thousands of square feet per floor. UA = Unlimited Area. F FACTORY - INDUSTRIAL {a,b,g} TYPE CONSTRUCTION MAX. HT. IN FEET SPRINK. MAX. NO. OF STORIES AREA MULTI -STORY ONE-STORY ONLY IV 1 -Hour IV Unprot. 65' 55' uns h spr k uns h spr k 2 4 2 4 31.5 63.0 21.0 42.0 31.5 94.5 21.0 63.0 S STORAGE {a,b,e,g} TYPE AmEONSTRUCTION IIF MAX. HT. IN FEET SPRINK. MAX. NO. OF STORIES AREA MULTI -STORY ONE-STORY ONLY IV 1 -Hour IV Unprot. 65' 55' uns h spr k uns h spr k 2 4 2 4 24.0 48.0 16.0 32.0 24.0 72.0 16.0 48.0 d UILUIIVU t'CNIVII i HYVLII./-H I IUN City of Fayetteville Inspection Division 113 W. Mountain Street Permit #: Type: ., /—FIS ' • :ADDRESS: C 36 Not Required Required by Fayetteville, AR 72701 Phone: 575-8233 (J� / U Planninc/G4'ri approved (---o.2 • Flood Plain Bldg Insp -el 1 c �/ approved / ii Block:_ Subdivsion: Plat: In 10 Sal Iii 0 Engineer I .^ G. 9 3.-z7 ec-Twn-Rn F -�7 Pia Check: N approved , /Q/ Drainage _ finer. Mailing u( 4AKA- Address: Po 3s57 Pride Zip: -21970/ Phone: Sot 'y63 -syn vl« /LK sttitect/ngineer. S&z.rei)M Mailing Address: ' Zip: e. lba+NSFriP STIr S Prtti ft& Phone: yY3-c29// 0416.4) refill -fir Las ;nlractor. -Kier N- Mailing Address: Co Zip: Phone: 'z7 ?Ss7 Phone: 11113'SgG-] 1 7x70/.. ---`W3- State Contractor's License P. Expires: OW NES intact: f3u/1'i hgysn14._ Yr/c., rork: YNEW _ ADDITION _ ALTERATION _ REPAIR _ MOVING _ DEMOLITION _ FOOTING ONLY /EXTERIOR ONLY _ TENANT FINISH _ DESIGN/BUILD e.sidential: _ Single Family _ Multifamily (number of units: i, ) Valuation of Work S1%00 Opo Townhouse Structural Information :ructural: r90 o00 ectrical: $ S5, DOD umbing: $ c)0,00n echanical: $ /O,coo •tal: $ # of Stories: Height: Basement: Length: Width: Slab Floor: 1 ay AVA 375 fie$ ✓Y N Sum Total Area Total ooled: Total Unheated: Add./Alt Area: Sewer: Frame: 69375 sq ft 6,5 37S sq. ft sqft sq. ft Public Septic_ Wood _ Metal ✓Masonry_ •ructure will comply with Arkansas Energy Code Requirements (Yes/NA): 4317 e you responsible for other buildings in this subdivision? (Yes/No): 1195 ESCRIPTION OF WORK: )tafm 131x- C.mr-r se of Building: UI.S NOTICE RPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, CHANICAL. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK/ ONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 6 MONTHS. R IF WORK/CONSTUCTION I5 SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A ERIOD OF 6 MONTHS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. iereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the samo to true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances goveming this typo of work ,II be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does )t presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or cal law regul.ryr construction or the performance of construction. Previous Use .gnature .contractor or #ulhorized agent :gnature of olkher (d te) /( ato) 5 (8gat Const. Type 5ai7."V Occ. Group: �3 Max. Occ. Load Fire Zone: Protection (hrs): 00;3 Sprinkled: ✓Y N Special Approvals: Not Required Required by Received Zoning Flood Plain Parks Fee Ark. Pibg/Food )C / )c / / Septic Drainage Grading Fire Dept. Soil Report Tree Preservation - Note: Inspection of permitted work may reveal code violations not discovered during plan review. Engineering Division must review if more than one permit in the same subdivision. h-136 (?r�ts E n Rot B/4. )L66 , �P&1-' LT- 5LeC R15E7t (ec t4 04_ tL.ec. rT, rte -C- zs /DI41/4)6 Rc--a'to 2/cc &F9 Peari.r� r PERAPP1. — 340' EXIST. F.H. ` CONSTRUCT... DITCH rn 12 i 15.'CcONC. D[t t`PSTER \�\5S44• NORTHWEST OIL CO., INC. 0 TREE PRESERVATION STATISTICS • STATISTICS ' EXISTING REWIRED ZONE.: 1-1. ' SITE AREA : 5.08 Ac. (221 284 5 >_1.)• Canopy — 127. (25.750 e.f.). Saved — 1007. (25,750 e.f.) Canopy = 12% (25,750 e.f.) Saved — 12X (25.750 e.f.) Added — .5X (1100 .1.), NOTE: -ALL PLANTED TREES ARE TO BE ARIZONA ASH (Fraeinue velulina) • • • • • Permit • Date: 3 a�/9.6- CUILUINLi HERMIT APPLICATION City of Fayetteville Inspection Division 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Phone: 575-8233 Review Routing & Approval • SITE ADDRESS: /OS S Sw0isr2'4-7._ PLerzar Lot: avr-raasapt Block:_ Subd1vision: itdr kei3IPP e Sec-Twn-Rng:a3-Ib r30Plat: (DU`} Plan Check:Y N Inspections Planning Engineering Landscape SW/Trails dX I iL-/7_5Y Work: _ NEW ✓ ADDITION _ ALTERATION _ REPAIR _ MOVING __DEMOLITION _ FOOTING ONLY _ EXTERIOR ONLY TENANT FINISH _ DESIGN/BUILD Residential: Single Family Multifamily (number of units: 1 Townhouse OTHER: Valuation of Work • Structural: S DO 000 Electrical: $ (o ou o Plumbing: $ /0.12. oo Mechanical: S /0 000 S Loa S 30 p o p Total: S //0 opo # of Stories: Height Length: Width: Slab Floor: Basement Building Information a� 80 /85 �Y Sum Total Area Totally Cooled: Total Unheated: AddJAlt Area: N Public Sewer: SaFt Structure: Wood • Building will comply with Arkansas Energy Code Requirements (Yes/NA): 144 Is a retaining wall to be constructed? (Yes/No): t•to Are you responsible for other buildings in this subdivision? (Yes/No)' y/5 Flood Plain?(Yes/No): Pio :Base Flood Elevation: 1111 'Lowest Finished Floor: 0o3 • DESCRIPTION OF WORK: A-001 or' OP Lyrics-- LAQt,- Sr1ra.> QsvaioF)kawr 5 S. sq. ft sq. ft sq. ft sq. ft _✓Y_N (Te -t1-4‘) Masonry Other Engineering Approval: Engineering Approval: Planning Approval: 11412,/s -r -Q'41_ Use of Building: WQ,J{Vuyf NOTICE SEPARATE PERWTS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, GAS, MECHANICAL, AND SIGNS. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK/CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED 15 NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 6 MONTHS, OR IF WORK/CONSTRUCTION 15 SUSPENDED OR ABAN- DONED FOR A PERIOD OF 6 MONTHS AT ANY TIME WORK I5 COMMENCED. I hereby certify that 1 have read and ermined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other l r local law regulating construction or the performance of construction. -�— signature of tractor or3 beer authorized agent (date signature of tie •1 3/.m/yr (dale) Previous Use: Const. Type: Max. Occ. Load Protection (hrs): J 1.) A O Occ. Group: Fire Zone: Sprinklered ✓Y N Office Use Only Special Approvals: Req'd (Y/N) _ - . - . , ' I, Owner: Mailing Address: fie, — fa Box In- Zip: spry. lc 7» / Phone: t(V3 - SYr Nr} 36v7 Parks Fee ArchdecuEngmeer. Mailing Address: N.W. �=Nrri/VarQS Ark Health Zip: Phono: Sc cln ContracQQmr: Mailing Address: Cr 4/-vvn'4 ! ngO BD)- 36Y) ( Zip: fl v .r 7J7o r Phone: f/S' Review Contact �� � Phone: /5, #L^'4-- I/Z(3-Sn 7 A 1\4-,) r r Stale Conlranors License d: Expires: Accessibility Work: _ NEW ✓ ADDITION _ ALTERATION _ REPAIR _ MOVING __DEMOLITION _ FOOTING ONLY _ EXTERIOR ONLY TENANT FINISH _ DESIGN/BUILD Residential: Single Family Multifamily (number of units: 1 Townhouse OTHER: Valuation of Work • Structural: S DO 000 Electrical: $ (o ou o Plumbing: $ /0.12. oo Mechanical: S /0 000 S Loa S 30 p o p Total: S //0 opo # of Stories: Height Length: Width: Slab Floor: Basement Building Information a� 80 /85 �Y Sum Total Area Totally Cooled: Total Unheated: AddJAlt Area: N Public Sewer: SaFt Structure: Wood • Building will comply with Arkansas Energy Code Requirements (Yes/NA): 144 Is a retaining wall to be constructed? (Yes/No): t•to Are you responsible for other buildings in this subdivision? (Yes/No)' y/5 Flood Plain?(Yes/No): Pio :Base Flood Elevation: 1111 'Lowest Finished Floor: 0o3 • DESCRIPTION OF WORK: A-001 or' OP Lyrics-- LAQt,- Sr1ra.> QsvaioF)kawr 5 S. sq. ft sq. ft sq. ft sq. ft _✓Y_N (Te -t1-4‘) Masonry Other Engineering Approval: Engineering Approval: Planning Approval: 11412,/s -r -Q'41_ Use of Building: WQ,J{Vuyf NOTICE SEPARATE PERWTS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, GAS, MECHANICAL, AND SIGNS. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK/CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED 15 NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 6 MONTHS, OR IF WORK/CONSTRUCTION 15 SUSPENDED OR ABAN- DONED FOR A PERIOD OF 6 MONTHS AT ANY TIME WORK I5 COMMENCED. I hereby certify that 1 have read and ermined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other l r local law regulating construction or the performance of construction. -�— signature of tractor or3 beer authorized agent (date signature of tie •1 3/.m/yr (dale) Previous Use: Const. Type: Max. Occ. Load Protection (hrs): J 1.) A O Occ. Group: Fire Zone: Sprinklered ✓Y N Office Use Only Special Approvals: Req'd (Y/N) /S/=OK Date Parks Fee Ark Health Sc cln A 1\4-,) r r Accessibility r Note: Inspection of permitted work may reveal code violations not discovered during plan review. EGec /'E-Ar11 IT INA) t4 -PPR. J el) 0 chi& s . CtD\ PERAPP1.WK• • • z • • J EASEMENT l 23 oruti on This Easement is made this -314 day of March, 1999 betw4eri`.the NoahGvest Oil Company, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "GRANTOR," and Burt Hanna, L.L.C., an Arkansas Limited Partnership, (hereinafter referred to as "GRANTEE." WHEREAS, the GRANTOR is fee owner simple of a part of Lot 37, Fayetteville Industrial Park Replat, a subdivision in the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas; and WHEREAS, the GRANTEE is fee simple owner of a part of Lot 36 in the Fayetteville Industrial Park Replat, a subdivision in the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas; and WHEREAS, GRANTEE needs an easement over a portion of GRANTOR'S land to satisfy the building code set back requirements of the City of Fayetteville for the proposed expansion of GRANTOR'S building on Lot 36. THEREFORE, in consideration of one dollar, GRANTEE'S execution of an Agreement of even date herewith, and other valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the GRANTOR hereby grants, bargains, and sells to the GRANTEE an easement for the sole purpose of satisfying the set back requirements of the City of Fayetteville pursuant the City's adoption of the 1991 Southern Building Code, over and across the following described real estate situated in Washington County, Arkansas, to -wit: A part of Lot 37 of the Fayetteville Industrial Park replat in Fayetteville, Arkansas, being located in the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Township 16 North, Range 30 West, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point in the West line of said Lot 37 being the common line between Lots 36 and 37 of said Fayetteville Industrial Park replat that is North 22 degrees, 47 minutes, 52 seconds East 223.64 feet from the Southwest Corner of said Lot 37, thence South 88 degrees 59 minutes East 66.49 feet, thence North 01 degrees, 03 minutes, 13 seconds East 166.67 S: \LAMA R P\ W I L L IAM S\HANNA\EASM N T.301 �l 29216 • • • • • • feet to the West line of said Lot 37, thence South 22 degrees, 47 minutes, 52 seconds West along said West line 179.49 feet to the point of beginning, containing 5,541.3 square feet, more or less. Neither GRANTOR nor GRANTEE will construct improvements of any type whatsoever upon, under, over, or within said easement with the exception of a fence. GRANTEE shall not plant trees, shrubs, or plants, other than grass, within said easement without the prior written consent of GRANTOR. GRANTEE shall not grant to others the right to utilize the easement for any purpose other than the purpose specifically reserved to the GRANTEE herein. GRANTEE shall not mortgage, pledge, or hypothecate the real property within the easement. This Easement shall run with the land, shall inure to the benefit of the GRANTEE and its successors and assigns, and shall be binding upon the GRANTOR and its successors and assigns. GRANTEE joins in the execution of this Easement to acknowledge acceptance of the Easement and the narrow purpose of the easement and the restrictions upon the Easement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR hereunto sets its hand and seal this `Jj(T. day of March, 1999. GRANTOR: NORTHWEST OIL SOMPANY, INC. BURT HA By By eorge T. Wi ams, Its President GRANTEE: S:ILAMARP\W ILLIAMSW ANNAIEA$MN T.301 2 anna, Member • • STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ACKNOWLEDGMENT )SS On this day of March, 1999, before me, a Notary Public, duly commissioned, qualified, and acting, within and for said County and State, appeared in person the within named George T. Williams, to me personally known, who stated that he is the President of Northwest Oil Company, Inc., and duly authorized in said capacity to execute the foregoing instrument for and in the name and behalf of said corporation, and further stated and acknowledged that he had so signed, executed, and delivered the foregoing instrument as GRANTOR for the consideration, uses, and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal this 314 day of March, 1999. 2eNsl Notary Public My Commission Expires: X6,1- Ict`1 \ • ACKNOWLFDGMFNT STATE OF ARKANSAS )SS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON On this 4'day of March, 1999, before me, a Notary Public, duly commissioned, qualified, and acting, within and for said County and State, appeared in person the within named Burt Hanna, to me personally known, who stated that he is a Member of Burt Hanna, L.L.C., and duly authorized in said capacity to execute the foregoing instrument for and in the name and behalf of said corporation, and further stated and acknowledged that he had so signed, executed, and delivered the foregoing instrument as GRANTEE for the consideration, uses, and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal this �/ day of March, 1999. 7-:�ti O /1)(17777/12 Notary Public My Commission Expires: S:\LAMARP\W I LLIAMS\HANNA\EASM N T.301 • • 44AI 61-12etteA 01`c3.5 �j i 4M 3k}t.scfJ gc) C-1 (Pt -a, - f I(9f—a- -70 Q7' I/ r JA" 744.06 6)14/Airr fice)/50A-ticoff ATA 029, /9981 erif-:/djeo t:65:ket 4-744-k 513 -7 a-70( 55 ze1 icJD 1.46 72 703 Cr TY o R rr k "(I `r ae 1p -g- 17 27p� v y / O o��...S0_ -�FC KAC 72-7 °/ ( /307 d, Cg+)w r'rtc- �Jc iiJ�lc�t H 7oVe C Ply OF FYtTrev;LLE.