Commission considers signs, building permit requirements

Why create an ordinance and if it’s something we want to allow, have to grant a variance? - Paul Church

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

— Planning and Zoning Commission members on Thursday tabled reviewsof proposed city sign ordinances and code requirements for clearance under existing buildings before permits can be issued for remodels.

After approving a lot split on North Byers Street requestedby Max andJudy Fletcher, the commission considered an 18-page proposed sign ordinance modeled after Siloam Springs’ sign regulations.

The proposed ordinance includes more than six pages of definitions and in the remaining pages would regulate everything from billboards and business marquees to garagesale signs, lost-animal signs and the placement of flags.

“There’s a lot in here,” said Roy Jech, chairman of the commission. “Whoever’s going to enforce it is going to have toput in a lot of study.”

“I don’t like all this sign ordinance stuff,” commission member Paul Church said. “We need a little less government. I don’t know what the problem is that needs to beaddressed.”

The proposal was being considered because of signs still up promoting businesses on Main Street which are no longer open, Commission member Wanda Meyer said.

City attorney Jay Williams said, under the city’s current code, it may not be possible to regulate large signs should a billboard company decide toplace signs in town along the highways. It would be better to have an ordinance in place before that happens, he said.

Signage and the placement of flags at McKee Foods were mentioned as an example, being described by commission members as “very professional” though the sign and flags would likely not meet the requirements of the proposed new code and would require a variance if another business wanted to do the same.

“Why create an ordinance and if it’s something we want to allow, have to grant a variance?” Church asked. “You don’t write an ordinance and anytime it’s a pretty sign, grant a variance,” he said.

Church also called the size limitations for business signs along the highway “too restrictive.”

“Why would we want to limit people to 100 square feet?” he asked. “That’s not very big fora major business.” he added, suggesting the restrictions could cause a business to choose to locate elsewhere.

Williams suggested that it might be better to look at just reworking the city’s existing code rather than starting all over with an entirely new sign ordinance. By a 6-1 vote, the matter was tabled until a future meeting to allow more time to study the issue and to determine the needs of the city. Church, Meyer, Danny Feemster, Roy Jech, David Nelson and Mike Parks voted in favor of tabling the issue. Commission member Jim Kooistra voted against the motion to table rather than resolving the issue.

Crawl-space clearance

The commission began discussion on city code which regulates crawl space under homes.

The matter was brought to the commission because many of the older homes in the city have less crawl-space clearance than the 18 inchesrequired for new construction, making it difficult or impossible for property owners to get building permits to remodel the homes without going to the added and “unreasonable’ expense of jacking up the homes and setting them on new foundations. A number of council members seekingto improve the town’s appearance have expressed frustration over the fact that building permits are not beingissued to property owners who wish to make improvements to the older homes.

Mayor Wes Hogue told commission members that city building inspector David McNair has followed the policy of issuing permits to homeowners needing permits to remodel if ground clearance is 12 inches or more, and requiring property owners to raise the houses up to the new construction code requirements of 18 inches if the houses have to be elevated.

Part of the reason forrequiring at least 12 inches of clearance is so that homes can be certified by licensed termite inspectors.

“David (McNair) has been enforcing the code like this from the beginning,” city attorney Jay Williams explained. “If you want something else, he wants it by ordinance.”Williams said.

Commission member Mike Parks explained that codes are written for new construc- require 18tionandinches of clearance, “but we’re dealing with existing buildings, less than 18 inches,” he said, adding that treated lumber and treated plates were an option of dealing with homes with less than 12-inch clearance. “Other cities allow homeowners to dig under their houses (for clearance) if they have a way to remove the water; Gentry doesn’t. People are discouraged because their houses have less than 18-inch clearance. You eliminate any remodel if (homes) are made ofbrick, rock or have a concrete porch,” he said.

Councilwoman Janie Parks said the city had too many houses which couldn’t be jacked up and brought into compliance with current code enforcement.

“Sixty or seventy percent of homes will just have to sit,” Janie Parks said. “You can’t do any major work. Other cities treat them as prior construction and they are grandfathered in,” she said, mentioning Berryville and Russellville as examples and saying Gentry was the only town out of those she’s contacted that restricts remodels of old homes to this extent.

Hogue said the code and standards were in place to protect future buyers as well, saying the city has been enforcing the code equally upon all persons.

“The International Fire Code already addresses anything closer that 8 inches (from the ground),” Janie Parks said, saying it required treated lumber.

The commission tabled the issue for more study and until the city building inspector could be present and take part in discussions.

News, Pages 1 on 02/24/2010