Loading...
boa_09 18 1972LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT M I N U T E S SEPTEMBER 18, 1972 2:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT Darrell D. Dover, Chairman S., Spencer Compton, Vice Chairman L. Dickson Flake Capp Shanks, Jr. MEMBERS ABSENT Lawrence S. Woolsey STAFF PRESENT Don R. Venhaus Louis E. Barber Richard Wood James Finch Dorothy Light OTHERS PRESENT Perry V. Whitmore, City Attorney J. Huddleston, Gazette Reporter R. Armbrust, Democrat Reporter There being a quorum present, the meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 2:00 p.m. A motion was made for approval of the minutes of the last meeting as mailed, which was seconded and passed. Action was taken on the fol Tract No. 1 - Z-2616 Applicant: Location: Description: Classification: Variance: advertised items: First National, Inc. 420 West Capitol Avenue All of Block 104, original City of Little Rock "H" - Business District Requbst's a Variance from the Height Provisions of Section 43-19 (1) of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of office building in excess of permitted height (454 ft. total) The Staffs recommendation was read as follows: "The Staff recommends approval of variance. This height variance is requested to allow the proposed 1st National Bank Building to be constructed to a height of 454 ft.." (Continued on next page) Little Rock Board of Adjustment Minutes September 18. 1972 Mr. Dover, Chairman, asked Mr. Compton to preside. Mr. William Terry, Attorney, was present representing the applicant. He stated that Mr. Forgy was present representing the architects and Mr. Estes was present representing the bank if the Staff wished to ask them any questions. This is a height waiver only. This application is for a.31-story building plus penthouse. The proposed plan is for a building 434 ft. and they were asking for an additional 20 feet in order to take care of any possible variance that might arise; such as for antennas, T.V. towers, signs, and anything of that nature. The building itself is to be 434 ft. There were no objectors. A motion was made for approval of the application, which was seconded and passed. Tract No. 2 - Z-2624 Applicant: Vincent Bruno Location• 3400 West Roosevelt Road Description: Long legal Classification: "F" - Commercial District Variance• Requests a Variance from the.Yard Area Setback Provisions of Section 43-15 of the Code of Ordinances to permit con- struction in front yard The Staffs recommendation was read as follows: "The Staff recommends denial of variance as requested, but.approval of an addition to the structure located in area of present sidewalk in the front of building and not to exceed the projection of the existing western portion of building. This would provide some additional room in the structure with- out a further encroachment in the front yard space. An approximate 8 ft. in depth addition should afford some relief to the applicant in providing the additional space he desires to obtain." The applicant, Mr. Bruno, was present and stated that his son was going to join him in the business and he needed to expand the building 10 ft. in order to put in six more tables. He desires more room in order to separate the bar from the regular dining area. There would not be too much remodeling involved -- no new windows or new doors. There use to be a 4k ft. tall fence in the area but this was removed at the request of the adjacent property owner. Eight feet would not help --he would have to change the entire bar area and bring in a new doorway. His home and parking space are located at the rear of the building. Mr. Venhaus asked if he could make a change to the structure to the north or east. Mr. Bruno replied that he could not without a tremendous overhaul. 2 - Little Rock Board of Adjustment Minutes Sevtember 18, 1972 A motion was made for approval of the application, which was not seconded. Mr. Venhaus made the suggestion that the Board take into consideration the variance as recommended by the Staff in case Mr. Bruno wanted to extend the structure north, east, or south along the present walkway as long as there was no further encroachment onto the setback area. As this is a non -conform- ing structure approval of Staff recommendation would preclude necessity of applicant coming before the Board again should he desire in the future to make an addition to the structure. A motion was made for approval of the Staff recommendation, which was seconded and passed. Tract No. 3 - Z-2626 Applicant: R. F. Toll Location: 7325 Kanis Road Description: All of Lot 4, Burks Addition, a replat of part of Tract 11, Hocott Home Sites Subdivision Classification: "I" - Light Industrial District Variance: Requests a Variance from the Rear Yard Provisions of Section 43-16 of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction in rear yard setback The Staff's recommendation was read as follows: "The Staff recommends approval of the application. This variance request is the result of a building permit check disclosing an "A" zone adjacent to this lot which requires a yard space when adjacent to a residential district (zoned "A"). The "A" zone is presently occupied by a non- conforming concrete batch plant which properly zoned would require a "K" District. To the east of the non -conforming land -use, the property is zoned "H". It is felt that rezoning of the non -conforming land -use would appropriately be "I" Industrial which would eliminate the yard space request for the property at issue. Therefore, favorable consideration of this petition is recommended." Mr. Jack Ulmer, representing the applicant, stated that they were request- ing a building permit for an addition to the rear of the building. The applicant has to allow for the Rock Creek drainage structure, fire lane on both sides of the building, and parking area; so he has no other way to expand except to the rear of the existing plant. Now, there is an open ditch and chain link fence in this area in question. There were no objectors. A motion was made for approval of the application, which was seconded and passed. - 3 - Little Rock Board of Adjustment Minutes Seutember 18. 1972 Tract No. 4 - Z-1915-A Applicant: Location: Description: Classification: Variance: Putnam Realty and Associates 6320 Baseline Road The south 170 ft. of the west 140 ft. of Tract 16, Arnold's Highland Acres "E-l" - Quiet Business District Requests a Variance from the Area Provisions of Section 43-6 of the Code of Ordinances to permit erection of a sign in excess of that permitted (total 144 sq. ft. or four 6' k 6' faces) The Staff's recommendation was read as follows: "The Staff recommends denial of the application as submitted and recommends instead approval of a non -rotating sign, single pole mount with facings, either a double faced sign 6 ft. x 6 ft. on each Bide for a total of 72 sq. ft., or a box type sign limited to 4 ft. x 4 ft. panels for a total of 64 sq. ft." Mr. Dover, Chairman, asked Mr. Compton to preside. Mr. Tom Lovett, representing the lessee, stated that this tract lies about two blocks west of the intersection of Geyer Springs Road and Baseline Roads. This is an area of rapid commercial growth. To the west of the property is a wooded tract. A church and school combination are -across the street, and an office building is to the east. There is a residential area close -by behind the property with about 10 houses which has been there for quite some time. They have received no hostility at all from the surround- ing property owners. He showed photographs of different type signs already in the area. He pointed out that a bank sign was larger than the sign they were requesting. The sign they are asking for is the same sign that the association uses now as a trademark, a symbol, and they feel that they could not open a branch office without it. The sign is eternally lighted, does not flash, but does revolve. A smaller size sign would be very hard to see in the area. Too much competition. Mr. Compton asked Mr. Lovett to indicate the larger signs and those that were in "E-1" zones. He said this would make a difference. Mr. Lovett said he could not identify the zones in the areas. Mr. Venhaus said, "I think that all of these signs are either on property outside of the city and outside our jurisdiction or in "F" Commercial zoning districts. Signs in the "E-l" District are on property adjacent to residential areas. I think that if we are going to get into a competition and argue that wherever a savings and loan company is or wherever a financial institution is, it has got to compete on the basis of its sign with those in a commercial district, then we are going to have to come up with a new kind of zoning classification for those kind of uses. I don't - 4 - Little Rock Board of Adjustment Minutes September 18, 1972 think it is fair to compare them on that kind of basis. I disagree in terms of the visibility of the smaller sign in that location. I do think we have to keep in mind the special character of "E-1" Districts. I think that we have to require that financial institutions that locate in "E-l" Districts to bear the same responsibility as the other uses that go in those districts in terms of their signs." Mr. Glen Williams, President of the savings and loan company, (the lessee) stated that the applicant has advised him that he plans to ask for the property to be rezoned to "F" Commercial and then there would be no sign problems because they could put this size sign up in a "F" Commercial District. The area around this strip has a character of commercial and they have made tentative arrangements to lease this location from the applicant if they can obtain the proper drive-in facilities and this type size sign. If they can not obtain these, they can not operate in that location. There were no objectors present. A motion was made for approval of the application, which was seconded, but failed for lack of sufficient affirmative votes. Mr. Venhaus made the suggestion that Mr. Williams. defer this matter until the next meeting when there may be a full member Board present to vote, which was agreeable to Mr. Williams. A motion was made for the application to be deferred to the October 16th meeting, which was seconded and passed. DEFERRED MATTERS Item No. 1 - Z-2619 Applicant: Westmark Association Location: 4125 "A" Street Description: Lot 7, Block 4, Pinehurst Addition Classification: "C" - Two-family District Variance: Requests a Variance from the Use Provisions of Section 43-22 (4)-(d) of the Code of Ordinances to permit parking on a lot in a residential zone The Staff's recommendation was read as follows: "This application was deferred from August 21st meeting at request of applicant. He advised the Staff that notices had not been completed and he was in process of purchasing the adjacent lots on the east and west sides concerning which there have been no developments to our knowledge. - 5 - Little Rock Board of Adjustment Minutes September 18 1972 Considering this one lot as petitioned, the Staff reaffirms its previous recommendation of denial. Using this lot in the middle of the block would, in our opinion, seriously affect adversely the adjacent and surrounding residential properties which are fairly well maintained." The applicant was not present. Mr. Venhaus suggested that the Board extend to the applicant the privilege of deferral. A motion was made that the Staff notify the applicant that he is required to renotify the adjacent property owners, and that the matter be read- vertised, which was seconded and passed. Item No. 2 - Z-516 Applicant: Cliff Peck location: 6700 South University Avenue Description: Long legal Classification: "G-l" and "F" - Commercial District Variance: Requests a Variance from the Height Provisions of Section 43-15 & 17 of the Code of Ordinances to permit erection of signs in excess of that permitted The Staff's recommendation was read as follows: "This application was deferred at the August 21st meeting to allow time for investigation into elevations as they relate to the definition of height and its application to signs. It was determined by the Staff that the sign base in question was below the adjacent curb grade approximately 2 ft. Permit for the signs were issued." It was not necessary to take any action on this application at this meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m. Darrell D. Dover, Chairman Dv —A,, P, LJ,�—� Don R. Venhaus, Secretary - 6 -