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 -