Loading...
boa_07 17 1961LITTLE HOCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES DATE: July 17, 1961 TIME: 2:00 P. M. PLACE: Chamber of the Board of Directors MEMBERS PRESENT: Maxwell J. Lyons II, Chairman Bruce Anderson William R. Meeks MEMBERS ABSENT: Emily Penton W. H. Marak STAFF PRESENT: Henry M. De Noble, Director Julius Breckling, Planner Melba Lawing, Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Matilda Touhey, Reporter for the Gazette The meeting was called to order and an advertised public hearing was held on the following dockets: Docket No. 23-61 Applicant: South Highland Church of Christ by J. C. Brooks Location: The west side of Lewis Street between 27th and 28th Streets Description: Lots 1 through 6, block 3, Oak Grove Square Addition Classification: "B" Residence District Variance: From the front and rear yard provisions of Section 11 and the off-street parking provi- sions of Section 2-A to permit construction of a new auditorium Mr. Brooks was present. Mr. Breckling explained the church°s re- quest. When asked about off-street parking Mr. Brooks said he had talked with Mr. Dodge, attorney for Safeway, Inc., and he gave him ver- bal permission to use the lot any time they needed it. The church has 24 spaces marked off; they need 54 to comply with the ordinance. He said the new building will be built south of the present building. They will tear down the house and part of the brick building. No objectors were present. In executive session Mr. Anderson moved that it be given approval, Mr. Meeks seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Page :? of 6 Docket No. 24-61 Applicant: Location: Description: Classification: Variance: B. J. Block 708 }!right !avenue Commencing at the SE corner of block 217, Original City, run north 50 feet, thence west 141.1 feet, thence south parallel to Gaines Street 67 feet to the north line of Wright Avenue., thence in an easterly direction along the north line of l�iright Avenue, 143.1 feet to the point of beginning. "C" Two-family District From the rear yard provisions of Section 11 to permit construction of a bedroom The notice of hearing had not been returned for this docket, therefore, it was not heard. Docket No. 25-61 Applicant: Mrs. E. J. Holmann by John H. Haley, her attorney Location: 3506 Hill road Description: Lots 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, block 7, Auten and Moss Addition Classification: "B" Residence District Variance: From the side and rear yard provisions of Section 11 to permit an annex to existing garage and servants quarters Mr. Breckling presented this request to the Board. No one was present to represent the owner. In executive session Mr. Meeks moved it be approved, Mr. Anderson seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Docket No. 26-61 Applicant: L. Julian Alexander Location: The intersection of Kavanaugh Boulevard, Club Road, and Van Buren Street Description: Long legal Classification: "F" Commercial District Variance: From Section 18-8 to permit the remodeling of the existing building Mr. Thomas Bonner, Attorney for Mr. Alexander, said this request has been before the Board previously. It involves the triangular piece of property at the intersection of Kavanaugh Boulevard, Club Road, and Van Buren Street. He gave the members maps, which he ex- plained to them. He stated this property fronts on Kavanaugh Boule- vard. He said originally everyone was under the impression that this Page 3 of 6 was un-zoned property and at that time some of the members made the statement that Mr. Alexander knew what the property was zoned for when he bought it and knew it's limitations, therefore, they did not think he was due any consideration and that he had no hardship. The City Attorney°s office had obtained the original zoning map which shows that this property has been zoned "F" Commercial ever since the zoning ordinance was adopted. He said the zoning ordinance requires 25 feet front and rear yard and no side yard, but that if a side yard is provided it should be at least 4 feet. His client wants to extend the line on Kavanaugh; it is now 20 feet. His map showed the present use, which is a laundry pick-up station. The present building is 54.8 square feet, which is slightly less than llo of the land area, the proposed building will occupy 1,070 square feet, which is slightly over 22% of the land area. He felt that due to the peculiar shape of the lot there is a very definite hardship. He said if this is approved he is being allowed to use less than one-fourth of the land area. He read from Paragraph 8, Section 18 of Zoning Ordinance No. 5420. He said there is a 50 foot street on all four sides of the building and is 75 feet from the nearest building, so light is not a problem. He added that it probably is one of the few commercial buildings which is not near other buildings. Overcrowding could not be a problem if 66% of the land area is allowed and only 22% is used. He said his client meets the requirements for off-street parking spaces, and as far as increasing the traffic it is merely speculation; that the plans had been approved by Mr. De Noble and his staff. He discussed the inter- section and the traffic controls which are there. He said he could see no traffic problem and neither could the city°s own traffic engi- neer. He said it ''all boils down to his client ° s~ request. -- ",extension of his building". Mr. H. B. Stubblefield, Attorney for the property owners who ob- jected to this request, spoke next. He said the first request for use of this property was for an ice cream stand years ago, but was turned down flat. He gave a detailed history of this property. He said his clients very definitely object to the addition to this building and that they feel that there should not be any building there at all. He did not feel that a hardship had been shown. Commander Olds, who owns the drug store at this intersection, said he objected to the extension of this building because it would obstruct the view of the other business establishments. Mr. Bonner asked Commander Olds if the present building had hurt his business any? Commander Olds answered no appreciable amount. Mr. Bonner said he did not see how Commander Olds could see the building because of the advertising display he has in his window. Commander Olds denied that he had any advertising display in his window. Mr. Bonner said his client, in the "F" Comr_:iercia.l zone, is entitled to a three story building here. Commander Olds said he would rather have a three story building there than what is proposed. Mr. Bonner asked Mr. Breckling to put the map back on the screen and asked Commander Olds to show him what view Mr. Alexander would be obstructing. Mr. Brecklin g complied with this request. Page 4 o;r 6 Mr. Zimmerman said he was present at the meeting the last time it was brought before the Hoard. He stated, when this corner was developed the owners were required to dedicate certain land to keep the corner from being too congested. Mr. Bonner asked him who required him to dedicate -the land? Mr. Zimmerman answered the City, and added that the City felt that the dedication would prevent accidents. Mr. McCaskill. Attorney, said he felt that it is a ha,za,rd now and any extension would make it more hazardous. Mr. Meyers, Manager of the Black and White Food Store at this intersection, said an,yti_me you block the view of a business, hou have, in some degree, hurt it. Mrs. C. N. Overcash, at 5013-5015 Kavanaugh Boulevard said she objected to this request. Mr. C. A. Barnett, 5101 Kavanaugh Boulevard., said he could definitely see that there will be a traffic hazard if this is enlarged. He said Mr. Alexander knew the limitations on the property when he bought it; that he himself knew about them and was no longer interested in buying it. Mr. Williams, trust officer at Worthen Bank, had a list of the names of people who objected, but could not be present. Mr. Stubblefield said if this should be enlarged it could be used for other things, also, some of which might be undesirable. Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Zimmerman when this was submitted to the City, was it platted as property for sale or for dedication? Mr. Zimmerman answered that he did not know because he was not the trust officer at that time, he be- gan in 1938 and this happened before that. Mr. Bonner said he could remember when this place was a street car stop and then there was a service station there and that Mr. Alexander did not put the building there in the first place. He applied for a permit and was told that the property was not zoned. He then talked with Mr. Spatz, his alder- man, about getting the property zoned and being allowed to use it. He did not think Mr. Alexander had violated any laws. He said if a three story building could be allowed hers: he did not see how this building, surrounded by streets, could be considered "smothered". Mr. Bonner and Mr. ZimmermaT-i then discussed the property line and the 20 foot setback line. Mr. Bonner said the buildings across the street had 12-15 foot setback and his client is asking for 20 feet and also providing off-street parking. He added that they could have had square lots across in front of them, which would have been much worse. He said they would have more yard space than the other businesses in the area. In executive session, after discussion of both sides of this question, Mr. Anderson moved that it be denied since the owner is using the property and no particular hardship had been shown. The motion carried unanimously. Docket_No__27-61 Applicant: R. T. Hillebrenner Location: The north:-„ st corner of West 30th and Washington Streets Description: Lots 20, 21, and 22, block 7, Hiffel and Holder's .Second Addition Variance: From all EJ)plicable provisions of Section 14 to permit extension to a residential building and an extension to a commercial building Page 5 of 6 Mr. and Mrs. Hillebrenner were present. They said this original- ly was a trailer court, but they found they could not comply with the ordinance. Both of the houses on the back of the lots are residences and have tenants in them. They want to extend the .residential build- ing and also the commercial building. After discussion in executive session Mr. Meeks moved that it be denied, Mir. Anderson seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Docket No. 28-61 Applicant: Ira A. Friddle Location: 7605 Cantrell Road Description: Lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 (south of Highway No. 10), block 2, Bellvue Addition Classification: "F" Commercial District Variance: From the rear yard and "more than one building on one tract" provisions of Section 13 to per- mit relocation of existing retail lumber com- pany buildings Mr. Moore was present for Mr. Friddle. He said he wants to re- move the existing buildings to relocate the lumber and building supply building with a setback from Highway No. 10 of 30 feet. His driveway } entrance will come in from Second Street. In executive session Mr. Meeks moved it be approved with the in- gress and egress and parking being approved by Mr. De Noble, Mr. Anderson seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Docket No. 29-61 Applicant: G. L. Medlock Location: The northeast corner of 6th and Martin Streets Description: Lots 7, 8, and 9, block 1, C. 0. Kimball and Bodeman Addition Classification: "B" Residence District Variance: From the front yard provisions of Section 11 to permit construction of a single family house to within 17 feet of the front property line Mr. and Mrs. Medlock were present. They said they were not going to put up a shack on this lot, but will construct a house for his family to live in. He plans to brick veneer the front and probably one side of it. The back of the lot slopes into a drainage ditch. He will stay 4 feet from the ditch as required by the Public Works Department. Mr. Russell Morton, Attorney, said he owns three lots north- west of the proposed structure. He felt that the Board should take into consideration that all the other houses on the block set back 25 feet. He stated that there are some 13,000 dollar houses in the area and he did not think a. structure of that type could be placed on these lots. It was his opinion that Mr. Medlock could set back Page 6 of 6 25 feet, but that it might r.ost him more money. He said, for the protection of the other owners he would not like to see the Board grant him this waiver. He felt that it would lower the value of the other property to have a house sticking out 8 feet further than the others. He did not think these lots were suitable to build on anyway. Mr. William A. Strickland, 603 South Martin Street reiterated what Mr. Morton said. He added that this is an established neighbor- hood and felt that he should not be granted this waiver when the owners who are already there were not allowed to do the same thing when they built their house. Mr. Neal i'Iorton, 600 Sotath Martin Street, said he had lived here 23 years. He had had the lots offered to him numerous times, but he refused to buy because of the attitude of the neighbor- hood toward building a house on these lots. He said Mr. Roy Davis at 604 South Martin Street had not received a notice of the public hear- ing and felt sure he would have been present to object if he had re- ceived notice. Mr. Dan McArthur, 609 South Martin Street, said he felt if a uniform building line was kept it would look better. Mr. Morton said he understood that Mr. P'iedlock was going to build this house, but did not intend to live in it himself very long. Mr. Anderson said this had no bearing on the case. Mr. Morton said he brought it up for the Board's consideration. Mr. Medlock said he in- tends to build it for himself and his family to live in. He said one man told him he did not ever want to see a house on that corner. After discussion in executive session it was decided to defer action on this, work with the owners to see if they could revise their plan and build to the property line on 6th Street and set back 25 feet from South Martin Street, then notify the property owners of this revision. The meeting adjourned at 4 P. Fi. Melba Lawin g, Secretary Approved: Chairman Max cell J. yo.:7 , II ,