Loading...
boa_09 19 1955MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT The Little Rock Board of Adjustment met in the Council Chamber, City Hall, on September 19, 1955 at 2:00 P. M. The following members were present: Mr. W. H. r}arak, Chairman Miss Emily Fenton, Vice Chairman Mr. Warren Baldwin e d Docket Ho. 35-55 - James F. Hewitt, 19lo-1914 Grant Street, described � as Lots Three (3) and Four (4), Black Eight, Mountain Park Addition, zoned 'IF" Commercial District; re- questing a variance from the front yard provisions of X Section 13 of Ordinance No. 5420 to permit location d and a stablishim nt of proposed bank building up to the Z property line. Q E" The attorney for the proposed bank was present and explained that his client was requesting e- waiver of the front yard recuirement in order to have more space for parking in the rear. A revised plan was presented at this time which differed xr,.m the original plan in that the building would have a 5' setback from the front property line instead of no setback at a11, in order to save three trees. There were no objectors present. In the executive meeting Miss Penton moved that this be approved as shown on the new plan; Mr. Baldwin seconded and the motion carried. Docket No. 36-55 - John L. Fletcher and (Mrs.) J. B. Dei4ille, 519-521 Cumberland Street, described as Lots Five (5) and Six (6), Block 40, Original City of Little 'ock, Arkansas, zoned "E" Apartment District; requesting permission to locate a parking lot at this location. rIr. Fletcher was present and stated that there are two houses on this property „; .ch are about 75 years old and that they could no longer economically be repaired -)nd maintained. He proposes to tear them down and make a parking lot. It was a stated that the zoning ordinance gives the Board the authority to permit a parking lot in a residential district as a special exception. Nir. Fletcher presented a deed of consent from the Ada Thompson Home, giving permission to tear the houses 1 down. It was signed by S. M. Brooks, President of the Ada Thompson, on Aun. st 91 :1955. it was notarized by Harriet F. Costin. In the executive meeting Mr. Baldwin moved that this be approved; Miss Penton (L seconded and the Motion carried, 00 0 Q 0 Z Q I- N Page 2 of 5 Docket No. 37-55 - Buford Bracy, Southwest intersection of Meadowland Drive and "R" Street, described as Lot Fifteen (15), Kavanaugh Place Addition, zoned "A" One Family District; requesting a variance from the rear yard provisions of Section 11 of Ordinance 51+20 to permit construction ten (10) feet from the rear lot line. Mr. Buford Bracy was present and stated that the lot in question is a pie - shaped corner lot uh ich is presently being used as a playground. Mr. Bracy explain- ed to the Board that the plot plan which he presented showed that if he built the house according to the zoning ordinance it would extend beyond the front line es- tablished by the adjoining residences. The surrounding property owners were present and agreed that if the house were placed back in line with the adjacent houses as shown on the plat it would be most de sirable. In the executive meeting Miss Penton moved that this application be approved; Mr. Baldwin seconded and the motion carried. A. Application for special exception to permit a Discalced Carmelite Monastery at the southeast corner of North Taylor and South Grandview. Mr. Thomas Bonner presented some additional information concerning the dedication along Taylor Street. The Commission has already received a proper deed of dedication from the Bishop. He also presented a new plat showing that the brick wall will be set in $1 from the south side property line. Mr. Bonner stated that they would allow 5' rear yard space, too, thus eliminating the necessity of asking for a waiver of t)iat requirement. It was then stated that the request had narrowed down to whether or not to permit the tonastery as a special exception, all the yard .iaivers requested having been changed now to comply with the regulations. Mr. Bob Downey, attorney and resident of the area, was present and spoke for the property owners objecting to a Ionastery at this location. He also presented a protest petition signed by forty-five property owners who felt that it would decrease the value of their property and also would increase the traffic, especially after the chapel is built. Mr. Downey had talked with Captain Witherspoon and quoted him as saying that it would create a great traffic problem and that if the Board allowed the Monastery and Chapel here he would ben all perking on Taylor and South Grandview. He discussed the difficulty of widening the street at this point, He said he felt sure that the Bishop had other property on which to build and that according to the zoning ordinance he would have difficulty in proving a hardship. He stated that the property owners strongly objected to the high enclosure wall. Mr. Keith Arthur was present and stated that he had built his home in a resi- dential district, that if this request was granted it would depreciate the value of his property, and that he would have difficulty selling his home and relocating. He further stated that the ban on parking would create a very serious problem and that a monastery and Chapel at this location would be very undesirable. Mr. G. B. Campbell, Jr. was present to object to this request. He stated that Mr. Arthur had covered his objections, also, Page 3 of 5 Mr. Charles McDade was present to object and stated that he objected on the same basis as the others. Mr. Bonner stated that this project was. permitted in a "C" Two -Family District under the zoning ordinance. He stated that the property owners knew when they bought property here that this property was owned by Catholics and already had buildings on it. He felt that it would be unfair to Bishop Fletcher not to allow him to use the remainder of his property since no suitable location in a "C" Two - Family area could be found. Mr. Burleigh said that, generally speaking, there are three types of problems on which a Board of Adjustment may take action: 1. Appeals to the Board from decisions of the Building Commissioner. 2. Requests for variances from the general zoning requirements, such as yards, height, etc., where, because of some peculiarity of the particular piece of property, there would be a hardship involved if the property were de- veloped in the normal way. 3. Requests for special exceptions which are outlined in the ordinance. These may be granted by the Board on a showing of their suitability at a particu- lar location and compatability with the general development plan. In these cases, no hardship need be demonstrated. Mr. Burleigh read from Paragraph 4,. Section 18, which lists the permitted special. exceptions. Mr. wdward Penick was present as an objector. He asked the Board members to out themselves in the property owners place. He stated that they objected to the type of building. They also understand it will be 2000 long and three stories high. He felt that it would be unfair not to be alloied to park in front of their homes if parking is removed from Taylor Street. He stated that he thought the Monastery and ,hapel should be relocated so as not to deprive the property owners of the.most suitable use of their property. It was stated that the building is proposed to be 23' high or two stories with a Partial basement. The height regulation in this area is 22 stories or 351, Dr. Frances Brennecke was present to object. She was concerned with the traffic hazard and the safety of the children. Mr. Downey closed the arguments for the objectors with a reference to the pre- amble of the zoning ordinance which outlines the purpose of the zoning ordinance. In the executive meeting Mr. Baldwin stated that the property owners knew who owned this property when they built their ]homes here. It was agreed by all members that the traffic problem was not an immediate one and not as serious as the property owners seemed to think it would be, as the Monastery itself would not be a traffic generator. It was stated that this land had not as yet been presented to the Planning Commission for re -platting. It was agreed that if this request were granted it would only be a continuance of the existing use established as a right on the whole tract by the seminary. The members did not think the surrounding property would be depreciated to any :greater extent than it would be if a church, which is already permitted here, were built. The possibility of a court case. Was also discussed. It was agreed that the additional 25' right-of-way on North Taylor Street should be dedicated to make a street 501 wide. Mr. Burleigh stated that there was nothing in this request in conflict with the preamble of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Baldwin moved that the Board Oopt the following resolution! A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE REQUEST CONTAINED IN DOCKET NO. 29-55 WHEREAS an application has been filed with the Little Rock Board of Adjustment in behalf of Bishop Albert L. Fletcher of the Roman Cstholic Diocese of Little Rock requesting approval of a Roman *Catholic Church (or Chapel) and monastery as a special exception to be located at the southwest corner of North Taylor and Grandview Streets, and WHEREAS notice of a hearing on this application has been given to all known parties of interest and published in a news- paper as required by law and the rules of this Board, and WHEREAS said hearing has been held and all parties appear- ing thereat having been heard. NOW THEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED; That the Little Rock Board of Adjustment finds that a Church (or chapel) and monastery on the property at the south- west corner of North Tplor Street and Grandview Street would be a suitable use at the location proposed and is compatible with the intent of the general development plans of the City of Little Rock, particularly with the spirit and intent of the Little Rock zoning Ordinance (Ordinance No. 5420). AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Little Rock Board of Adjustment hereby grants the requested special exception subject to the establishment of the property as a lot by approval of the Little Rock Planning Commission and the Little Rock City Council's acceptance of the formal dedication of a strip of ground along the west side of said property as the east half of the North Taylor Street right-of-way. The motion was seconded by Miss Penton and carried unanimously. B. Request of M. M. Eberts American Legion Post for variance from front yard provisions to permit construction to within one foot of the front property line at the southeast corner of 7th and Bishop Streets. f This application was reviewed by Mr. Kay Matthews, attorney for the American Legion Post. A new plan was submitted with a letter of assurance that the building on the rear of the lot would be razed in: the future, but would remain at the present as a source of income for the Post.. The new plan did not vary from the orkginal one except that the building would be 11 from the front property line instead of being constructed to the line. Mr. Marak felt that 25' rear and front and 5' side yard space should be re- quired. it was stated that if the house in the rear were allowed to remain there would be two main structures on one lot which would reduce the minimum lot area re- quirement. Mr. Matthews explained again that the Post wanted to keep the house on the rear of the lot for financial reasons. After a short discussion in the executive -meeting it was agreed that no hard- ship was involved. Miss Fenton moved that this request be denied3 Mr. Baldwin seconded and the motion carried. C. Possible report of Mr. W. M. Black on application for extension of com- mercial zone on property at the northwest corner of 29th and Lewis Streets where existing district line divides lot of single ownership* The contractor representing Mr. Black was present. Mr. Stephens reviewed the former action of the Board and stated that, whenever possible, non -conforming buildings were being eliminated. Mr. Marak felt that the driveway which was planned to surround the building would ruin the residential property on the West side, and that the parking as pro- posed would be in the yard of the house to the north. The contractor stated that Mr. Black would abandon his plans for the $20,000 new building if the request was denied and remodel the old one at, a cost of about $4,000. He cited the merits of the new building and the effect on the community and the City as a whole. After a short discussion in the executive meeting about the crowded conditions which would result if this was permitted Miss Penton moved that this request be denied; Mr. Baldwin seconded and the move carried. There was no further business and the meeting adjourned. Mrs. Melba Lawing, Secretary Approved; Wd H. Marak., Chairman Page 4 of 5 e�- / 9 U4 c5® of the existing use established as a right on the whole tract.by the seminary. The members did not think the surrounding property would be depreciated to any greater extent than it would be if a church, which is already permitted here, were built. The possibility of a court case was also discussed. It was agreed that the additional 251 right -of -Way on North Taylor Street should be dedicated to make a street 501 wide. Mr. Burleigh stated that there was nothing in this request in conflict with the preamble of the.zoning ordinance. Mr. Baldwin moved that this request be granted subject to the establishing of the property as a lot by approval of the Planning Commission and the Council's acceptance of the dedication for the east half of Taylor Street; Miss Penton second- ed and the motion carried. B. Request of it. 14. Eberts American Legion Post for variance from front yard provisions to permit construction to within one foot of the front property line at the southeast corder of 7th and Bishop Streets. This application was reviewed by Mr. Kay Matthews, attorney for the American Legion Post. A new plan was submitted witha letter* of asvarance that the building on the rear of the lot would be, razed in the.future, but would remain at the present as a source of income for the Post. The new plan did not vary from the original one -.xcept that the building would be 11 from the front property_, .line instead of being eonstruct3d to the line. Mr. Marak felt that 25' rear.and front and 5' side yard space should be re- cuired. It was stated that if the house in the rear were allowed to remain there arould be two main structures on one lot which would reduce the minimum lot aren,re- quirement. I,ir. Hatthews explained again that the Post wanted to keep the house, on the rear of the lot, for financial reasons. After a short discussion im the executive meeting it was agreed that no hard- ship was involved. :iiss Penton moved that this request be denied; i1r. Baldwin seconded and the motion carried. C. Possible report of Mr. W. 11% Black on application for extension of com- mercial zone on property at the northwest corner of 29th and Lewis Streets where existing district line divides lot of single ownership. The contractor representing Mr. Black was present. Mr. Stephens reviewed the form-r action of the Board and stated that, whenever possible, non -conforming buildings were being eliminated. ur. Marak ,felt that the driveway which was planned to surround toe building would ruin the residential property on the west side, and that the parking as pro- Page 5 of 5 posed would be in the yard of the house to the north. The contractor stated that Mr. Black would abandon his plans for the .20,000 new building if the request was denied and remodel the old one at a cost of about ;,li,000. -fie eitee, the merits of the new buildinr; and the effect on the community and the City as a. whole. After a short discussion in the executive meeting about the crowded conditions which would result if this was permitted Niss Penton moved that this request be denied; 11r. Baldwin seconded and the move carried. , There was no further business and the meeting adjourned. Mrs. melba sawing, Secretary _approved: -- W&- H. Mat&2 Chairman