Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutboa_06 21 1971LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT M I N U T E S JUNE 21,_19 71 MEMBERS PRESENT Spencer Compton, Darrell D. Dover, Lawrence Woolsey MEMBERS ABSENT Dave Grundfest L. Dickson Flake STAFF PRESENT John L. Taylor Louis E. Barber Richard Wood James Finch Dorothy Riffel Chairman Vice Chairman OTHERS Bob Lowry, City Attorney's office J. Huddleston, Gazette Reporter Brenda Tirey, Democrat Reporter 2:00 P.M. There being a quorum present, the meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 2:00 P. M. for the consideration of the following cases. A motion was made for approval of the minutes of the last meeting as mailed (June 7,1971 - special meeting), and the regular April 19,1971 minutes, which was seconded and passed. Tract No. 1 - Z-2486 Applicant: A. M. Keith Location: 1400 Block West 3rd Street (south side of Street) Description: Lots 6 and 10, and E2 of Lot 5, Block 342, Barton's Subdivision of Original City Classification: "E-l" Quiet Business District Variance: Requests a Variance from the Use Provisions of Section 43-6 of the Code of Ordinances to permit a parking lot for commercial usage on adjacent property Mr. Byron R. Morse, realtor, was present representing the applicant, A. M. Keith. He explained :that they have enough parking spaces, but are trying to lease these plots also for off-street parking so there won't be any traffic problem there. It is on a fast traveled street - Third Street, and they intend to make a driveway around ,.the building which will house a restaurant and bar designed to cater to young people from 23 to 33 years of age. It is a franchise operation called "Friday's" and this will be patterned after the one in Memphis. Board of Adjustment Minutes - June 21,1971 Mr. Ralph Patterson, attorney representing the Arkansas Bus and Truck Association an abutting property owner, was present, as was its President and Manager. Mr. Patterson said his client feels that the granting of such a variance would work and undue hardship economically on them inasmuch as they will eventually be surrounded on the south side by a parking lot, on the west side bj a parking lot, on the north side by the business for which this parking lot would be attached, and on the east by Victory Street. The value of their property would be severely diminished in the event they wanted to sell it as they could only sell it to the owner of subject property. He said they also feel that it is not ecologically sound as some trees would have to be destroyed and grass would be covered with asphalt. He cited the fact that such an operation would be a nuisance as there would be music in the building that this parking lot would serve and would create a parking problem for the Arkansas Bus and Truck Association for its nightly meetings, and would create a traffic hazard. Mr. Patterson quoted a portion of the zoning ordinance 43-22 "the Board shall not permit, as a variance, any use in a district that is not permitted in this chapter, nor shall the Board make any changes in this chapter." Subsection (d) which described the uses, "permit the location of the following uses in a district from which they are prohibited by this chapter: airport, nursery, greenhouse, library, museum, community center, hospital, institutions of an educational, religious or philanthropic nature,and parking lot." He said it is his contention that the word "and" tied parking lots to the rest of these uses. In other words "what we feel this particular ordinance means "airport and parking lot, nursery and parking lot, greenhouse and parking lot, etc. We feel that the Board cannot permit a Variance of the use as stated above. Mr. Morse stated that at present the Arkansas Bus and Truck Association h a lot 40' X 100' and in his opinion the parking lot would improve their property as the 50 X 150' to the south would be im?roved, and would provide parking for the Truck and Bus Association during the dayand usually at night. It will clean up the neighborhood and make it look a lot better, he said. He added that the cottonwood and mulberry trees would be saved. Mr. Oscar Rhodes, 314 Victory, was present in opposition stating that he owns property in the middle of the block, and objected to the operation of a "beer joint" at this location. Mr. Norman C. White, 1419 West 3rd Street, was present objecting to the proposed development, stating his concern as being for the sewer at this location which was laid 42 years ago, but if this does not interfere with the sewer, he had no objection. He indicated that he would be glad to see the property "cleaned up". Mr. Morse indicated that they would cooperate fully in any situation that concerned the sewer, Mr. Patterson re-emphasized his position that only a parking lot variance can be granted in conjunction with other uses as set out previously. Mr. Dover replied "we do have the power to grant variances for parking lots", and the City Attorne.y's representative substantiated this fact. A motion was made that the application be approved, which was seconded and passed. -2- Board of Adjustment Minutes - June 21 1971 Tract No. 2 - z-2484• Applicant - Location: Description: Classification: Variance: C� J. S. and H., Inc., by Mike Hedrick 509 South Cedar Street The South 45 feet of Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, Reyburn a.nd Wright's Addition "C"-Two-family District. Requests a Variance from the Use Provisions of Section 43-4 of the Code of Ordinances to permit a parking lot in a residential zone The Staff recommended denial of this application. To grant the Variance would effect an intrusion of this parking lot into the middle of a block developed by single- family homes. Mr. Mike Hedrick, representing the applicant., C.J.S. and H., Inc., an allergy clinic across the street, stated this variance is for a parking lot for the clinic which will be used primarily for overflow parking for employees, for the doctors and their patients. Mr. Harold Kelly, 2911 Lee Avenue, who owns a house at: 3904• West Capitol, was present in opposition. He said the neighbors feel that it is very inappropriate to convert this lot in the middle of the block to a parking lot which he says is not necessary and would be an imposition on that neighborhood. Most of the adjacent property owners own their homes and many have lived there for twenty- five years or more. Mr. Paul 0. Finney, 513 South Cedar was present in opposition saying that it would hurt his property, and objected to its being in the middle of a residential block. Mrs. Margaret Shelton and Mrs. Middie Poteete Smith., 506 South Cedar, were present stating their objections mainly to be the overflow of water from the Clinic, and putting a parking lot in the middle of a block that is entirely residential. A letter from these objectors was also filed. Mrs. Della Anderson, 3915 West Capitol Avenue, was present in opposition stating her objection being to additional water flow to her property which is adjacent to this lot on the west; also the danger of damage to her fence. Mrs. Beulah A. Stone, 501 South Cedar, was present in opposition stating that the proposed parking lot would be two doors from her property, and would attract an undesirable element in the evening who use these parking lots for their activities. Mr. Joe Shields, 3903 West Capitol Avenue, was also present in opposition stating that he opposed any parking lot in this residential area. A letter of objection was also filed from G.A.G.Deane, 415 South Cedar Street. Mr. Hedrick remarked had he known of so much opposition in the neighborhood he would not have filed the application, and if the Variance were denied it would not be appealed. He said he would like the Variance to serve his client, but under- stood the opposition. A motion was made that the application be denir-d. which was seconded and passed. -3- _N Board of Adjustment Minutes June 21 1971 Tract No. 3 - Z-1664 Applicant: Location: Description: Classification: Variance: Basil E. Butler 3200 Roosevelt Road Part of 'SW4-SE SE4 Sec. 8 T-1-N, R-12-W "F"-Commercial District Requests a Variance from the Yard Area Setback Provisions of Section 43-15 of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of all weather canopy enclosure over pool area in Front Yard Setback The Staff recommended approval of the requested Variance. Mr. Basil E. Butler, the applicant, was present. He stated that this all-weather canopy enclosure over the pool area at the Alamo Plaza Motel would be of trans- parent fiber glass construction with aluminum ribs which would not cause any sight problems for traffic in and out. In the summer months he would take the ends and sides down, but in the winter months it would protect his pool from freezing, keep leaves out of it, etc: A motion was made for approval, which was seconded and passed, Tract No. 4 - Z-1524 Applicant: Dr. Charles Betts Location: 501 North Pine Street Description: Lot "B" Sartin Replat Classification: "F"-Commercial District Variance: Requests a Variance from the Rear Yard Setback Provisions of Section 43-15 of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction in Rear Yard Setback The Staff recommended denial of this application. Granting a variance of the required rear }yard space for reasons of the terrain is not justified. The hardship in this instance appears to be one of lesser financial return on development of the property which is not considered a hardship within the purview of the Zoning Ordinance. In the opinion of the Staff this is a case of overbuilding on the lot. It is desired to point out that there is recourse to the removal of the platted building line on the west side of the lot which would permit a re -design of the structure more fitting to the lot. The lot contains 6500 square feet and the developer proposes to construct 5 apartment units which require 6000 square feet of family lot area. The applicant advises this office that, in addition, the structure is to contain a rental office space. Before a building permit could be issued, the lot must be re -platted to re -locate the drainage easement. -4- Board of Adjustment Minutes June 21.1971 Mr. Jack Young, attorney for the applicant, requested that the case be deferred for a month as the person who sent out the notices is no longer with the firm and they did not have a chance to get the notices filed. A motion was made to defer the case until the July 19.1971 meeting on condition that the case be re -advertised and property owners re -notified. The motion was seconded and passed. Tract No. 5 - Z-2451 Applicant: Location: Description: Classification: Variance: Ben R. Miller 5415 "A" Street Lots 3 and Wz of Lot 4, Block 10, Pfeifer's Addition "E"-Apartment District (1) requests a Variance from the Yard Setback Provisions of Section 43-13 of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction in Rear and Side Yard Setbacks (2) requests a Variance from the Area Provi- sions of Section 43-21 of the Code of Ordinances to permit parking space -requiremerit of maneuver space in public right-of-way (3) requests a Variance from the Use Provisions of Section 43-21 (H) (b) of the Code of Ordinances to permit parking in Front Yard Setback Mr. Ben Miller, the applicant, was present. The Staff recommended denial of the requested Variances. The proposed development would totally cover the subject property with no provision for open space. The front yard :urea in this proposal is reduced to 20 feet and in addition is devoted entirely to parking spaces which back into the street right-of-way on "A" Street thus using the street for maneuvering from the parking area. The rear yard and one side yard is occupied by a two -deck parking structure. It appears that with the dimensions shown, an entry passage of 12 feet in width from a 15 foot alley, and with the nature of the terrain of this property, it would be difficult to gain access to the rear parking area. After much discussion concerning parking areas, the use of public right-of-way for maneuvering in and out of the property, lack of turning radius for proposed parking deck, possibility of reducing the units to 14 instead of 16, it was the consensus of the Board that they deny the first two variances, and grant the third. A motion was made to grant the variance to permit parking in the front yard setback_, and denv the variance to permit construction in rear and side yard setbacks and the request to permit parking space requirement of maneuver space in public right- of-way. The motion was seconded and passed. -5- Board of Adjustment Minutes June 21,1971 Tract No. 6 - Z-2485 Applicant: Location: Description: Classification: Variance: William L. Caliotte #1 Monica Drive Lot 43, Broadmoor Addition "A"-One-mily District Requests a Variance from the Yard Area Setback Provisions of Section 43-12 of the Code of Ordinances to permit an addition to existing non -conforming residential structure. The Staff recommended denial of this application. To approve the requested Variance would extend the non-conformance of a non -conforming structure which in the opinion of the Staff appears unwarranted. The house when originally constructed was located too close to the rear property line at one point, but to allow the Variance would extend the non-conformance for a distance of 38 feet. No hardship situation has been established by the applicant. Mrs. William L. Caliotte, wife of the applicant, was present. There were no objectors. She stated that when they bought the house sixteen years ago they were not aware that it was a non -conforming use, and Fausett told her that it was not in the City limits when they purchased the house. The 16t is 130 feet across the front by 120 feet on one side, but the back yard is small due to it being a "pie shaped" lot. Mr. Harold McDaniel, 59 Lakeshore Drive, has no objection, and Lot 40 is rental propertyq but the tenants have no objection. Only one adjoining property owner (Lot 42) was unavailable as they were out of town on vacation. Mrs. Calliotte indicated that they would be able to save the two trees on the lot close to the site of the proposed addition. A motion was made for ap2roval of the variance conditionall and subject to the approval of the owner of Lot 42, and with this approval the Board's approval would be final, but if that owner objects, the Board would reconsider the application. The motion was seconded and passed. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:45 P. M. JO L. TAYLOR, ' Acting Secretary 1�,� I I d L-�e �/ — S. Spencer Compton, Chairman