Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutboa_03 19 1962a 0 l LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES DATE: March 19, 1962 TIME: 2:00 P. M. PLACE: Chamber of the Board of Directors MEMBERS PRESENT: Maxwell J. Lyons, II, Chairman 1°dilliam R. Meeks W. K. Marak Emily Penton STAFF PRESENT: Henry M. DeNoble, Director Zelda Turner, Secretary Julius Breckling, Planner OTHERS PRESENT: Jerry Donoho, Gazette Reporter A quorum was present and the chairman called the meeting to order. I?._e New Matters (Advertised) Docket No. 16-62 Applicant: W. C. Walls Location: 4114 Longcoy Street Description: Lot 3, Block 158, John Barrow Addition Classification: "A" One -family District Variance: From the front and side yard provisions of Section 11 of Ordinance 5420 to permit construction of a carport and two;stcry extension (Bedrooms and Porch) Mr. Walls was present. Mr. Breckling explained to the Board that this proposed request was necessary since the existing house was constructed too close to the North and front property lines_. Mr. Meeks asked if the applicant rented any rooms, to wh-oh Mr. Walls replied that he did not. Mr. Mares asked how the neighbor to 1:1 So•u'-..h felt about this request and Mr, Walls replied that he did not object. In executive session Mr. Marak made a motion to approve this request with the re;ommendation that the fence be re -constructed on the property line. The motion was seconded by Miss Penton and carried unanimously. Docket No.. 17-62 Applicant: Tony ArdF;rson Location: 6708, 6'�iC; 6712 Cantrell Road Description: Lots 2, and 4, Block 1, White City Addition Glas.sifigation: "F" Commercial District Variance: From the side and front yard provisions of Section 13 of Ordinanca 5420 to permit purpose of improving appearance of building Mr. Anderson was present. He said that he had masonry buildings at presen €_:::1 that he wished to erect an extension of brick. He stated that there would be Page 2 of 6 no parking in the front of this proposed building. Mr. DeNoble told the Board that the Highway Department is putting in curbs in this area at present. In executive session Mr. Meeks made a motion that this request be approved subject to the Traffic Engineer Department's approval of curb cuts and parking, that the area between the front of the building and the Cantrell Road right of way not be used for parking, and that the parking lot be paved in accordance with the city's standards. The motion was seconded by Mr. Marak and carried unanimously. Docket No. 18-62 Applicant: M. M. Eberts American Legion Post No. 1 by L. L. Langford Location: 911 Scott Street Description: South 1/2 of Lot 3, all of Lot 4, Block 25, Original City Classification: "E" Apartment District Variance: From Section 18-4 of Ordinance 5420 to permit the location of a parking lot in a restricted district Mr. Harrison was present and was asked if the property owners had been notified. He pointed out that Mr. Parsons would have been the one to receive the notices, and that he did not receive any word of the notices from Mr. Parsons. He said, therefore he would not be in a position to say whether or not the adjacent property owners had baen notified. He said that he had been under the impression that the meeting was to be held on March 29th. Yx,.. Marak asked if he had received any objections con:• cerning this request and Mr. Harrison replied that he had not. Mr. Harrison said that one of the adjacent lots belonged to the Knights of Columbus, and that there was a parking lot and a service station next to the tract under consideration. He said that he had talked with all the adjacent property owners about this request, with the exception of Mrs. Crawford, but that he had talked with one of the owners who had spoken to her about it, He said that none of these people had indicated to him that they would object. Mrs Meeks told Mr. Harrison that the Board coulc'. take action based on the as manption that these property owners have been not:ific,d., and if they had not been notified that the Board would consider this application at the next meeting. In executive session Mr. DeNoble told the Board that the property to the North of this proposal was a service station, and to the South was an apartment house whAch -m-ovided an unpaved parking lot. Mr. Meeks made a motion to approve this regnest on .ae assumption that notices were sent out, but if they were not, to take up this request again at the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Miss Penton and carried unanimously. Docket No. 19-62 Applicant: Mrs. Leah W. Harkey Location: # 27 Pine Manor Drive Description: Lot 40, Pine Manor Addition Classification: "A" One -family District Variance: From the side yard provisions of Ordinance 54�0 to permit construction of a den and storage room Mrs. Harkey was present. Mr. Marak asked how the neighbor felt about thf.s a -quest and Mrs. Harkey said that she was perfectly agreeable. She told the Boar1 that the storage room is in the rear of the carport at present, and that she docs'Lres tc construct a storage room in the back yard. Mr. Meeks asked if the proposed Page 3 of 6 building would be of brick construction, and Mrs. Harkey replied that the house was frame, and that the storage room would also be frame. She said that the carport floor was cement and concrete. Mr. Marak reviewed Mrs. Harkey's plot plan and pointed out to the Board that the fence did not seem to be on the property line. Mrs,. Harkey said that the neighborts fence was on her property, but that she did not object to it. In executive session Miss Penton made a motion to approve this request. The motion was seconded by Mr. Marak and carried unanimously, Docket No. 20- 62 Applicant: Mrs. Ruth B. Crews Location: 1522 �oulsianA Street Description: Lot 7, Block 186, Original City Classification: "E" Apartment District Variance: From the rear yard provisions of Section 12 of Ordinance 5420 to permit occupancy and rental of storage building Mrs. Crews was present. Mr. Breckling explained that this application had been considered about two years ago by the Board and that they had denied it at that time. He said that Mrs, Crews had re -filed her application and was trying to et the Board to approve it as it was originally filed. Mrs. Harkey said that she '.aad had to sell everything she could to keep from losing her home and property, due to a new highway that was routed too near her property. She said that she had $1700 yet to pay, and that she needed the income which this proposed apartment house would supply. She said that the building she wished to rent was not built for storage to begin with. She said that it had originally been built to be used as an apartment building, and she felt that she would be putting this property to its best use. She pointed out that this proposal would not use any more space with a couple occupying it than it did now. She stated that she had received no objections from any of tre adjacent property owners. Mr. Lyons asked how many apartments she had in her existing building and Mrs. Crews replied that she has two apartments upstairs which include living room, bedroom, kitchen, and bathroom facilities. Mr. Lyons then asked if any parking space would be provided. Mrs. Crews replied that there was off --street _parking space provided in the front of the building. Mr. Lyons wanted to know if an. -one was using this parking space at the present. Mrs.. Crews replied that no one was using it now, but that one couple owna car and parked it on 16th Street. In executive session Mr. Meeks pointed out that this area would be an excellent parking place for her tenants. Mr. Breckling told the Board that he had received a letter of protdst on this request, in which the sender stated that he felt that if this proposal: was approved that other people in the area would ask to be allowed to do likewise. It was pointed out that Mrs. Crewsl lot included 7500 feet of land, and that only 2400 feet of land was necessary for a four+dapartment building. Miss Penton told the Board that Mrs. Craf,Js had done quite a bit of work on the main house to improve its appearance. Mr. Breckling stated that he and Mrs. Crews had discussed various ways to solve the problems of this request, one of which was that she may be able to join the two buildings together. Mr. Marak asked if this build- ing would be similar to a garage apartment and 1r. Breckling replied that there -could be no garage, but otherwise it would be similar to a garage apartment„ Mr. u M,_,,rak made a motion to the effect that if Mrs. Crews would submit alternate plans !'or the location of use of the building, that the Board would consider such a request at another meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Meeks and carried unanimously. Page 4 of 6 Docket No. 21-62 Applicant: Joseph A, Calhoun, M, D. and Edwin F. Gray, M. D_ by Guy Amsler Location: 5804 West Markham Street Description: Lot 15, Block 2, Orlando Heights Addition Classification: "E-1" Quiet Business and Institutional District Variance: From the rear yard provisions of Section 12 of Ordinance 5420 to permit extension of existing structure to the rear of house additional X-ray equipment Mr. Amsler and Dr. Gray were present.. Dr. Gray said that the East end of the tract was elevated higher than the West end. He told the Board that Dr. Calhoun owned the property immediately to the West. Mr. Marak asked if the adjacent owners to the North objected and Dr. Gray said that they had indicated to him that they wanted all of "A" Street to be residential. Mr. Lyons asked if the property under consideration was bounded by a wire fence and Dr. Gray said that it was, and that they did not have formal screening. Mr. Lyons asked what the applicant proposed to build and Dr. Gray said that he desired to erect an addition to house additional X-ray equipment. Mr. Lyons then asked if this equipment would be used at night and Dr. Gray replied that it would not. He said that the building would be constructed of solid concrete brick. Mr. Marak warted to know if this X-ray equipment would interfere with the reception of televisi3ns and radios in the vicinity and Dr, Gray replied that it would not. Mr. Amsler said that he had talked to all the adjacent property owners. Mr. Breckling asked if there were any restrictions on the Bill of Assurance and Mr. Amsler replied that to the best of his knowledge there were no restrictions. In executive session the chairman asked if the property owners to the rear of this tract had any objections. Mr:, Breckling replied that only one of these persons had indicated to him that they might object. Mr. Lyons asked how far the building was from the rear property line and Mr. Breckling said that there was 15 feet be- tween the building and the property line. Miss Penton asked if parking was already provided and Mr. Breckling replied that there was space for parking at the rear of the lot- Mr. Meeks asked how these people entered the parking lot and Mr. DeNoble said that they went across the dorner lot, but they did not actually have an access to the parking lot unless they had an agreement with the owners of the adjacent lot. Mr. Meeks made a motion that this request be approved provided that any parking permitted in the rear be supplied with some type of hard surfacing, and that they erect ever -green screening at the rear of the lot. The motion was seconded by Mr. Marak and carried unanimously. Docket No. 22-62 Applicant: Pioneer Lum^= Company Location: West of Thayer on West Tenth Street Description: Block 8, Root'-s and Coyts Addition except lots 7, 8, 9, 10, and the East 1/2 of 11 Classification: "J" Light Industrial District Variance: From the more than one building on lot provisions of Section 15 of Ordinance 5420 to permit construction of material storage buildings Mr. Thomas was present. Mr. Breckling said that among other problems with this proposal was the fact there are several buildings which cross building lines. Mr. Thomas said that they need storage space immediately. He said that they proposed Page 5 of 6 to destroy the old buildings and erect new ones. He said that the storage buildings would be used to house dimension lumber and boards. Mr. Lyons asked if they were proposing to build both of these storage buildings in the immediate future* and Mr. Thomas said that they were. He said that a shed and three buildings would be removed, and that he would remodel one of the buildings and change it into an office. He said that after the porch of the ware house is completed that the merchandise would be moved into that building. Mr. Lyons asked how long it would take to complete this proposal. Mr. Thomas replied that it would take approximately two years with- out borrowing a substantial amount of money. He said that they had already spent in the neighborhood of ten or twelve thousand dollars on this project. Mr. Marak asked if they had received any objections. Mr. Thomas replied that they had con- tacted all the adjacent property owners and had not received any objections. He said that the Pioneer Lumber Company had acquired this land about two years ago. Mr. Lyons asked what the first phase of this proposal would be. Mr. Thomas replied that the first phase would be to build a small ware house on the railroad spot and to tear the old building out. Mr. Lyons asked if the first two phases of this proposal could be done in 35 to 4.0 days after the issuance of a building permit. Mr. Thomas replied that it probably could be completed sometime next Augubt. Mr, Lyons wanted to know what they would do after this part of the proposal had been completed. Mr. Thomas said that they would tear down the large ware house and build an office. He said that possibly next Spring the last two buildings could be demolished. He stated that there was a house on the corner lot with a family living in it, and that he has been trying to purchase this corner lot, so as to be able to use the entire block on that side of the street. Mr. Meeks asked what kind of material would be used in the construction of these proposed buildings. Mr. Thomas replied that they would be constructed of concrete, concrete block,, and metal roofing, with a sky -light of aluminum. He said that there was a van storage building across the railroad tracks from his property. In executive session there was a discussion of various ways to insure that the old buildings were torn down as new ones were constructed. Mr. Meeks made a motion that if the Board of Directors authorizes the issuance of the building permit for the construction of the building adjacent to the railroad right of way, the Board of Adjustment approves this application, provided that no certificate of occupancy is issued on the last building until all the buildings have been removed in ac- cordance with the plan submitted. The motion was seconded by Miss Penton and carried unanimously. Docket No. 23-62 Applicant: Charles E. Moores Location: 1616 South Pierce Street Description: Lot 5, Block 6, Cherry and Cox Addition Classification: "B" Residence District Variance: From the side yard provisions of Section 11 of Ordinance 54.20 to permit construction of bedroom and porch. Mrs. Moores was present. Mr. Breckling explained that the existing building had been built too close to the side property line. Mr. Meeks asked if all the adjacent property owners had been notified and Mrs, Moores replied that she had notified all the adjacent property owners and that th6y had not objected to this request. Mr. Meeks then asked her if she rented any rooms in this building, to which Mrs. Moores replied that she did not. Mr. Meeks asked if this addition to the house would be constructed of the same type of materials that were used for the house. Mrs. Moores replied that the house was constructed of asphalt siding, and that the proposed additional bedroom and porch would be constructed of the same Page 6 of 6 material. She added that the porch would be built onto the rear of the house. In executive session Mr. Meeks made a motion that this request be approved. The motion was seconded by Miss Penton and carried unanimously. IV. Amendment to Docket No. 59--•61 Docket No. 59-61 Applicant: Herbert Storthz Location: 400 North University Avenue Description: Long legal Classification: "E-1" Quiet Business and Institutional District Variance: From the '^eight, side yard, and lot area requirements per unit provisions of Section 12-A, Ordinance 5420, to permit an apartment house to be constructed to a height of 163 feet (14 stories) with 160 units An amendment to permit a heat1mg and equipment building on the rear portion of the lot.. Mr. Storthz, Mr. Noland Blass, and Mr. Leonard Scott were present. Mr. Blass told the Board that they propose to install air conditioners and an electric gener- ating system in this building. He said the electric generating system would be housed in a one-story brick structure that would harmonize with the apartment house. He stated that the apartment building backs up to the power plant and that he did not see how this proposal could harm anyone. Mr. Meeks asked if this generating system would create much noise and Mr. Blass replied that it would not be as noisy as the power plant. Mr. Blass stated that Mr. Storthz intended to maintain the tree screening around the building as much as possible. Mr. Blass stated that a nursing home was on the property to the West of this proposal. In executive session Mr. Marak made a motion to approve this amendment. The motion was seconded by Miss Penton and carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 4:15 P. M. APPROVED: Maxwell J. Lyons, II, Chairman Zelda Turner, Sect.etary