HomeMy WebLinkAbout1961-04-14 Minutes140
1-2
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
APRIL 142 1961, 4:0o P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
Present: Mr. John I. Smith, Chairman, Mr. George Bowen, Mr. James A. Pennington,
- Mr. J. F. Robinson, Mr. Harold E. Lieberenz, City Building Inspector, and the
following applicants: Mr. Chester Stephens, Mrs. Josephine Haight, and
Dr. Walter Johnson, Mr. Paul Young, and Mr. Dale Bradford, representing
University Baptist Church. Mr. and Mrs. T. E. Duncan appeared relative to
the application of the church. They were accompanied by Mr. E. J. Ball,
Attorney.
Absent: Mr. Tom Schiewetz
The meeting was called to order by Mr. John I. Smith, Chairman. The minutes were
approved as mailed to the Board members prior to the meeting.
The first application was that of Mr. Chester Stephens of 509 South Hill Avenue.
Mr. Stephens wished to remodel his residence by constructing a carport and small storage
room on the south side and rebuilding a front porch on the east side. This residence
is in an I -1B Industrial Zone and must be approved by the Board before any building
permit may be issued. The Board ascertained that the building was a one -family residence,
and that the carport roof would be about seven (7) feet from the south property line.
Mr. Lieberenz pointed out that the only .violation was that it was a residential building
in an industrial zone. There was no further discussion, and the applicant was dismissed.
_n -
The next application was that of the University Baptist Church Corporation, represented
• by Dr. Walter Johnson, Mr. Dale Bradford, and Mr. Paul Young. The church wished to erect
a new building addition on their property at 315 West Maple Street, which is located in
a R-4 Residential Zone of the City. This must be cleared for church use by the Board of
Adjustment. The proposed building would be approximately seven (7) feet from the east
property line, rather than the fifty (50) feet required by the Zoning Ordinance in this
area.
Mr. Lieberenz stated that the building would be a structure approximately 52 feet by
119 feet and would have a frame covered walkway about thirty (30) feet long to the other
church building. There would be a steeple about fifty (50) feet high at the northwest
end of the new addition. Mr. Lieberenz read the section of the Zoning Ordinance stating
that buildings for public assembly must have at least one acre of land and must be fifty
(50) feet from the property line in this zone before the Building Inspector could write
a building permit unless approved by the Board of Adjustment.
Mr. Young stated that, as a member of the Planning Commission, he believed several errors
had been made because those three churches appealed to the Commission, stating that they
planned construction in the near future.
Mr. E. J. Ball, Attorney, representing Mr. and Mrs. T. E. Duncan, stated that his clients
insisted that the fifty (50) feet requirement be met. He stated that he did not believe
the convenience of the church should be the inconvenience of Mr. and Mrs. Duncan.
Mrs. Duncan stated that this property had been offered to the church several years ago
for $8,500 and they had refused to buy it. She stated that the church was now trying to
• use property they had refused to buy. She stated that the church was taking away their
privacy and ruining the value of their property. She said a basement entrance to the
church building would be only about fifty-seven (57) feet from their house.
2-2
-2-
Mr. Bradford stated that the sketch was incorrect in that there would not be a basement
entrance facing the Duncan property.
Mr. Young stated that he believed the point where the building was seven (7) feet
from the property line would be north of, the Duncan's north property lane.
Mr. Duncan stated that he did not see why the church should go out of its way to
violate the ordinance and to destroy the privacy of an individual. He also stated
that he,felt that the Board, the City, and the church mould be held responsible
for any damages caused if the building were permitted.
Mr. Ball stated that his clients would agree to compromise if the building could
be adjusted to be twenty-five (25) feet from the property line rather than the
proposed seven (7) feet.
There was no further discussion, and the applicants were dismissed.
- 0 -
Mrs. Josephine Haight appeared to discuss her application of the last meeting
with the Board. She applied on March 30, 1961, for permission to build a
residence on Lots 114 and 102 on Skyline Drive. Mr. Lothar Krueger appeared at
that time and objected to the proposed house because it was planned to be less
than five (5) feet from his property line. Mrs. Haight, at this meeting, discussed
with the Board the possibility of cutting the length of her proposed house about
two (2) feet, thus making it 18 feet by 28 feet and moving it far enough to comply
with the objection of Mr. Krueger. There was no further discussion, and the
applicant was dismissed. •
- 0 -
After a lengthy discussion, Mr. Bowen made a motion that the University Baptist
Church application be approved on condition that the building be moved twenty-five
(25) feet from the property line of the Duncans, in compliance with the compromise
to which the Duncans had agreed, with a written statement from the Duncans that it
would be all right as far as they are concerned. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion.
The Board voted unanimously to approve the application on this condition and
instructed the Building Inspector to obtain the written statement.
0 -
The Board unanimously approved the application of Mr. Cheater Stephens.
- 0 -
After a brief discussion, the Board decided that Mrs. Haight should make adjustments
in her proposed building to comply with the objections of Mr. Krueger and file a.
new application.
APPROVED: r�lld720/!0, �.rYryl.t�Ofr7?9
ecretary
DATE: 4� 4 q�lo f i%l
(/ff
r